There is no such thing as an "unbiased will of the majority".

That sort of terminology might have flown back in the 18th century with Rousseau and the like speaking of a "general will" but in today's era of social science, it has about as much force as invoking divinity.

Everyone has bias. The idea of a general will is largely fiction and was discredited at the time.

Our system is based on coercion, costs and trade-offs and nothing more. That is human history. You may have some rights (perhaps a right to privacy, it is debatable) but this is really just the three core components dressed up in reverse. The freedom of speech for instance is simply to codify the idea that the state silencing you is intolerable. Intolerable is eventually meaningless unless it is backed up by costs and coercion against the state which they will seek to avoid.

When the state violates such "rights" flagrantly sometimes the people are called to manifest this aspect of "intolerable".

That's what a revolution is.

Failing that you need to convince people. And in so doing if you aim to find some "unbiased will of the majority" you are wasting your time.

You would be better off with a lobbyist. Surely such a person would not so readily engage in such fiction regarding how democracy actually works, and would thus be more effective in achieving your goals.