Quotes about commitment
page 10

Margaret Thatcher photo
F. R. Leavis photo
Gerhard Richter photo
Anton Chekhov photo

“The conflict about the meaning of free speech went on through the 1920s, Holmes and Brandeis persisting in their view and expressing it in strongly worded dissents. In one sense it was a curious performance by the two of them, for each had a deep commitment to the Supreme Court as an institution and thought that division among the justices should be avoided when possible.”

Anthony Lewis (1927–2013) American journalist

[82-83, Anthony, Lewis, w:Anthony Lewis, Make No Law: The Sullivan Case and the First Amendment, Vintage, 1992, 0679739394, http://books.google.com/books?id=YElZ5GgC7E0C&lpg=PA1&pg=PT127#v=onepage&q&f=false]

Mark Tully photo

“There is hope: in a fiercely independent Supreme court, a crusading free press and an absolute commitment to representative democracy. It's time to slip those last reins of rundown colonial institutions.”

Mark Tully (1935) British journalist

Source: Michael Holland " Slow progress http://www.theguardian.com/books/2003/dec/07/features.review?INTCMP=SRCH", The Guardian, 7 December 2003

Thomas Brooks photo

“The giving way to a less sin makes way for the committing of a greater.”

Thomas Brooks (1608–1680) English Puritan

Precious Remedies Against Satan's Devices, 1652

Werner Erhard photo
Septimius Severus photo

“You see by what has happened that we are superior to you in intelligence, in size of army, and in number of supporters. Surely you were easily trapped, captured without a struggle. It is in my power to do with you what I wish when I wish. Helpless and prostrate, you lie before us now, victims of our might. But if one looks for a punishment equal to the crimes you have committed, it is impossible to find a suitable one. You murdered your revered and benevolent old emperor, the man whom it was your sworn duty to protect. The empire of the Roman people, eternally respected, which our forefathers obtained by their valiant courage or inherited because of their noble birth, this empire you shamefully and disgracefully sold for silver as if it were your personal property. But you were unable to defend the man whom you yourselves had chosen as emperor. No, you betrayed him like the cowards you are. For these monstrous acts and crimes you deserve a thousand deaths, if one wished to do to you what you have earned. You see clearly what it is right you should suffer. But I will be merciful. I will not butcher you. My hands shall not do what your hands did. But I say that it is in no way fit or proper for you to continue to serve as the emperor's bodyguard, you who have violated your oath and stained your hands with the blood of your emperor and fellow Roman, betraying the trust placed in you and the security offered by your protection. Still, compassion leads me to spare your lives and your persons. But I order the soldiers who have you surrounded to cashier you, to strip off any military uniform or equipment you are wearing, and drive you off naked. 9. And I order you to get yourselves as far from the city of Rome as is humanly possible, and I promise you and I swear it on solemn oath and I proclaim it publicly that if any one of you is found within a hundred miles of Rome, he shall pay for it with his head.”

Septimius Severus (145–211) Emperor of Ancient Rome

Herodian, Book II.

George W. Bush photo

“The United States is committed to the worldwide elimination of torture, and we are leading this fight by example.”

George W. Bush (1946) 43rd President of the United States

26 June 2003 http://www.politicalposts.com/news/index.asp?id=180606 http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Nov/11212003/commenta/commenta.asp.
2000s, 2003

Maneka Gandhi photo

“We are changing the law and I am personally working on it to bring 16-year-olds into the purview. According to the police, 50 per cent of the crimes are committed by 16-year-olds who know the Juvenile Justice Act. But now for premeditated murder, rape, if we bring them into the purview of the adult world, then it will scare them.”

