Quote

Being able to provoke a different point of view to the standard current ideological or political perspective as played out in conventional newspaper or radio reportage is what a public intellectual does. But it's not merely about being oppositional, because that's too negative.

The premise of my book is that everyone is a bit ideological to some extent. Everyone comes from a ideological perspective.

So many differing opinions and philosophies... are rarely housed under the roof of a single magazine.

When a party is in opposition, it opposes. That's its job. But when it comes to power, it must govern. Easy rhetoric is over, the press of reality becomes irresistible. By necessity, it adopts some of the policies it had once denounced. And a new national consensus is born.

We respect opposition to any position or policy. But we believe that the opinion that should prevail and be respected is that of the majority.

Being against other people's policies eventually puts you in a downward spiral. It's fine to be principled and oppose views that you don't agree with, but you also have to have an alternative.

It's essential not to have an ideology, not to be a member of a political party. While the writer can have certain political views, he has to be careful not to have his hands tied.

I know how easy it is for some minds to glide along with the current of popular opinion, where influence, respectability, and all those motives which tend to seduce the human heart are brought to bear.

There's a flip side to having prominent public intellectuals, which is that they start meddling in politics and often with quite disastrous results.

I understand that it's good tactics to categorize me as a close-minded, unobjective extremist, but nobody that respects me has those views.