“Autarchy and the Statist Abyss,” 1968
“It is difficult to see why the most advantageous political system, for the present, would not be a democratic state with an artistocratic government, provided only the artistocracy be that of real merit, and not of artificial qualities. If this be not the real principle of the republican form of government then I must confess that I do not know what its principle is.”
John Burgess (1933). The Foundations of Political Science. (reprinted 1994) As cited in Ido Oren, "The Subjectivity of the 'Democratic' Peace," International Security, Vol. 20, No. 2.
Help us to complete the source, original and additional information
Related quotes
1810s, Letter to H. Tompkinson (AKA Samuel Kercheval) (1816)
Federalist No. 39 Full text at Wikisource http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers/No._39
1780s, Federalist Papers (1787–1788)
The Cosmos as a Poem (2010)
Source: "Neal Boortz - Libertarian", [http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities.html Libertarian Celebrities & VIPs http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/neal-boortz.html,, Advocates for Self-Government, 2006-09-08, http://web.archive.org/20030719050508/www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/neal-boortz.html, 2003-07-19]
Harijan, (Nov. 1. 1936). M.K. Gandhi, Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol-62, New Delhi: Publication Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India (1975) p. 92
1920s, An Autobiography (1927)
Speech to the National Reform Union in Manchester (6 July 1887), quoted in The Times (7 July 1887), p. 7
1880s
Bishop urges Catholic groups to renege after they signed Trudeau’s pro-abortion pledge https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/bishop-urges-catholic-groups-to-renege-after-they-signed-trudeaus-pro-abort (May 3, 2018)
The Cornerstone Speech (1861)
Context: The surest way to secure peace, is to show your ability to maintain your rights. The principles and position of the present administration of the United States the republican party present some puzzling questions. While it is a fixed principle with them never to allow the increase of a foot of slave territory, they seem to be equally determined not to part with an inch 'of the accursed soil. Notwithstanding their clamor against the institution, they seemed to be equally opposed to getting more, or letting go what they have got. They were ready to fight on the accession of Texas, and are equally ready to fight now on her secession. Why is this? How can this strange paradox be accounted for? There seems to be but one rational solution and that is, notwithstanding their professions of humanity, they are disinclined to give up the benefits they derive from slave labor. Their philanthropy yields to their interest. The idea of enforcing the laws, has but one object, and that is a collection of the taxes, raised by slave labor to swell the fund necessary to meet their heavy appropriations. The spoils is what they are after though they come from the labor of the slave