What is interesting is that, although it is framed as a war between the elites and Main Street, the Tea Party is actually really good for the elites.
Chrystia FreelandRead
All of us can agree that we want government to work as well as possible, and we should all applaud efforts to improve it. But there is no escaping the divisive and essential questions: What is the purpose of the state, and whom does it serve?
Interpretation
The quote emphasizes the importance of understanding the fundamental purpose of government and the need for improvement in its functioning.
Chrystia Freeland's quote highlights a common desire for effective governance while simultaneously stressing the importance of addressing core questions about the role of the state and its obligations to its citizens. It suggests that despite agreement on the need for a well-functioning government, discussions about its fundamental purpose are necessary to ensure that it serves the people adequately.
In practice
This quote can be used in a debate about government reform.
What is interesting is that, although it is framed as a war between the elites and Main Street, the Tea Party is actually really good for the elites.
The irony of the political rise of the plutocrats is that, like Venice's oligarchs, they threaten the system that created them.
In a globalized economy, jobs no longer need a passport, but workers do.
This is the 21st-century paradox: Even as political democracy has become the intellectual default mode for much of the world, the private sector usually trumps the public one when it comes to accommodating consumer choice.
Living as we do in the age of Facebook, we shouldn't be surprised that some countries are starting to imagine themselves more as social networks than as a physical place.
One of the most important political and economic facts of this young century is that capital has been slipping the traces of the nation-state. Business is global; government is national.
One vote. That's a big weapon you have there, Mister. In 1948, just one additional vote in each precinct would have elected Dewey. In 1960, one vote in each precinct in Illinois would have elected Nixon. One vote.
A day will come when our children and grandchildren will look back and they'll ask one of two questions. Either they will ask: "what in God's name were they doing?" or they may look back and say: "how did they find the uncommon moral courage to rise above politics and redeem the promise of American democracy?"
Look: I don't want to live with a nuclear Iran. I would like to make it uncomfortable for them to seek it.
Your proposal raises the greatest mischief that can befall my country. You could not have found a person to whom your schemes are more disagreeable. Let me conjure you then, if you have any regard for your country, concern for your self or posterity, or respect for me, to banish these thoughts from your mind, never communicate, as from yourself, or anyone else, a sentiment of the like nature.
Given political history in Chile, it seemed to me that there was a critical task of consolidating a democracy and creating healthy civic-military and political-military relationships.
Political campaigns are designedly made into emotional orgies which endeavor to distract attention from the real issues involved, and they actually paralyze what slight powers of cerebration man can normally muster.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.