Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Donald Horne

Quote by Donald Horne

“The ideal of the rule of law, along with equality under the law, is one of the bases of tolerance. It means that, one way or another, governments themselves must act in accordance with the law- a responsibility they sometimes try to evade. The treatment of asylum seekers in Australia is an example, where successive Commonwealth governments have produced a series of changes to the law. In a liberal-democratic society the rule of law also means that there must be open discussion about those laws and how they are being upheld in the courts. It also means predictability- known rules about the relationship between people and governments, and in certain matters, between individuals. It is intended to mean fairness - no one should be condemned unheard, and hearings must be carried out openly by courts or tribunals as independent of governments as possible. (In their wars against asylum seekers, governments have shuffled procedures around as if they were fairground illusionists.)”

Quote by Donald Horne

Book:10 Steps to a More Tolerant Australia
Create image

Work

10 Steps to a More Tolerant Australia

Browse quotes and source details for this work. more

Author

Donald Horne
Donald Horne

Donald Horne, born on December 26, 1921, was an accomplished journalist from Australia. His career spanned various fields, including literature, politics, and social commentary. Horne was known for his incisive analysis and profound insights, and his work had a significant impact on Australian culture and society. more

You May Also Like

“In Confucian thought, individuals practice moral virtue both by restraining themselves and pursuing their own interests. This is a dual push-and-pull process. In today’s China, the latter is taken care of by capitalism and commerce. The former, however, needs to be taken care of by the rule of law. Otherwise, the system of governance is corrupted by unrestrained individual desires and selective enforcement of ‘virtue’ or law.”

LawVirtueMoralityCapitalismChinaVirtuousGovernanceRule Of LawUsConfucian Thought
Book:Peaceful War: How the Chinese Dream and the American Destiny Create a New Pacific World Order
Create image

“The time to act is now, before it's too late. Indeed, there is power in numbers, but if those numbers will not unite and rise up against their oppressors, there can be no resistance. You can't have it both ways. You can't live in a constitutional republic if you allow the government to act like a police state. You can't claim to value freedom if you allow the government to operate like a dictatorship. You can't expect to have your rights respected if you allow the government to treat whomever it pleases with disrespect and a utter disregard for the rule of law.”

NumbersRightsToleranceResistanceRule Of LawGovernmental Structure
Book:A Government Of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State
Create image

“I believe that the law is the most important thing in the world today. I don't mean the practice of lawyers. I mean the law itself. Normally I sleep well. If there's one thing that can keep me awake at night it's a vision, which I sometimes have, of this country being ruled by the wishes of its rulers and not by the rule of law.' 'Could it happen here?' 'Of course it could. It's too bloody easy for a Government to panic and set the law on one side because it happens to be inconvenient. Temporarily, of course. They always mean to bring it back again -- some time.' --Flash Point, 1974”

Rule Of LawFlash PointMichael Gilbert
Author:Michael Gilbert
Create image

“Most of the men thrown into the back of the van that night were drunk, but none was in public: each was in his own home. And yet not one of them questioned the legality of his arrest. After nearly a dace of democracy, each assumed that the cops had every right to drag him out of his home and throw him in prison.”

PoliceSouth AfricaRule Of Law
Book:Thin Blue: The Unwritten Rules of Policing South African
Create image

“The radical rhetoric of the early fascist movements led many observers, then and since, to suppose that once in power the fascist regimes would make sweeping and fundamental changes in the very bases of national life. In practice, although fascist regimes did indeed make some breathtaking changes, they left the distribution of property and the economic and social hierarchy largely intact (differing fundamentally from what the word revolution had usually meant since 1789). The reach of the fascist “revolution” was restricted by two factors. For one thing, even at their most radical, early fascist programs and rhetoric had never attacked wealth and capitalism as directly as a hasty reading might suggest. As for social hierarchy, fascism’s leadership principle effectively reinforced it, though fascists posed some threat to inherited position by advocating the replacement of the tired bourgeois elite by fascist “new men.” The handful of real fascist outsiders, however, went mostly into the parallel organizations. The scope of fascist change was further limited by the disappearance of many radicals during the period of taking root and coming to power. As fascist movements passed from protest and the harnessing of disparate resentments to the conquest of power, with its attendant alliances and compromises, their priorities changed, along with their functions. They became far less interested in assembling the discontented than in mobilizing and unifying national energies for national revival and aggrandizement. This obliged them to break many promises made to the socially and economically discontented during the first years of fascist recruitment. The Nazis in particular broke promises to the small peasants and artisans who had been the mainstay of their electoral following, and to favor urbanization and industrial production. Despite their frequent talk about “revolution,” fascists did not want a socioeconomic revolution. They wanted a “revolution of the soul,” and a revolution in the world power position of their people. They meant to unify and invigorate and empower their decadent nation—to reassert the prestige of Romanità or the German Volk or Hungarism or other group destiny. For that purpose they believed they needed armies, productive capacity, order, and property. Force their country’s traditional productive elements into subjection, perhaps; transform them, no doubt; but not abolish them. The fascists needed the muscle of these bastions of established power to express their people’s renewed unity and vitality at home and on the world stage. Fascists wanted to revolutionize their national institutions in the sense that they wanted to pervade them with energy, unity, and willpower, but they never dreamed of abolishing property or social hierarchy. The fascist mission of national aggrandizement and purification required the most fundamental changes in the nature of citizenship and in the relation of citizens to the state since the democratic revolutions of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The first giant step was to subordinate the individual to the community. Whereas the liberal state rested on a compact among its citizens to protect individual rights and freedoms, the fascist state embodied the national destiny, in service to which all the members of the national group found their highest fulfillment. We have seen that both regimes found some distinguished nonfascist intellectuals ready to support this position. In fascist states, individual rights had no autonomous existence. The State of Law—the Rechtsstaat, the état de droit—vanished, along with the principles of due process by which citizens were guaranteed equitable treatment by courts and state agencies. A suspect acquitted in a German court of law could be rearrested by agents of the regime at the courthouse door and put in a concentration camp without any further legal procedure.”

RevolutionFascismRhetoricRule Of LawChanges
Book:The Anatomy of Fascism
Create image