Dining Over the Divide: A Encounter Among Different Perspectives
Meeting the Individuals
First Diner: P., 34, from London
Profession Former civil servant, currently a student studying public health
Political history Voted the Green Party recently (also a affiliate of the party); formerly Labour. Identifies as âprogressive, and globalist rather than nationalistâ
Interesting fact A drawing of a teacup he did as a child was once hung in the National Gallery of Ireland
Other Participant: Akshat, 43, from Harrow
Profession Risk manager in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Hailing from the Indian subcontinent, Akshat has lived in the United Kingdom for five years, and supported Conservative. Describes himself as âsomewhat right of centreâ
Amuse bouche Akshat self-learned to read and write the Urdu language. âIt has no practical use for me, I was just fascinatedâ
For starters
The first participant Over the last two decades, Iâve lived and worked in the Middle East, South Korea, the US. The issues Peter and I talked about are UK-centric, but they are also global, because human life more or less follows the same curve wherever it is. I was expecting someone very liberal, but Peter wasnât all gung ho â we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, Peter had mojitos.
The second participant We split appetizers â fishy spring rolls, steamed buns, radish cakes with sprouts, which were excellent. I felt somewhat anxious, as I believe Akshat was. Was he going to attack me for being a snowflake? We each have immigrant backgrounds. I grew up in Dublin; I have resided in the US and the Iberian Peninsula. We connected through our love of London.
Key disagreements
Akshat I view immigration similar to adding salt to a dish. With a small amount, the food tastes wonderful. Add too little or too much and the dish is either too bland or too salty.
Peter Akshat used an analogy regarding seasoning. It would be odd to be if the state was choosing some preferred demographic of the country.
The first participant There are, unfortunately, individuals fleeing persecution, but a lot of migrants arriving in the UK are those seeking better finances who do not necessarily contribute much and can weigh on the welfare system. No one compels you to go to a different nation for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support yourself and your family.
The second participant We got lost with certain details. I donât think it is the case that you arrive and work and then following a half-decade you get permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. Itâs been a hostile environment for some time, application costs are quite expensive, there is an healthcare levy, access to benefits is limited. There is no special treatment for anybody. And regarding the new policies, under which you canât bring your family over, it is astonishing to state: we want your work, but we reject you as a person. I think we must maintain a certain level of compassion.
Sharing plate
Akshat Peterâs sceptical of unregulated markets. I am, too, but simultaneously, economic growth benefits society and ought to be promoted.
Peter We each have global outlooks. And we concurred that certain elements of society â politics, the press â thrive off creating conflict. We did find common ground in basic principles and values.
For afters
The first participant Peter is of the opinion that since the UK profited from the colonial era, it ought to provide reparations to those countries. I simply think: it is unfair to assess the past with present day morality; eras vary, current society were not responsible of what happened 50 or 100 years ago. Suppose the Britain was obliged to repay India, it would be a huge amount of funds. Is the UK in a position to do that? No.
Peter In the past, I donât think adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. As an instance, when I first moved to the United Kingdom, people had little knowledge of the Irish famine and the part that colonialism contributed to it. I hold that decolonization isnât just about issuing payments, it should be about looking at past errors and our current responsibilities.
Takeaways
The first participant It may not alter the way I think, but I understand Peterâs concerns. I talk to individuals every day whose views are contrary to my own. Itâs about bringing everyone to the common understanding, in order that all of us can strive for the improvement of society.
The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. 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 engaging in dialogues with others in future.
