“There are always two parties, the party of the Past and the party of the Future: the Establishment and the Movement.”

— Ralph Waldo Emerson

1860s, Life and Letters in New England (1867)
Context: There are always two parties, the party of the Past and the party of the Future: the Establishment and the Movement. At times the resistance is reanimated, the schism runs under the world and appears in Literature, Philosophy, Church, State and social customs.

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "There are always two parties, the party of the Past and the party of the Future: the Establishment and the Movement." by Ralph Waldo Emerson?

Ralph Waldo Emerson 727

American philosopher, essayist, and poet 1803–1882

Related quotes

“Party historians go to the past for party purposes; they seek to read into the past the controversies of the present.”

Arnold Toynbee (1852–1883) British economic historian

Source: Lectures on The Industrial Revolution in England (1884), p. 32

“There are two parties, so-called, but they're really factions of the same party, the Business Party.”

Noam Chomsky (1928) american linguist, philosopher and activist

Quotes 1990s, 1990-1994, Interview by Adam Jones, 1990
Context: In the United States, the political system is a very marginal affair. There are two parties, so-called, but they're really factions of the same party, the Business Party. Both represent some range of business interests. In fact, they can change their positions 180 degrees, and nobody even notices. In the 1984 election, for example, there was actually an issue, which often there isn't. The issue was Keynesian growth versus fiscal conservatism. The Republicans were the party of Keynesian growth: big spending, deficits, and so on. The Democrats were the party of fiscal conservatism: watch the money supply, worry about the deficits, et cetera. Now, I didn't see a single comment pointing out that the two parties had completely reversed their traditional positions. Traditionally, the Democrats are the party of Keynesian growth, and the Republicans the party of fiscal conservatism. So doesn't it strike you that something must have happened? Well, actually, it makes sense. Both parties are essentially the same party. The only question is how coalitions of investors have shifted around on tactical issues now and then. As they do, the parties shift to opposite positions, within a narrow spectrum.

“It is the nature and intention of a constitution to prevent governing by party, by establishing a common principle that shall limit and control the power and impulse of party, and that says to all parties, thus far shalt thou go and no further. But in the absence of a constitution, men look entirely to party; and instead of principle governing party, party governs principle.”

Thomas Paine (1737–1809) English and American political activist

1790s, First Principles of Government (1795)

“But I always say, one's company, two's a crowd, and three's a party”

Andy Warhol (1928–1987) American artist

“A party with a narrow vision, a party that is afraid of the future, a party whose leaders are inclined to shoot from the hip, a party that has never been willing to put its investment in human beings who are below them in economic and social status.”

Jimmy Carter (1924) American politician, 39th president of the United States (in office from 1977 to 1981)

Remarks on the Republican party, at a fundraiser in Hollywood, Florida, as quoted in "Carter Attacks Reagan Tax Cut, Seeks Debates," The Washington Post, (18 July 1980), Pg. A1; this has often become misquoted as "Republicans are men of narrow vision, who are afraid of the future." http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=9752
Presidency (1977–1981), 1978