Quotes About Freedom

We do not choose political freedom because it promises us this or that. We choose it because it makes possible the only dignified form of human coexistence, the only form in which we can be fully responsible for ourselves. Whether we realize its possibilities depends on all kinds of things — and above all on ourselves.

if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In

The most we can say of democracy or freedom is that they give our personal abilities a little more influence on our well-being.

For nothing could be better than living a modest, simple, and free life in an egalitarian society. It took some time before I recognized this as no more than a beautiful dream; that freedom is more important than equality; that the attempt to realize equality endangers freedom; and that, if freedom is lost, there will not even be equality among the unfree.

Indeed, he said as late as 1976 that he would have remained a socialist all his life if he had thought that it was possible to reconcile socialist egalitarianism with freedom.

It is not difficult to show that a theory of democratic control can be developed which is free of the paradox of sovereignty. The theory I have in mind is one which does not proceed, as it were, from a doctrine of the intrinsic goodness or righteousness of a majority rule, but rather from the baseness of tyranny; or more precisely, it rests upon the decision, or upon the adoption of the proposal, to avoid and to resist tyranny." Karl Popper, 'The Open Society and Its Enemies', Chapter 7.

It will for ever remain one of the greatest triumphs of Athenian democracy that it treated slaves humanely, and that in spite of the inhuman propaganda of philosophers like Plato himself and Aristotle it came, as he witnesses, very close to abolishing slavery.

Great men may make great mistakes; and as the book tries to show, some of the greatest leaders of the past supported the perennial attack on freedom and reason.

We must plan for freedom, and not only for security, if for no other reason than only freedom can make security more secure.

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. [...] We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.

There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions. … It obviously endangers the freedom and the objectivity of our discussion if we attack a person instead of attacking an opinion or, more precisely, a theory.

It is wrong to think that belief in freedom always leads to victory; we must always be prepared for it to lead to defeat. If we choose freedom, then we must be prepared to perish along with it.

Democracy and freedom do not guarantee the millennium. No, we do not choose political freedom because it promises us this or that. We choose it because it makes possible the only dignified form of human coexistence, the only form in which we can be fully responsible for ourselves. Whether we realize its possibilities depends on all kinds of things — and above all on ourselves.

the alleged clash between freedom and security, that is, a security guaranteed by the state, turns out to be a chimera. For there is no freedom if it is not secured by the state; and conversely, only a state which is controlled by free citizens can offer them any reasonable security at all.)

The prolonged use of violence may lead in the end to the loss of freedom, since it is liable to bring about not a dispassionate rule of reason, but the rule of the strong man. A violent revolution which tries to attempt more than the destruction of tyranny is at least as likely to bring about another tyranny as it is likely to achieve its real aims.

Scientific' Marxism is dead. Its feeling of social responsibility and its love for freedom must survive.

How often I have found that we grow to maturity not by doing what we like, but by doing what we should. How true it is that not every 'should' is a compulsion, and not every 'like' is a high morality and true freedom.

In the midst of our lives, of our freedom and our struggles, we have to make a radical, absolute decision. And we never know when lightening will strike us out of the blue. It may be when we least expect to be asked whether we have the absolute faith and trust to say yes

Demek ki Platon'un, "Kim yönetmeli?" ya da "Kim iktidar sahibi olmal??" sorusu yanl??t?r. demokrasiye inanmamam?z?n nedeni, demokraside halk?n egemen olmas?ndan kaynaklanm?yor. Ne siz ne de ben hakimiz; tam tersine sizler de, ben de yönetiliyoruz, hatta bazen ho?umuza gitmeyecek kadar çok. demokrasi bizim için, siyasi muhalefet ve bu nedenle de siyasi özgürlük anlay???yla uzla?abilen tek yönetim biçimidir.

Sonuç olarak daha iyi bir dünya aray???, ba?ka insanlar?n, bir dü?ünce u?runa ya?amlar?n? istemeyerek feda etmeyece?i bir dünya aray??? olmal?d?r.

Ben bir ölçek önermi?tim: Ço?unluk bir hükümet de?i?ikli?ini arzu etti?i takdirde, devletin politik kurumlar? vatanda?lar?na, kan dökmeksizin hükümet de?i?ikli?ini gerçekle?tirmeyi mümkün k?l?yorsa, o devlet politik olarak özgürdür. Daha k?sa bir ifadeyle: yöneticilerimizden kan dökmeden kurtulabiliyorsak özgürüz demektir. (Hayat Problem Çözmektir)

Every enlightened path can turn on itself and become a new tyranny

People always say to me "What do you think you'd like to be When you grow up?" And I say, "Why, I think I'd like to be the sky Or be a plane or train or mouse Or maybe a haunted house Or something furry, rough and wild... Or maybe I will stay a child.

Masters have wrought in prisons, At peace in cells of stone: From their thick walls I fashion Windows to light my own.