Anna, an education academic at the University of Exeter, and JJ, a 19-year-old medical sciences student, met for dinner at The Galley Restaurant in Topsham, Exeter, to discuss their differing political views. They found common ground on social issues but clashed on the monarchy and income caps.
Common Ground on Social Issues
Both agreed on several social issues. Anna said, “It was really easy and natural, not a single awkward moment.” JJ noted, “We lined up on a few social issues: she high-fived me when I told her I went to a Surfers Against Sewage protest.”
The Monarchy Debate
Anna, originally from Germany, expressed reservations about the monarchy. “King Charles seems to be doing a good job, but I don’t think that makes the system OK. The hard-won lesson from the Third Reich was not to centre institutional continuity around particular individuals.” JJ countered, “I would just hate the idea of a President Blair or President Truss. Whereas we were all rooting for King Charles to put Trump in his place and exercise the soft diplomacy that he’s always been good at.”
Income Tax and Wealth Caps
Anna supported a 100% income tax on earnings over £200,000, referencing a proposal by French politician Jean-Luc Mélenchon for a 100% tax over €400,000. JJ disagreed, saying, “An income cap that low is going to stifle investment into the country. People won’t want to live here if they can’t have their well-paid corporate jobs compared with other countries. And how effective is an income cap when the super rich just take their money through capital gains, dividends and assets?”
Prison Reform
Both agreed that nonviolent offences should not lead to prison. Anna pointed out, “Not having a TV licence continues to be a criminal offence disproportionally affecting women, and not paying the fine can lead to imprisonment. Why can Angela Rayner say non-payment of a £40,000 tax bill was a mistake and continue her political career while a single mum not paying her TV licence goes to prison?” JJ added, “I agree people shouldn’t go to prison for small things like not paying the TV licence, but with something like Palestine Action it’s difficult, because they are doing wrong things. If they commit criminal damage they should go to prison. But we shouldn’t be imprisoning people for holding up a placard that says, ‘I support Palestine Action’.”
Takeaways from the Dinner
Anna reflected, “We had a really good discussion. I think it was a lesson for me, that if you put out different points of views, examine them together and are open to hearing the other person’s opinion, it’s really good for changing attitudes.” JJ concluded, “When you’re breaking bread with someone, the temperature of the discussion doesn’t increase the way it does on social media. If only we could get more people to do it.”
