Dining Across the Divide: An Encounter Between Different Perspectives
Introducing the Participants
One Diner: Peter, 34, from London
Occupation Former civil servant, now a student focusing on public health
Political history Voted Green recently (also a affiliate of the political group); formerly Labour Party. Identifies as “progressive, and internationalist instead of nationalist”
Interesting fact A drawing of a teacup Peter created as a child was once displayed in the Irish National Gallery
Other Participant: A., 43, from Harrow
Occupation Risk manager in the infrastructure industry
Political history Originally from India, Akshat has resided in the UK for half a decade, and voted the Conservative Party. Identifies as “somewhat moderate right”
Interesting fact Akshat self-learned to read and write the Urdu language. “I have no use for it, I simply found it intriguing”
For starters
The first participant Over the last 20 years, I’ve lived and worked in the Middle East, South Korea, the US. The topics we discussed are focused on Britain, but they are also universal, because human life more or less follows the same curve wherever it is. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I had a couple of beers, Peter had mojitos.
The second participant We shared appetizers – seafood rolls, steamed buns, radish cakes with sprouts, which were excellent. I was a little nervous, as I believe he was too. Would he criticize me for being a snowflake? We each have immigrant backgrounds. My childhood was in Dublin; I’ve lived in the US and the Iberian Peninsula. We bonded over our love of the capital.
Key disagreements
The first participant I view immigration similar to sprinkling salt to a dish. With a small amount, the dish tastes wonderful. Use too little or too much and the meal is either too bland or too salty.
Peter He used an analogy about salt. It would be a funny place to be if the government was selecting some preferred demographic of the country.
The first participant There are, sadly, individuals fleeing persecution, but a lot of people arriving in the United Kingdom are economic migrants who do not necessarily contribute much and can weigh on the welfare system. No one compels you to go to a new country for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you can take care of yourself and your relatives.
Peter We became confused with some of the facts. In my view it is the case that you arrive and are employed and then following a half-decade you get indefinite leave to remain. Nothing is automatic. It’s been a hostile environment for some time, visa fees are quite expensive, there is an healthcare levy, eligibility for support is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anyone. And regarding the new policies, under which you can’t bring your family over, it is astonishing to state: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I believe we have to have a certain level of compassion.
Common ground
Akshat Peter’s sceptical of unregulated markets. So am I, but at the same time, economic growth benefits society and ought to be promoted.
Peter We each have global outlooks. And we agreed that some parts of society – politics, the media – thrive off stoking division. We discovered common ground in basic principles and ethics.
Dessert and debate
The first participant Peter believes that because the United Kingdom profited from the colonial era, it ought to provide reparations to those countries. I simply think: you cannot judge the past with present day morality; eras vary, current society were not responsible of events decades or a century ago. Let’s say the UK had to compensate the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is the UK in a position to do that? No.
The second participant In the past, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. As an instance, upon my arrival to the UK, the public weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the role that colonialism contributed to it. I hold that decolonisation is not merely about issuing payments, it should be about looking at past errors and our current responsibilities.
Takeaways
The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I appreciate his worries. I talk to people regularly with opinions are contrary to my own. The goal is bringing everyone to the common understanding, in order that all of us can work towards the improvement of society.
The second participant We were there for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I had some sweet Japanese wine. I didn’t persuade him of anything, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we might become more receptive to engaging in dialogues with others in future.