Maneka Gandhi (1956) Indian politician and activist

On the Juvenile Justice Act, as quoted in "Juveniles who commit rape should be tried as adults: Maneka Gandhi" http://ibnlive.in.com/news/juveniles-who-commit-rape-should-be-tried-as-adults-maneka-gandhi/485770-37-64.html, IBNLive (14 July 2014)
2011-present

Viktor Orbán photo

“What agents would choose in certain well- defined conditions of ignorance (in the “original position”) is, for Rawls, an important criterion for determining which conception of “justice” is normatively acceptable. Why should we agree that choice under conditions of ignorance is a good criterion for deciding what kind of society we would wish to have? William Morris in the late nineteenth century claimed to prefer a society of more or less equal grinding poverty for all (e. g., the society he directly experienced in Iceland) to Britain with its extreme discrepancies of wealth and welfare, even though the least well-off in Britain were in absolute terms better off than the peasants and fishermen of Iceland.” This choice seems to have been based not on any absolute preference for equality (or on a commitment to any conception of fairness), but on a belief about the specific social (and other) evils that flowed from the ways in which extreme wealth could be used in an industrial capitalist society.” Would no one in the original position entertain views like these? Is Morris’s vote simply to be discounted? On what grounds? The “veil of ignorance” is artificially defined so as to allow certain bits of knowledge “in” and to exclude other bits. No doubt it would be possible to rig the veil of ignorance so that it blanks out knowledge of the particular experiences Morris had and the theories he developed, and renders them inaccessible in the original position, but one would then have to be convinced that this was not simply a case of modifying the conditions of the thought experiment and the procedure until one got the result one antecedently wanted.”

Source: Philosophy and Real Politics (2008), pp. 87-88.

Martin Luther King, Jr. photo
Albert Kesselring photo
Alan Keyes photo
Phyllis Chesler photo
Nick Minchin photo

“It is literally crazy to be committing to an ETS (emissions trading scheme) before seeing the outcome of Copenhagen... and frankly idiotic before we see the final form of the US emissions trading scheme”

Nick Minchin (1953) Australian politician

The Australian http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/turnbull-loses-vital-ets-ally/story-e6frgczf-1225799948099

Al Sharpton photo
Hardinge Giffard, 1st Earl of Halsbury photo
Letitia Elizabeth Landon photo

“Firefighters across the country have no greater friend than Rudy Giuliani. Those of us who have worked with Rudy Giuliani know he has always been a strong and consistent supporter of firefighters and first responders. On September 11th and the days that followed Mayor Giuliani once again demonstrated his commitment to the safety and well being of our firefighters and his respect for their extraordinary courage and sacrifice.”

Howard Safir (1941)

A statement by Safir posted on JoinRudy2008.com, Rudy Giuliani's official presidential campaign website
[Howard Safir, http://www.joinrudy2008.com/news/pr/417/, MAYOR GIULIANI’S RECORD OF SUPPORT FOR NEW YORK’S BRAVEST, Rudy Giuliani Presidential Committee, Inc., 2007-07-09, 2007-12-20]

Peter Thiel photo

“Most of our political leaders are not engineers or scientists and do not listen to engineers or scientists. Today a letter from Einstein would get lost in the White House mail room, and the Manhattan Project would not even get started; it certainly could never be completed in three years. I am not aware of a single political leader in the U. S., either Democrat or Republican, who would cut health-care spending in order to free up money for biotechnology research — or, more generally, who would make serious cuts to the welfare state in order to free up serious money for major engineering projects. … Men reached the moon in July 1969, and Woodstock began three weeks later. With the benefit of hindsight, we can see that this was when the hippies took over the country, and when the true cultural war over Progress was lost. Today's aged hippies no longer understand that there is a difference between the election of a black president and the creation of cheap solar energy; in their minds, the movement towards greater civil rights parallels general progress everywhere. Because of these ideological conflations and commitments, the 1960s Progressive Left cannot ask whether things actually might be getting worse.”

Peter Thiel (1967) American entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and hedge fund manager

In an editorial http://www.nationalreview.com/article/278758/end-future-peter-thiel published by National Review (2011)

Christine O'Donnell photo

“The Bible says that lust in your heart is committing adultery, so you can't masturbate without lust.”

