Dining Over the Gap: An Encounter Between Opposing Perspectives
Introducing the Participants
One Diner: Peter, 34, from London
Profession Ex- civil servant, now a learner focusing on community health
Political history Voted Green recently (also a member of the party); previously Labour Party. Identifies as “left, and globalist instead of patriotic”
Amuse bouche A sketch of a tea cup he created as a kid was once hung in the National Gallery of Ireland
Second Diner: A., 43, Harrow
Profession Risk manager in the infrastructure industry
Political history Hailing from India, he has resided in the UK for five years, and supported the Conservative Party. Describes himself as “slightly right of centre”
Amuse bouche Akshat taught himself to understand the Urdu language. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated”
Initial impressions
Akshat During the past two decades, I’ve lived and worked in Qatar, South Korea, the US. The issues Peter and I discussed are UK-centric, but they are also universal, because people's lives largely follows the same curve across the world. I was expecting a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we engaged in a productive, logical conversation. I drank beer, he opted for mojitos.
The second participant We split starters – seafood rolls, dumplings, radish cakes with sprouts, which were superb. I felt somewhat anxious, as I think he was too. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. My childhood was in Dublin; I’ve lived in the US and the Iberian Peninsula. We bonded over our affection for the capital.
The big beef
Akshat I view immigration like adding salt to a meal. When you add a little bit, the dish is delicious. Use too little or too much and the dish is either too bland or too salty.
Peter Akshat used an analogy about salt. It would be odd to exist if the state was choosing some ideal ethnic makeup of the nation.
The first participant There are, unfortunately, people escaping oppression, but many people arriving in the United Kingdom are economic migrants who may not add significant value and can burden the benefit system. Nobody forces you to move to a new country for opportunity, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your relatives.
Peter We became confused with some of the facts. In my view it’s like you come over and are employed and then following a half-decade you get permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. It’s been a hostile environment for some time, application costs are quite expensive, there is an NHS surcharge, eligibility for support is restricted. There is no special treatment for anyone. And concerning the recent changes, under which family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: we desire your labor, but we reject you as a person. I think we must maintain a degree of humanity.
Sharing plate
Akshat Peter questions unchecked capitalism. So am I, but simultaneously, economic growth benefits society and should be encouraged.
Peter We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that some parts of society – government, the press – benefit from stoking division. We did find common ground in basic principles and values.
For afters
Akshat Peter is of the opinion that since the United Kingdom profited from colonial times, it ought to provide reparations to affected nations. My view is simply: you cannot judge history with contemporary ethics; eras vary, current society had no control of events decades or a century ago. Suppose the Britain was obliged to repay India, it would be a huge amount of funds. Is Britain able to manage that? No.
The second participant Until recently, I believe adequate reflection occurred with the colonial past. For example, when I first moved to the UK, people weren’t aware of the Great Famine and the role that colonialism contributed to it. My view is decolonisation isn’t just about issuing payments, it should be about examining what went wrong and our current responsibilities.
Final thoughts
The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I understand Peter’s concerns. I talk to people every day whose views are opposite to my own. The goal is uniting people to the common understanding, in order that everyone can strive for the improvement of society.
The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I had some sweet Japanese wine. I did not convince him of anything, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we might become more receptive to engaging in dialogues with others in future.
