Circles and Squares

Brexit is a defining moment in the history of the UK not just because we may be leaving the EU but because it has revealed the fundamental flaw in our political system. The problem we have is not one of corruption, although that definitely exists, but of style. Our Parliamentary system simply has no mechanism for constructive and inclusive dialogue. In a complex world of multiple viewpoints Westminster only understand binaries – there’s the Government and there’s the Opposition, pit against one another in eternal combat for supremacy in a battle which no longer has any relevance to the real world outside its doors. And within that combat there is no room for nuance. A Party must have a single unified world view, despite the many different people and voices it contains. Because there was no tolerance in the Conservative Party for differing views, David Cameron took the entire country into a Referendum to silence difference once and for all. It spectacularly backfired. His Party is now more fractured than ever and so is the country.

For me this is the difference between Circles and Squares. Westminster is a Square. There are sides and borders. There are corners for conspiracy and edges to be pushed against. A Square demands combat. The sides face off across a central divide and in every interaction that must be a winner or a loser. Westminster is an eternal game of chess, where elected Kings and Queens fight for dominance of the discourse.

But what the world needs right now are more Circles. In a Circle ideas can flow. There are no sides and no borders. No corners or edges. A Circle embraces difference and encourages dialogue. Those inside can look across and alongside. There is no hierarchy, no combat, no oneupmanship. Within a Circle we’re all part of something together.

In 2016 when Theresa May became Prime Minister she had no experience of Circles. Bolstered by centuries of tradition she fully embraced Square thinking and set off to dominate Brexit. Instead of recognising the complexity of what Brexit had revealed she went storming off down a binary path, determined to deliver a victory for herself and her Party. So she called a General Election to strengthen her side, spent time and resources pushing an agenda to appease the strongest faction in her team and refused to speak to anyone with an opposing view. As a consequence Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn took up arms and fought back with his own vision of Brexit, brandishing his smugness like a battle axe to bludgeon the Government into submission.

So Brexit became the latest battle in the war between opposing ideologies and each side dug in its heels and shouted at each other across the divide until time ran out.