Christine O'Donnell (1969) American Tea Party politician and former Republican Party candidate

TV appearances

Frances Kellor photo
Ilana Mercer photo
Alex Salmond photo

“I have frequently had men describe the following scenario to me: "If at the beginning of a relationship, I keep the woman at a distance and don't want to get too close, she feels that I am pushing her away and that I am not making a commitment—that I am afraid to be intimate. When I finally let down my guard and try to be intimate and close, when I really make myself vulnerable and give up control, which is uncomfortable for me, then I feel really inadequate. She blames me for things that she never blamed me for when I kept my distance. When I start to get close, that's when I am accused of saying the wrong thing or trying to control her. So I am better off staying at a distance and letting her complain about a lack of intimacy."Stewart, age thirty-six, described it this way: "Maryann was liberated on the surface, but the undertow was very different. I would find out a couple of evenings after I had been with her that she was very angry and I wouldn't even know that I had done something wrong. She would be angry because she said I wasn't really involved enough. I didn't care enough about her. The irony is that the women in my life whom I've made the greatest effort to get close to are the ones who always wind up saying they are angry because I wasn't getting close. When I made no effort to get close and really kept my distance, I never got any complaints. The moment I felt I was really opening myself up to be intimate, that was when I was found to be failing. That is the double bind for me."Another such truth was experienced by Alex. He said, "If you keep the control, the distance, then the woman is kept insecure; and so long as she is insecure about the relationship, she will be less inclined to attack. If she's interested in you, but you keep her at a distance, she will be careful about attacking you. She won't criticize you because she's afraid of you. The moment you cross the barrier and actually start to get committed, you find that she begins to feel that you are inadequate as a partner. You know then and there that you are never going to be able to satisfy her."I found this to be true sexually. At the times when I personally thought I was the most sensitive and the most involved and caring as a lover, I would find out often that I was a failure. At the times when I allowed myself to be totally selfish, without apology and didn't give one thought to what the woman experienced, I never got any complaints. I was never told I was selfish as a lover. In fact, I was often told that I was wonderful."”

Herb Goldberg (1937–2019) American psychologist

Why men and women can't talk to each other: the hidden unconscious messages of gender, pp. 39–40
The Inner Male (1987)

John Adams photo
Khushwant Singh photo
Norman Lamont photo

“There are going to be no devaluations, no leaving the ERM. We are absolutely committed to the ERM. It is at the centre of our policy. We are going to maintain sterling's parity and we will do whatever is necessary, and I hope there is no doubt about that at all.”

Norman Lamont (1942) British politician

Robin Oakley and Colin Narborough, "Lamont shows his determination to sink or swim with the pound", The Times, 27 August 1992.
Statement on the morning of 26 August 1992, at the start of the economic problems which eventually produced Black Wednesday.

Maurice Glasman, Baron Glasman photo
AnnaSophia Robb photo
Pete Yorn photo

“When you come back from your escape. Then I could follow you to hell. ~ "Committed"”

Pete Yorn (1974) American musician

Song lyrics

Ann Coulter photo
Robert Maynard Hutchins photo
Frederick William Faber photo
Muhammad al-Taqi photo
Robert Penn Warren photo
Nadine Gordimer photo

“The gap between the committed and the indifferent is a Sahara whose faint trails, followed by the mind's eye only, fade out in sand.”

Nadine Gordimer (1923–2014) South african Nobel-winning writer

"Great Problems in the Street," in I Will Still Be Moved (1963) ed. by Marion Friedmann

Plutarch photo

“To conduct great matters and never commit a fault is above the force of human nature.”

Plutarch (46–127) ancient Greek historian and philosopher

Life of Fabius
Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, 10th ed. (1919)

Allen C. Guelzo photo

“[R]eligious commitment formed the backbone of much of the North's hostility to slavery.”

