Daily in this election year the personal
and political portions of life have become difficult to separate. President Trump
dominates the airwaves and the dialogue, as his Tweets are disseminated further
on every newscast.
Political news is everywhere we look—in restaurants,
doctors’ offices, my phone’s notification stream. A conversation with friends
too quickly slips into one that betrays what one thinks about the man, negative
or positive. Friends are lost.
We are being slowly herded into personal
silence.
Historically, silence has been a tool of
dictators and autocrats. In other countries we have seen repressions, arrests
of political opponents, executions—literal silencings.
Now that social media can be manipulated
toward political ends, however, we have an alternative, the silencing that
results from overkill. From political noise.
We Americans are not used to a constant
political bleat, at least not in between election campaigns.
This orchestrated noise affects our health
as well as our sense of well-being. We react to the shock of daily news—melting
ice caps, the novel coronavirus, Australia burning, earthquakes, floods, as
well as the usual death and destruction in the Middle East. Politicians
threaten Medicare, a literal lifeline for older citizens, and the news is
hidden in the noise, if not twisted.
Small wonder that studies along with
anecdote confirm a rise in popular anxiety following the election of 2016.
Blood pressures—easy to measure—rose. Medical complaints referring to anxiety
increased, as did prescriptions for anti-depressants.
Opting out of Facebook and Twitter is one
way people cope, but that complies with the goal of political noise—to silence
coherent discussion and the ability to communicate freely.
The excuse for leaving social media is the
stridency of argument and personal attack it allows. Both sides—Left and
Right—engage in this.
Republicans, however, have displayed
greater skill at the strategic use of new technology. Their supporters are
better at amplifying a targeted message from the coordinated set of megaphones
they have positioned throughout the public sphere.
It has required many years—decades—of
Movement Conservatism, lavishly funded, to create this network, the right-wing
messaging universe: Talk radio, FOX News, numerous internet-linked interest
groups, message boards, along with bot banks that spread false information.
(“Political Bots and the Right-Wing Hijacking Of Social Media,” WBUR, May 18,
2017)
The manipulation of text and videos by
technology has made it even harder to isolate even a manifest truth. This is
another aspect of the engineered political noise intended to silence us.
We hear a lot of commentary on
underrepresented voices, silenced voices. Often this refers to segments of
society overlooked by the nattering cohort of coastal pundits, mainstream and
right-wing.
But what about self-silencing?
That’s what we do when we pull out of
social media. Or when we avoid discussion and the opportunity of listening to
our neighbors.
It’s also what we do by slicing the views
of candidates and issues too finely, then defending our slice as though it were
home territory.
We see the result of that reaction in the
Democratic debates where, except for longtime socialist independent Bernie
Sanders, so many presidential candidates vary so little in basic convictions.
Democratic heads don’t wear white or black hats. They wear hues of gray, pink,
purple—well, a rainbow of nuanced positions.
The election to date, however, shows how
those nuances can add up to fragmentation. The Democratic Party is divided into
rough-edged parts. Although those parts interpenetrate, they do not blend into
one mass, moving in unison behind one candidate. At least, not yet.
And it becomes harder for them to find that
unifying catalyst in the presence of so much noise.