OPINION

Silence, for anyone who’s listening

Silence, for anyone who’s listening

There is nothing, it seems, that is capable of turning down the aggressive tone prevailing in public discourse and ensuring that a discussion can take place in a calm and composed manner. Nothing can be said, apparently, without being immediately followed by its exact opposite. Yet it is very doubtful if the people doing the loudest shouting on one side or the other will have any part in the outcome of the next election.

Anyone who watched Thursday’s debate in Parliament on the wiretapping affair got any answers they may have been expecting only to the degree that they kept their ears and minds open. Only to the degree, that is, that they genuinely hoped to learn something or just tuned into the discussion with fixed opinions and views. For people in the latter category, the prime minister never admitted to making a “mistake” and never called for the rhetoric surrounding the affair to be toned down, as it is all now in the hands of Parliament and the justice system. But nor did the leader of the main opposition – who accused the prime minister of being behind a “deep-state operation” and spoke of an “institutional and undemocratic lapse the likes of which we have not seen since 1974” – contribute to shedding light on the case anymore than other rhetorical acrobatics.

Such self-perpetuating polarization appears to be casting more darkness over the political landscape just when we need more clarity. It is not just the fact that households are concerned about much more pressing problems in their daily lives – phone taps not being among them; it is also the silent and fresh increase of that portion of voters who cannot be easily identified in polls, but who will likely end up having a decisive impact on the next election, whenever that takes place. Their silence is not an expression of determination or of indifference, and that is what makes it so much more interesting. They know which way they’ll go, which party they’ll pick, but they don’t want to say because they don’t want to be “stigmatized” or become embroiled in an argument. 

The polarization and clashes we see in the “microsociety” of politics, media and social media do not adequately reflect what is going on in society, all over the country. In an environment where no one knows who’s watching who and why, the various processes unfolding in society tend to pass under the radar.

Politicians and society are not on the same page; and the certain thing is that handouts are no longer a safe way to bridge the divide.

Subscribe to our Newsletters

Enter your information below to receive our weekly newsletters with the latest insights, opinion pieces and current events straight to your inbox.

By signing up you are agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.