Allen C. Guelzo (1953) American historian

Source: 2010s, Fateful Lightning: A New History of the Civil War and Reconstruction (2012), Chapter One

Salman al-Ouda photo
Miguel de Unamuno photo
Léon Bloy photo

“The worst thing is not to commit crimes but, rather, not to accomplish the good that one could have done. It is the sin of omission, which is nothing other than to be unloving, and no one accuses himself of it.”

Léon Bloy (1846–1917) French writer, poet and essayist

Youcat English: Youth Catechism of the Catholic Church, Ignatius Press, 2011 https://books.google.com/books?id=soVf9Q1h-esC&pg=PT26&dq=%22The+worst+thing+is+not+to+commit+crimes+but,+rather,+not+to+accomplish+the+good+that+one+could+have+done.%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAGoVChMI3_bSqOH6yAIVwvI-Ch3kOAGF#v=onepage&q=%22The%20worst%20thing%20is%20not%20to%20commit%20crimes%20but%2C%20rather%2C%20not%20to%20accomplish%20the%20good%20that%20one%20could%20have%20done.%22&f=false

“The English seem to think drinking wine is like committing adultery, something you do rarely and abroad.”

William Nicholson (1948) British screenwriter, playwright and novelist

Source: Motherland (2012 novel), p. 18

Francis Escudero photo

“The elections are not about what rallies I should or not join but rather about issues and platforms, pure intentions and commitment to principles. It is sad that they have focused on rallies as an issue for this campaign.”

Francis Escudero (1969) Filipino politician

The Official Website of the Senate of the Philippines http://www.senate.gov.ph/press_release/2013/0221_escudero1.asp
2013, Mid-Term Campaign Trail

George William Foote photo
Jean Paul photo

“How calmly may we commit ourselves to the hands of Him who bears up the world!”

Jean Paul (1763–1825) German novelist

Source: Dictionary of Burning Words of Brilliant Writers (1895), P. 597.

Norman Lamm photo

“Mutual commitment to ideals -- yes; the stifling of all dissenting notions -- no.”

Norman Lamm (1927) American rabbi

Seventy faces: articles of faith (2002)

William Jennings Bryan photo
Joyce Brothers photo

“If your energy is as boundless as your ambition, total commitment may be a way of life you should seriously consider.”

Joyce Brothers (1927–2013) Joyce Brothers

As quoted in It's All About You: Live the Life You Crave (2007) by Mary Goulet and Heather Reider

Newton Lee photo
Lysander Spooner photo
Zail Singh photo

“No one actually brought me any money. But there were many commitments made…Chandraswami said he knows some Sultan. He wanted me to contest for the second time. Somehow, this fellow had a dislike for Rajiv perhaps because Rajiv refused to encourage him.”

Zail Singh (1916–1994) Indian politician and former President of India

When it was rumored that he was thinking of contesting for Presidential election for a second term. In: K.R. Sundar Rajan "Presidential Years:Zail Singh's posthumous defence of his controversial tenure."

