I don't live in the UK but have been there many times including having worked there and I believe this view is reasonably commonplace elsewhere, especially so in all Anglophone countries. I've always been a highly political person even to the extent of having studied Political Science as part of Philosophy Studies and I would also strongly agree with the article's third sentence which concludes that 'People who hold certain, commonplace views, stay silent believing that expressing those views will carry penalty not reward'.

Even with my strong political views, I've always applied that rule of not discussing politics and religion when in the company of the majority of people I know, and especially so in the workplace environment. In fact, my posts here on HN are about as political as I get in public, as I know that even the few who know that I post on HN would never bother to read my comments anyway—as they are just not interested in discussing politics.

Even those who hold similar political positions to me will not engage in or sustain a discussion on a political matter for very long. Thus, I'd not only agree with the Ethical Systems blog that 'workplaces are losing their viewpoint diversity' but I'd also suggest that this position holds generally across the whole population. Moreover, I also add that this view of keeping quiet is much more commonplace nowadays than it was decades ago during the 1960s when my politics were forming. That said, back then there was not the same degree of polarization as there is now—and when it existed it was cleanly divided along the well defined political left-right axis. These days, an axis of view can exist on any number of subjects and it's this wide diversity that's a large part of the problem. Many people are becoming even more timid and thus unprepared to discuss their views, as now there is increased potential to tread on someone's political toes.

It's clear to me why this problem exists and it's because our societies are now much more culturally diverse and far less homogeneous than they were when I was a kid. Back then, many of the issues that confront us today were essentially unknown let alone the subject of hot political discussion—unlike many of those of today where everyone is forced to engage in and espouse the politically correct position whether they like doing so or not.

For example, in the '50s it was just accepted that women stayed home and minded the kids; there was no problem in discussing Islam or Moslems as there were essentially none in Western society; and the word 'gay' had a completely different meaning to what it does these days. And as for the subject itself, being completely taboo it was never discussed (in fact, I didn't get to know the word's new connotation and meaning until I was in my late teens). I was like many others, when we found out its new meaning we were somewhat miffed, as we had suddenly lost a valuable word from our vocabulary and there was no replacement. (Back then, there was a subtle but distinct difference between 'gay' and 'happy' that everyone understood, however by the mid 1970s usage of its original meaning had all but disappeared from the language.)

Most of you who will read this weren't even born in the '50s and '60s so it is extremely difficult for me to convey how very different those times were from now. The shifts that have taken place in many societal values have been enormous and I'd venture to say there would be few times in history when values have changed so much and in so many different areas within a single lifetime. Thus, it's little wonder that many people have found it very difficult to adapt to these massive changes. Similarly, the rise of identity politics has further complicated matters as it has added many more threads to the problem.

If one looks at the problem globally, speaking one's mind in public nowadays is fraught with dangers. No wonder that so few actually do so.