The basic position seems to be ‘we won, get over it’. That might be ok for unimportant issues, or where a choice is easily reversed if it proves wrong. For anything really important or enduring it is totally inadequate. No marriage is going to survive such a winner takes all approach and nor will any nation.

As Jesus noted, no house divided against itself will stand. Democracy should reflect the thoughts and wishes of all its citizens, but that’s only the beginning. The harder next stage, is to work out what we, as a nation, can do with that knowledge – how do we apply it to progress as one nation. Democracy has always had to find ways of looking after its minorities. Otherwise it becomes simply the tyranny of the majority. When it is deeply and evenly divided this principle is all the more important.

The winner takes all approach rightly criticises merely repeating votes until a desired result is achieved. It’s a pointless approach that does nothing to solve underlying disagreements. What is needed is a proper national conversation that seeks a deeper mutual understanding and consensus. That would be real democracy.

It is arguable that what we like to call Democracy is not fit for purpose; certainly not for such a purpose. Winning only works when there is sufficient Agreeing in the general population, otherwise it cannot legitimately call itself Democracy.

Where do we go from here? I am not sure the way forward is at all obvious (or, perhaps, even possible). Something like a National Conversation seems to be required. We have all the tools in modern communication to enable this, though at the moment they are generally working in the opposite direction. As part (in theory at least) of one organisation that is also failing in this task – the Church – I am not occupying any high ground; just trying to say what I see.