William Foote Whyte photo
John F. Kennedy photo

“These burdens and frustrations are accepted by most Americans with maturity and understanding. They may long for the days when war meant charging up San Juan Hill-or when our isolation was guarded by two oceans — or when the atomic bomb was ours alone — or when much of the industrialized world depended upon our resources and our aid. But they now know that those days are gone — and that gone with them are the old policies and the old complacency's. And they know, too, that we must make the best of our new problems and our new opportunities, whatever the risk and the cost.
But there are others who cannot bear the burden of a long twilight struggle. They lack confidence in our long-run capacity to survive and succeed. Hating communism, yet they see communism in the long run, perhaps, as the wave of the future. And they want some quick and easy and final and cheap solution — now.
There are two groups of these frustrated citizens, far apart in their views yet very much alike in their approach. On the one hand are those who urge upon us what I regard to be the pathway of surrender-appeasing our enemies, compromising our commitments, purchasing peace at any price, disavowing our arms, our friends, our obligations. If their view had prevailed, the world of free choice would be smaller today.
On the other hand are those who urge upon us what I regard to be the pathway of war: equating negotiations with appeasement and substituting rigidity for firmness. If their view had prevailed, we would be at war today, and in more than one place.
It is a curious fact that each of these extreme opposites resembles the other. Each believes that we have only two choices: appeasement or war, suicide or surrender, humiliation or holocaust, to be either Red or dead. Each side sees only "hard" and "soft" nations, hard and soft policies, hard and soft men. Each believes that any departure from its own course inevitably leads to the other: one group believes that any peaceful solution means appeasement; the other believes that any arms build-up means war. One group regards everyone else as warmongers, the other regards everyone else as appeasers. Neither side admits that its path will lead to disaster — but neither can tell us how or where to draw the line once we descend the slippery slopes of appeasement or constant intervention.
In short, while both extremes profess to be the true realists of our time, neither could be more unrealistic. While both claim to be doing the nation a service, they could do it no greater disservice. This kind of talk and easy solutions to difficult problems, if believed, could inspire a lack of confidence among our people when they must all — above all else — be united in recognizing the long and difficult days that lie ahead. It could inspire uncertainty among our allies when above all else they must be confident in us. And even more dangerously, it could, if believed, inspire doubt among our adversaries when they must above all be convinced that we will defend our vital interests.
The essential fact that both of these groups fail to grasp is that diplomacy and defense are not substitutes for one another. Either alone would fail. A willingness to resist force, unaccompanied by a willingness to talk, could provoke belligerence — while a willingness to talk, unaccompanied by a willingness to resist force, could invite disaster.”

John F. Kennedy (1917–1963) 35th president of the United States of America

1961, Address at the University of Washington

Paul Krugman photo
Adlai Stevenson photo

“Whenever I hear one of these old guard leaders on the other side talking about cutting taxes, when he knows it means weakening the nation, I always think of that story about the tired old capitalist who was driving alone in his car one day, and finally, he said "James, drive over the bluff; I want to commit suicide."”

Adlai Stevenson (1900–1965) mid-20th-century Governor of Illinois and Ambassador to the UN

"A whistle-stop: Ypsilanti, Michigan," http://books.google.com/books?id=kHt3AAAAMAAJ&q=%22Whenever+I+hear+one+of+these+old+guard+leaders+on+the+other+side+talking+about+cutting+taxes+when+he+knows+it+means+weakening+the+nation+I+always+think+of+that+story+about+the+tired+old+capitalist+who+was+driving+alone+in+his+car+one+day+and+finally+he+said+James+drive+over+the+bluff+I+want+to+commit%22&pg=PA210#v=onpage Major Campaign Speeches of Adlai E. Stevenson, 1952, p. 210 (1953)

William Lane Craig photo

“There is one important aspect of my answer that I would change, however. I have come to appreciate as a result of a closer reading of the biblical text that God’s command to Israel was not primarily to exterminate the Canaanites but to drive them out of the land. It was the land that was (and remains today!) paramount in the minds of these Ancient Near Eastern peoples. The Canaanite tribal kingdoms which occupied the land were to be destroyed as nation states, not as individuals. The judgment of God upon these tribal groups, which had become so incredibly debauched by that time, is that they were being divested of their land. Canaan was being given over to Israel, whom God had now brought out of Egypt. If the Canaanite tribes, seeing the armies of Israel, had simply chosen to flee, no one would have been killed at all. There was no command to pursue and hunt down the Canaanite peoples.
It is therefore completely misleading to characterize God’s command to Israel as a command to commit genocide. Rather it was first and foremost a command to drive the tribes out of the land and to occupy it. Only those who remained behind were to be utterly exterminated. There may have been no non-combatants killed at all. That makes sense of why there is no record of the killing of women and children, such as I had vividly imagined. Such scenes may have never taken place, since it was the soldiers who remained to fight. It is also why there were plenty of Canaanite people around after the conquest of the land, as the biblical record attests.”

