🔗 Share this article Dining Over the Gap: An Encounter Among Different Perspectives Meeting the Individuals One Participant: P., 34, London Occupation Former civil servant, currently a student focusing on community health Voting record Voted the Green Party last time (also a affiliate of the party); previously Labour. Describes himself as “left, and globalist instead of nationalist” Amuse bouche A drawing of a teacup he created as a kid was once hung in the Irish National Gallery Other Diner: A., 43, Harrow Profession Risk analyst in the infrastructure industry Political history Originally from the Indian subcontinent, he has resided in the UK for half a decade, and voted the Conservative Party. Identifies as “somewhat right of centre” Interesting fact He taught himself to understand Urdu. “I have no use for it, I simply found it intriguing” For starters Akshat During the past two decades, I’ve lived and worked in Qatar, South Korea, the US. The topics Peter and I talked about are focused on Britain, but they are also global, because people's lives largely follows the same curve across the world. I was expecting a staunch liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we had a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, he opted for mojitos. The second participant We shared starters – seafood rolls, steamed buns, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I was a little nervous, as I believe he was too. Would he criticize me for my sensitivity? We each have immigrant backgrounds. My childhood was in Dublin; I have resided in the US and Spain. We connected through our affection for London. Key disagreements The first participant I view immigration like sprinkling salt to a dish. When you add a little bit, the food is delicious. Add too little or too much and the dish is insipid or overly seasoned. Peter Akshat had a metaphor regarding salt. It would be a funny place to be if the government was choosing some ideal ethnic makeup of the nation. The first participant There are, sadly, people escaping oppression, but many people coming to the UK are economic migrants who do not necessarily contribute much and can weigh on the benefit system. Nobody forces you to go to a different nation for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support your own needs and your relatives. The second participant We got lost with certain details. I don’t think it is the case that you come over and are employed and then following a half-decade you obtain indefinite leave to remain. Nothing is automatic. The climate has been unwelcoming for some time, visa fees are really high, you pay an healthcare levy, access to benefits is limited. There is no special treatment for anyone. And concerning the recent changes, whereby family reunification is restricted, it is astonishing to state: we desire your labor, but we reject you as a person. I believe we must maintain a certain level of compassion. Common ground The first participant Peter’s sceptical of unregulated markets. I am, too, but simultaneously, wealth creation benefits society and should be encouraged. Peter We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that certain elements of the community – government, the press – thrive off stoking division. We did find shared understanding in fundamentals and values. Dessert and debate The first participant Peter is of the opinion that because the UK profited from colonial times, it should pay compensation to affected nations. My view is simply: it is unfair to assess the past with contemporary ethics; times are different, modern people were not responsible of events 50 or 100 years ago. Suppose the Britain had to compensate India, it would be a huge amount of funds. Is the UK in a position to manage that? Certainly not. Peter Until recently, I don’t think there was much reckoning with colonial history. For example, when I first moved to the UK, the public weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the part that colonialism played in it. I hold that decolonization isn’t just about signing a cheque, it should be about looking at what went wrong and where we should be now. Takeaways The first participant It won’t change the way I think, but I understand Peter’s concerns. I converse with people regularly with opinions are opposite to my own. The goal is bringing everyone to the common understanding, so that everyone can work towards the improvement of society. The second participant We were there for two and a half hours. Akshat had dessert and I had some sweet Japanese wine. I did not convince him of anything, but we both enjoyed dinner, so we might become more receptive to engaging in dialogues with others in the coming times.