When power is exercised exclusively at the centre, the result is rigidity of rules and alienation of the people subject to those rules.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
In a republic this rule ought to be observed: that the majority should not have the predominant power.
In a democracy there is a centralization of governmental power in a simple majority.
It is a dark, unspoken truth that the powerful - the 'ruling class' - make up the rules as they go along.
It is unnatural for a majority to rule, for a majority can seldom be organized and united for specific action, and a minority can.
The world is not going into concentric blocs of power. It is actually going into a diffusion of power with more centres of decision-making than ever in human civilisation. That requires you to place yourself in far more hubs of power than ever before.
In opposition, you move to the centre. In government, you move the centre.
The exercise of power is determined by thousands of interactions between the world of the powerful and that of the powerless, all the more so because these worlds are never divided by a sharp line: everyone has a small part of himself in both.
In the sense that you're not at the centre of power, like a president or prime minister of a major power, everyone is marginalised; my position doesn't isn't unique in that respect. I think there are different sorts of relevance in different contexts.
Power should not be concentrated in the hands of so few, and powerlessness in the hands of so many.
The proper balance between individual liberty and central authority is a very ancient problem.
No opposing quotes found.