[Subject: The “Slaughter” of the Canaanites Re-visited, Reasonable Faith, http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=8973, 2011-10-20], quoted in [Why I refuse to debate with William Lane Craig, Richard, Dawkins, Guardian, 2011-10-20, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/20/richard-dawkins-william-lane-craig, 2011-10-20]

Henri of Luxembourg photo

“Each of us, within the limits of our resources, is set to be an actor, in having a lead role in one's own life, but above all by committing to others…a profound truth [is] that everyone has a role to play in society beyond their own fate.”

Henri of Luxembourg (1955) Grand Duke (head of state) of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

Jidderee vun eis ass, an der Mooss vun sengen Mëttelen, dozou opgeruff selwer Akteur ze sinn, an dem e säi Liewen an d’Hand hëlt, mee och an dem en sech fir déi aner engagéiert...eng profund Wourecht, an zwar dass Jiddereen an der Gesellschaft eng Roll ze spillen huet, déi säin eegent Schicksal iwwertrëfft.
Christmas message http://www.monarchie.lu/fr/actualites/discours/2014/12/discours-noel-lu/index.html (25 December 2014)
Society

Mike Tyson photo
Stanley Baldwin photo
Oscar Levant photo
George W. Bush photo

“[M]y administration is committed to a leadership role on the issue of climate change.”

George W. Bush (1946) 43rd President of the United States

June 11, 2001. "President Bush Discusses Global Climate Change" http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010611-2.html.
2000s, 2001

Jimmy Carter photo
J. Michael Straczynski photo

“Stun settings are for people who can't commit.”

J. Michael Straczynski (1954) American writer and television producer

Frequently attributed to jms, but earliest Google Groups post with that quote is by Bill Capeheart. May not originally be from Usenet. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.arts.startrek.current/msg/658ff5d2d6012984
Attributed

Robert Spencer photo
Mitt Romney photo

“I will dispense for now from discussion of the moral character of the president's Charlottesville statements. Whether he intended to or not, what he communicated caused racists to rejoice, minorities to weep, and the vast heart of America to mourn. His apologists strain to explain that he didn't mean what we heard. But what we heard is now the reality, and unless it is addressed by the president as such, with unprecedented candor and strength, there may commence an unraveling of our national fabric.The leaders of our branches of military service have spoken immediately and forcefully, repudiating the implications of the president's words. Why? In part because the morale and commitment of our forces-made up and sustained by men and women of all races--could be in the balance. Our allies around the world are stunned and our enemies celebrate; America's ability to help secure a peaceful and prosperous world is diminished. And who would want to come to the aid of a country they perceive as racist if ever the need were to arise, as it did after 9/11?In homes across the nation, children are asking their parents what this means. Jews, blacks, Hispanics, Muslims are as much a part of America as whites and Protestants. But today they wonder. Where might this lead? To bitterness and tears, or perhaps to anger and violence?The potential consequences are severe in the extreme. Accordingly, the president must take remedial action in the extreme. He should address the American people, acknowledge that he was wrong, apologize. State forcefully and unequivocally that racists are 100% to blame for the murder and violence in Charlottesville. Testify that there is no conceivable comparison or moral equivalency between the Nazis--who brutally murdered millions of Jews and who hundreds of thousands of Americans gave their lives to defeat--and the counter-protestors who were outraged to see fools parading the Nazi flag, Nazi armband and Nazi salute. And once and for all, he must definitively repudiate the support of David Duke and his ilk and call for every American to banish racists and haters from any and every association.This is a defining moment for President Trump. But much more than that, it is a moment that will define America in the hearts of our children. They are watching, our soldiers are watching, the world is watching. Mr. President, act now for the good of the country.”

Mitt Romney (1947) American businessman and politician

Facebook statement https://www.facebook.com/mittromney/posts/10154652303536121 (18 August 2017)
2017

William Ewart Gladstone photo
George V of the United Kingdom photo

“The King feels so strongly that, no matter the crime committed by anyone on whom the VC has been conferred, the decoration should not be forfeited. Even were a VC to be sentenced to be hanged for murder, he should be allowed to wear his VC on the scaffold.”

