Quotes About Government

Ya ni se ríen: todo tesoro público que les entra a sus bolsillos sin fondos se les hace cosa natural.

Y quién va a acabar con las FARC? ¿Este hombrecito? Este culibajito no puede ni con su alma. Es más alto de estatura física que de la moral. Y de la intelectual ni se diga.

Como el impuesto de guerra lo que nos resultó fue el impuesto de la derrota, ahora estrenamos gobierno con el impuesto de la paz. ¿La paz un impuesto? O sea, como quien dice, que aquí pagamos porque estamos vivos y pagamos porque estamos muertos.

The revenues of Cuban state-run companies are used exclusively for the benefit of the people, to whom they belong.

No matther whether th' constitution follows th' flag or not, th' supreme coort follows th' iliction returns.

Th' prisidincy is th' highest office in th' gift iv th' people. Th' vice-prisidincy is th' next highest an' th' lowest. It isn't a crime exactly. Ye can't be sint to jail f'r it, but it's a kind iv a disgrace. It's like writin' anonymous letters.

My dad says you don't see tanks and guns on parade in America because democracy keeps the country together, not fear of the military.

A monarchy is a merchantman which sails well, but will sometimes strike on a rock, and go to the bottom; a republic is a raft which will never sink, but then your feet are always in the water.

Liberty has never lasted long in a democracy, nor has it ever ended in anything better than despotism.

The White House is a historical BS factory."

groups in America tried to spark a sense of urgency within government circles but kept running into a wall of indifference or outright hostility. While the U.S. State Department dithered, stalled, and did its best to avoid doing anything

Democracy is the fig leaf of elitism.

The government would be able to go to court with respect to newspaper articles, broadcast pieces and the like that they thought were bad or harmful or even against the government and try to block them.

I believe that my theory is correct; for whatever be the question upon which I am arguing, whether it be religious, philosophical, political, or economical; whether it affects well-being, morality, equality, right, justice, progress, responsibility, property, labor, exchange, capital, wages, taxes, population, credit, or Government; at whatever point of the scientific horizon I start from, I invariably come to the same thing—the solution of the social problem is in liberty.

There are two principles between which there can be no compromise—liberty and coercion.

the purpose of the socialists is to suppress liberty of association precisely in order to force people to associate together in true liberty.)

The law is guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish.

This line of reasoning brings us to a challenging question: If people are as incapable, as immoral, and as ignorant as the politicians indicate, then why is the right of these same people to vote defended with such passionate insistence?

How is it that the strange idea of making the law produce what it does not contain—prosperity, in a positive sense, wealth, science, religion—should ever have gained ground in the political world?

You compare the nation to a parched piece of land and the tax to a life-giving rain. So be it. But you should also ask yourself where this rain comes from, and whether it is not precisely the tax that draws the moisture from the soil and dries it up. You should also ask yourself further whether the soil receives more of this precious water from the rain than it loses by the evaporation?

I cannot possibly understand how fraternity can be legally enforced without liberty being legally destroyed...

We disapprove of state education. Than the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Than the socialists say that we don't want an religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Than they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.

Yes, as long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true mission, that it may violate property instead of securing it, everybody will be wanting to manufacture law, either to defend himself against plunder, or to organize it for his own profit.

Do not the legislators and their agents form a part of the human race? Do they consider that they are composed of different materials from the rest of mankind?