Dining Over the Divide: An Encounter Between Different Viewpoints
Introducing the Participants
One Diner: Peter, 34, from London
Profession Ex- civil servant, now a student studying community health
Voting record Supported Green recently (and a affiliate of the political group); previously Labour. Identifies as “left, and internationalist instead of patriotic”
Amuse bouche A drawing of a teacup he did as a child was once displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland
Second Diner: Akshat, 43, from Harrow
Occupation Risk analyst in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Originally from the Indian subcontinent, Akshat has resided in the UK for half a decade, and supported the Conservative Party. Identifies as “slightly moderate right”
Amuse bouche He self-learned to understand Urdu. “It has no practical use for me, I simply found it intriguing”
For starters
Akshat Over the last 20 years, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, South Korea, the United States. The topics Peter and I talked about are focused on Britain, but they are also universal, because human life more or less follows the same curve across the world. I anticipated someone very liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we engaged in a productive, logical conversation. I drank beer, he opted for mojitos.
The second participant We shared starters – seafood rolls, dumplings, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I felt somewhat anxious, as I believe he was too. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. I grew up in Dublin; I’ve lived in the US and Spain. We bonded over our affection for London.
The big beef
Akshat I look at 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 insipid or overly seasoned.
Peter Akshat had a metaphor about salt. It would be odd to exist if the government was selecting some ideal ethnic makeup of the nation.
The first participant There are, sadly, individuals fleeing persecution, but many people coming to the UK are those seeking better finances who may not contribute much and can burden the benefit system. No one compels you to go to a different nation for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you can take care of your own needs and your relatives.
Peter We got lost with certain details. I don’t think 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. The climate has been unwelcoming for some time, application costs are really high, there is an NHS surcharge, eligibility for support is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anybody. And concerning the recent changes, under which family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: we desire your labor, but we don’t want you. I believe we have to have a certain level of humanity.
Sharing plate
The first participant Peter questions unregulated markets. I am, too, but at the same time, wealth creation benefits society and should be encouraged.
The second participant We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that certain elements of the community – government, the media – thrive off creating conflict. We discovered shared understanding in fundamentals and ethics.
For afters
Akshat Peter believes that since the UK benefitted from the colonial era, it should pay compensation to those countries. I simply think: it is unfair to assess history with contemporary ethics; times are different, current society were not responsible of what happened 50 or 100 years ago. Suppose the UK had to compensate the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is Britain able to manage that? Certainly not.
The second participant In the past, I believe adequate reflection occurred with the colonial past. As an instance, when I first moved to the UK, the public weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the role that colonialism played in it. I hold that decolonization is not merely about signing a cheque, it ought to involve examining what went wrong and where we should be now.
Final thoughts
The first participant It may not alter the way I think, but I appreciate Peter’s concerns. I converse with people regularly whose views are opposite to mine. The goal is uniting people to the common understanding, in order that everyone can work towards the improvement of society.
The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I had a Japanese dessert wine. I did not convince him of any point, but we each liked the meal, so we might become more open to having conversations with others in future.
