🔗 Share this article Dining Over the Divide: A Meeting Among Different Perspectives Meeting the Individuals First Diner: Peter, 34, London Occupation Ex- government employee, now a student focusing on public health Voting record Voted the Green Party last time (and a member of the party); formerly Labour. Describes himself as “progressive, and internationalist instead of patriotic” Interesting fact A sketch of a teacup Peter did as a child was once hung in the Irish National Gallery Second Participant: Akshat, 43, from Harrow Profession Risk manager in the construction sector Political history Originally from India, he has lived in the UK for five years, and voted the Conservative Party. Identifies as “slightly right of centre” Interesting fact Akshat self-learned to read and write the Urdu language. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated” For starters The first participant During the past two decades, I have resided and been employed in Qatar, South Korea, the United States. The issues Peter and I talked about are focused on Britain, but they are also global, because people's lives more or less evolve similarly wherever it is. I was expecting someone very liberal, but he was quite measured – we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, he opted for mojitos. Peter We split appetizers – fishy spring rolls, steamed buns, radish cakes with sprouts, which were excellent. I was a little nervous, as I think Akshat was. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. My childhood was in Dublin; I’ve lived in the United States and Spain. We bonded over our affection for the capital. Key disagreements The first participant I view migration similar to sprinkling salt to a meal. When you add a little bit, the food is delicious. Use too little or too much and the dish is either too bland or too salty. The second participant He had a metaphor regarding seasoning. It would be odd to exist if the government was selecting some preferred demographic of the nation. Akshat There are, unfortunately, individuals fleeing persecution, but many people coming to the UK are economic migrants who do not necessarily add significant value and can weigh on the benefit system. No one compels you to go to a different nation for prospects, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your relatives. The second participant We got lost with some of the facts. I don’t think it is the case that you come over and are employed and then after five years you get indefinite leave to remain. No process is guaranteed. The climate has been unwelcoming since Theresa May, application costs are really high, there is an NHS surcharge, access to benefits is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anybody. And regarding the new policies, under which family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I believe we must maintain a degree of humanity. Sharing plate Akshat Peter’s sceptical of unregulated markets. I am, too, but simultaneously, economic growth benefits society and should be encouraged. The second participant We each have global outlooks. And we agreed that some parts of the community – politics, the media – benefit from creating conflict. We did find shared understanding in basic principles and ethics. Dessert and debate The first participant Peter is of the opinion that because the United Kingdom profited from colonial times, it ought to provide compensation to affected nations. I simply think: you cannot judge history with contemporary ethics; eras vary, current society were not responsible of what happened decades or a century ago. Suppose the UK was obliged to repay India, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is Britain able to manage that? Certainly not. Peter In the past, I don’t think there was much reckoning with the colonial past. For example, when I first moved to the UK, people weren’t aware of the Great Famine and the part that imperial rule played in it. I hold that decolonisation is not merely about issuing payments, it ought to involve looking at what went wrong and where we should be now. Final thoughts The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I appreciate Peter’s concerns. I converse with individuals every day whose views are opposite to my own. It’s about bringing everyone to the same page, so that everyone can work towards the improvement of the community. The second participant We were there for 150 minutes. Akshat had dessert and I had some sweet Japanese wine. I didn’t persuade him of anything, but we each liked dinner, so we could hopefully be more receptive to engaging in dialogues with others in future.