THE ‘silent majority’, according to Wikipedia, is an unspecified large group of people in a country or group who do not express their opinions publicly.
The term was especially made popular by US President Richard Nixon during his 1986 campaign, when he was looking for the ‘undecided’ voters.
Theoretically, they are presumed to be the largest group by number – which could be true, given how many people don’t bother to exercise their right to vote.
Trump is also using the term, which is ironic. Even when he was, to the surprise of many, elected to office in 2016, Hillary Clinton beat him by 2.9-million votes, and he achieved a majority only by virtue of the complicated American electoral college system.
If nothing else, politicians are persistent and/or stubborn, not to mention over-optimistic and slow to comprehend realities.
Many political candidates have waited in vain on election day in the hope that the ‘silent majority’ will appear in their tens of thousands and place their X beside their party’s name on the ballot paper.
But why is the ‘majority’ silent?
The silence could mean a number of things: they might be without a voice, or couldn’t care less, or are distrusting of what might be done with their views.
They see no gain in telling, or they are spineless, or wishy-washy, or simply don’t have an opinion, or believe their views are private and personal.
Perhaps it’s apathy or indifference, or a resignation that regardless of what one does, nothing really changes, so why waste energy?
Today it is impossible to know who the silent majority are, if indeed such a sector of the population exists.
In the past, tedious public and door-to-door surveys were conducted to number and define the silent majority.
It’s no longer a matter for debate.
Today, (no) thanks to social media, the silent majority has been largely replaced by the screaming, vulgar, crude, unfiltered minority.
We live in an age of unprecedented verbal abuse, where crude ignorance is masquerading as knowledge; where people feel free to criticise, undermine, insult, threaten, blame and libel others from their perceived online ‘anonymity’.
If they are the majority – heaven help us!
They probably don’t realise – or most likely don’t care – who they might be hurting, offending or angering.
They are obviously also not mindful of the fact that their language and lack of manners says more about them than it does about their targets.
I’m also quite amazed at their depth and breadth of pseudo-knowledge. They will take on professionals in every field of study.
What is interesting is the number of people now abandoning social media platforms.
Some are simply members of WhatsApp groups whose participants have forgotten the purpose and ethics of the group – and the time of day or night.
But for most, they can no longer stand the non-stop negativity and aggression.
They’ve learnt you can’t beat a troll or a fanatic, who simply raises the volume and intensifies the attack in the face of valid argument.
And there’s no point seeking a rational debate; it’s heat versus light, and intelligence has rarely won a battle against fanaticism.
My approach is to stay off social media as much as possible, and hope against hope there is indeed a silent majority of sane, peace-loving, trusting, positive and forgiving people who one day will command the nation’s conversation.
