Dining Across the Gap: A Encounter Between Opposing Viewpoints

Introducing the Individuals

First Participant: Peter, 34, London

Occupation Former civil servant, currently a learner focusing on public health

Voting record Voted Green recently (also a affiliate of the party); formerly Labour. Describes himself as “progressive, and internationalist rather than patriotic”

Amuse bouche A sketch of a teacup Peter created as a child was once hung in the National Gallery of Ireland

Second Participant: Akshat, 43, from Harrow

Profession Risk analyst in the infrastructure industry

Political history Originally from the Indian subcontinent, he has lived in the United Kingdom for half a decade, and supported Conservative. Describes himself as “slightly moderate right”

Interesting fact He taught himself to understand the Urdu language. “I have no use for it, I simply found it intriguing”

Initial impressions

Akshat Over the last two decades, I have resided and been employed in Qatar, South Korea, the US. The issues Peter and I discussed are UK-centric, but they are also universal, because people's lives more or less evolve similarly across the world. I anticipated someone very liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we had a productive, logical conversation. I drank beer, Peter had mojitos.

Peter We shared starters – fishy spring rolls, dumplings, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were excellent. I felt somewhat anxious, as I think he was too. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We each have immigrant backgrounds. My childhood was in Dublin; I have resided in the United States and the Iberian Peninsula. We connected through our love of the capital.

Key disagreements

The first participant I look at immigration like adding salt to a meal. When you add a little bit, the food tastes wonderful. Use too little or too much and the dish is insipid or overly seasoned.

Peter Akshat used an analogy about salt. It would be a funny place to exist if the state was choosing some ideal ethnic makeup of the country.

The first participant There are, sadly, individuals fleeing persecution, but a lot of people coming to the United Kingdom are those seeking better finances who may not add significant value and can weigh on the benefit system. No one compels you to move to a new country for opportunity, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your family.

Peter We got lost with certain details. I don’t think it’s like you arrive and are employed and then following a half-decade you obtain indefinite leave to remain. Nothing is automatic. The climate has been unwelcoming since Theresa May, visa fees are really high, there is an healthcare levy, eligibility for support is restricted. There is no special treatment for anybody. And concerning the recent changes, whereby family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: we desire your labor, but we don’t want you. I think we must maintain a degree of humanity.

Common ground

Akshat Peter questions unregulated markets. I am, too, but at the same time, economic growth benefits society and should be encouraged.

Peter We’re both internationalist. And we concurred that some parts of society – government, the media – benefit from stoking division. We discovered common ground in basic principles and values.

Dessert and debate

Akshat Peter believes that since the UK profited from colonial times, it ought to provide compensation to affected nations. I simply think: it is unfair to assess the past with contemporary ethics; eras vary, modern people were not responsible of what happened decades or a century ago. Suppose the UK was obliged to repay the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of money. Is Britain able to do that? Certainly not.

Peter In the past, I don’t think there was much reckoning with colonial history. For example, when I first moved to the United Kingdom, people had little knowledge of the Great Famine and the role that colonialism played in it. I hold that decolonisation is not merely about signing a cheque, it should be about looking at past errors and where we should be now.

Takeaways

The first participant It may not alter the way I think, but I understand Peter’s concerns. I converse with individuals every day whose views are contrary to mine. It’s about bringing everyone to the same page, so that all of us can work towards the improvement of society.

The second participant We were there for two and a half hours. Akshat had dessert and I had a Japanese dessert wine. I did not convince him of anything, but we each liked the meal, so we might become more open to having conversations with other people in the coming times.