Quotes About Citizens

It is key that Kansas Citians make the call as to what kind of airport they want.

People do not want the state keeping information on its citizens for some ill-defined and unproven benefit.

This magistrate is not the king. The people are the king.

In an election, there are no kings.

That is the best government which desires to make the people happy, and knows how to make them happy.

Hispanic citizens know that illegal labor is taking jobs from their children and their legal immigrant friends.

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.)

Demokrasi ve despotizm aras?ndaki fark: demokrasilerde kan dökmeden hükümetler devrilir; oysa despotizmde bu böyle de?ildir. 3. Demokrasi, vatanda?lara iyilikler sunamaz (ve sunmamal? da). Gerçekten de "demokrasi" tek ba??na bir ?ey yapamaz; bir ?eyler yapacak olan ancak demokratik bir devletin vatanda?lar?d?r (ve ku?kusuz hükümetleridir).

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)

You politicians remain professional because the voters remain amateur.

Behind the troubled banks and the increasingly troubled insurance agencies stands "the full faith and credit" of the Government—in effect, a promise, sure to be honored by Congress, that all citizens will chip in through taxes or through inflation to make all depositors whole.80

Unlike in autocracy, people are more responsible than the leaders in democratic system of governance as leaders reflect their voters' thoughts and actions.

The institutional requirements of community pose fundamental issues that neither corporate capitalism nor state socialism ever took seriously. The critical point of departure is the question: Can you have Democracy with a big D in any system if you don't have democracy with a small d in the actual experience and everyday community life of ordinary everyday citizens?

We are not "merely" talking about nurturing democratic community practice; we are talking about community practice as the basis of fundamental experiences of critical importance to the nation as a whole and of democracy in general. The answer to the question "Can you have genuine Democracy with a big D in a continental nation if its citizens have little genuine experience of democracy with a small d in their own lives?" is simple: No.

American police terrorism was created to control the black and brown people of slavery. This remains vivid today. We need change across this country and accountability for our loved ones whose lives have been stolen by American terrorism. Who will govern the government when they continue to murder American citizens? Injustice in this country is pitiful and pathetic.

In a recent national survey, 24 percent of respondents identified themselves as "spiritual but not religious," meaning that nearly one-quarter of citizens surveyed have "combined diverse beliefs and practices into a personal faith that fits no standard definition.

radical violence was so deeply woven into the fabric of 1970s America that many citizens, especially in New York and other hard-hit cities, accepted it as part of daily life. As one New Yorker sniffed to the New York Post after an FALN attack in 1977, "Oh, another bombing? Who is it this time?

There has always been, and there is now, a profound conflict of interest between the people and the government of the United States.

Perhaps the most important thing I learned was about democracy, that democracy is not our government, our constitution, our legal structure. Too often they are enemies of democracy.

Society in every state is a blessing, but Government even in its best state is but a necessary evil. . . .

The good things that have been done, the reforms . . . all of that was not done by government edict. . . . It was all done by citizens' movements. And then keep in mind that great movements in the past have arisen from small movements, from tiny clusters of people that have gotten together here and there. If you have a movement strong enough, it doesn't matter who's in the White House. What really matters is what are people doing, and what are people saying, what are people demanding.

Is there a "national interest" when a few people decide on war, and huge numbers of others—here and abroad—are killed or crippled as a result of such a decision? Should citizens not ask in whose interest are we doing what we are doing? Then why not, I came to think, tell the story of wars not through the eyes of the generals and diplomats but from the viewpoints of the GIs, of the parents who received the black-bordered telegrams, even of "the enemy.

What if citizens organized to demand what the Declaration of Independence promised: a government that protected the equal rights of all to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? This would call for an economic system that distributed wealth in a thoughtful and humane way. It would mean a culture where young people were not taught to seek success as a mask for greed. Throughout

The very poor could not be counted on to support the government. They were like the slaves and Indians—invisible most of the time, but frightening to the elite if they started an uprising. Other citizens, though, might support the system. Farmers who owned their land, better-paid laborers, and urban office workers were paid just enough, and flattered just enough, that in a crisis they would be loyal to the system and the upper classes that dominated it. Big