Emily Thornberry Quotes

In my view what you can't argue for is a system that is neither decisive nor proportional and can be indecisive and disproportionate at the same time.

In England, a Majority of Citizens does not elect the Majority of Representatives.

Under universal suffrage the elected are those who know best how to take in the masses. The minority, which may happen to be the half minus one, is sacrificed.

Our concepts of ballot-box democracy may need to be modified to produce strong governments capable of making difficult decisions

I consider biennial elections as a security that the sober, second thought of the people shall be law.

… the decay of the liberties of the Dutch republic proceeded from three causes: 1. The perfect unanimity requisite on all occasions. 2. Their obligation to consult their constituents. 3. Their voting by provinces. This last destroyed the equality of representation, and the liberties of Great Britain also are sinking from the same defect.

In a democratic society, nothing will ever receive unanimous support. The way to deal with this is to empower elected governments and ensure that they answer to voters, not to give a veto to those who are the loudest or most willing to protest or break the law.

Representative democracy is a remarkably blunt instrument. Hundreds of issues are bundled together at every election, yet the vote tends to swing on just one or two of them.

One-man-one-vote is a most difficult form of government.. Results can be erratic.

Democracy is only an experiment in government, and it has the obvious disadvantage of merely counting votes instead of weighing them.

Today, parliaments are more important because of the need of legitimacy, of the popular legitimacy, of public opinion legitimacy of politics. Parliaments are, at the end of the day, the only true legitimacy.

Democracy is being allowed to vote for the candidate you dislike least.

It's an ancient idea that the leader of a democracy should not be the cleverest but the most average. That's an arguable point, but the world has decided otherwise - except in America, where it still divides the country right down the middle.

The problem is there is no such thing as a viable democracy made up of experts, zealots, politicians and spectators.

The conception of political equality can mean only one thing—one person–one vote.

Would it not be easier...for the government to dissolve the people and elect another?

Voting should be the right of the great body of the society…an inconsiderable proportion, or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans, and claim for their government the honorable title of republic.

The actual rulers in a parliamentary democracy are the class of professional politicians. In theory, they are supposed to represent the people, but in fact they rule over them.

A radical ... and revolutionary ... attack upon the fundamental basic principle of representative democracy for free people.

We already have term limits. They’re called elections.

That a majority of people can vote against a government, and yet that government still remains in power does not raise confidence in our democracy.

The great advantage of representatives is their capacity of discussing public affairs. For this, the people collectively are extremely unfit, which is one of the chief inconveniences of a democracy.

I have ever considered the constitutional mode of election ultimately by the Legislature voting by States as the most dangerous blot in our Constitution, and one which some unlucky chance will some day hit and give us a pope and antipope.

The parliamentary regime leaves everything to the decision of majorities,--how can the large majorities beyond parliament be expected not to wish to decide? If, from above, they hear the fiddle screeching, what else is to be expected than that those below should dance?

Sure the people are stupid: the human race is stupid. Sure Congress is an inefficient instrument of government. But the people are not stupid enough to abandon representative government for any other kind, including government by the guy who knows.