George V of the United Kingdom (1865–1936) King of the United Kingdom and the British Dominions, and Emperor of India

Lord Stamfordham, private secretary to George V, on 26 July 1920. The original Royal Warrant involved an expulsion clause that allowed for a recipient's name to be erased from the official register in certain wholly discreditable circumstances and his pension cancelled. Eight were forfeited between 1861 and 1908. George V strongly opposed the concept of revoking a Victoria Cross, and directed Lord Stamfordham to express this view forcefully in a letter.
About

P.G. Wodehouse photo
Brian Leiter photo

“Rosen would still demand, no doubt, an explanation of why the ruling class is so good at identifying and promoting its interests, while the majority is not. But, again, there is an obvious answer: for isn’t it generally quite easy to identify your short-term interests when the status quo is to your benefit? In such circumstances, you favor the status quo! In other words, if the status quo provides tangible benefits to the few—lots of money, prestige, and power—is it any surprise that the few are well-disposed to the status quo, and are particularly good at thinking of ways to tinker with the status quo (e. g., repeal the already minimal estate tax) to increase their money, prestige, and power? (The few can then promote their interests for exactly the reasons Marx identifies: they own the means of mental production.) By contrast, it is far trickier for the many to assess what is in their interest, precisely because it requires a counterfactual thought experiment, in addition to evaluating complex questions of socio-economic causation. More precisely, the many have to ascertain that (1) the status quo—the whole complex socio-economic order in which they find themselves--is not in their interests (this may be the easiest part); (2) there are alternatives to the status quo which would be more in their interest; and (3) it is worth the costs to make the transition to the alternatives—to give up on the bad situation one knows in order to make the leap in to a (theoretically) better unknown. Obstacles to the already difficult task of making determinations (1) and (2)—let alone (3)—will be especially plentiful, precisely because the few are strongly, and effectively (given their control of the means of mental production), committed to the denial of (1) and”

Brian Leiter (1963) American philosopher and legal scholar

2
"The Hermeneutics of Suspicion: Recovering Marx, Nietzsche, and Freud"

Alexander Hamilton photo
Benjamin Ricketson Tucker photo
David Bohm photo
Lyndon B. Johnson photo

“Tonight Vietnam must hold the center of our attention, but across the world problems and opportunities crowd in on the American Nation. I will discuss them fully in the months to come, and I will follow the five continuing lines of policy that America has followed under its last four Presidents. The first principle is strength. Tonight I can tell you that we are strong enough to keep all of our commitments. We will need expenditures of $58.3 billion for the next fiscal year to maintain this necessary defense might. While special Vietnam expenditures for the next fiscal year are estimated to increase by $5.8 billion, I can tell you that all the other expenditures put together in the entire federal budget will rise this coming year by only $0.6 billion. This is true because of the stringent cost-conscious economy program inaugurated in the Defense Department, and followed by the other departments of government. A second principle of policy is the effort to control, and to reduce, and to ultimately eliminate the modern engines of destruction. We will vigorously pursue existing proposals—and seek new ones—to control arms and to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. A third major principle of our foreign policy is to help build those associations of nations which reflect the opportunities and the necessities of the modern world. By strengthening the common defense, by stimulating world commerce, by meeting new hopes, these associations serve the cause of a flourishing world. We will take new steps this year to help strengthen the Alliance for Progress, the unity of Europe, the community of the Atlantic, the regional organizations of developing continents, and that supreme association—the United Nations. We will work to strengthen economic cooperation, to reduce barriers to trade, and to improve international finance.”

Lyndon B. Johnson (1908–1973) American politician, 36th president of the United States (in office from 1963 to 1969)

1960s, State of the Union Address (1966)

Maithripala Sirisena photo
José Rizal photo