One should respect public opinion insofar as is necessary to avoid starvation and keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
My opinions and principles are subjects of just criticism. I put myself before the public voluntarily.
Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.
A free and rooted society ought to consist of a web of moral obligations. We have the right to ignore them, but we ought to be actually obliged not to let other people starve or to let them lapse into destitution.
I have repeatedly called for respecting institutions and the democratic process. Once the process is completed, we should always respect the outcome.
Soundness of understanding is connected with freedom of enquiry; consequently, opinion should, as far as public security will admit, be exempted from restraint.
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
Anybody who asks for democracy to be introduced should respect the results of democracy.
It is precisely the purpose of the public opinion generated by the press to make the public incapable of judging, to insinuate into it the attitude of someone irresponsible, uninformed.
The freedom to criticize judges and other public officials is necessary to a vibrant democracy. The problem comes when healthy criticism is replaced with more destructive intimidation and sanctions.
It takes no compromising to give people their rights. It takes no money to respect the individual. It takes no survey to remove repressions.