On the record
I cannot recognize those implications as necessary to a proper view of national freedom.
Said by
Harold J. Laski
Source
gutenberg.orgHarold J. Laski: “I cannot recognize those implications as necessary to a proper view of national freedom.”
Editor's note · Context
Laski rejects the implications of national sovereignty as incompatible with a proper understanding of freedom.
Share
More from Harold J. Laski
From no accusation were its statesmen more anxious to be free than from that of a belief in democratic government.
The State has power only for the protection of natural law.
The charge that he supported the Revolution in America and deserted it in France is without meaning; for in the one there is no word that can honorably be twisted to support the other.
Nor do I see why it is unconstitutional for Labour, as in 1926, to withdraw from work in an orderly and coherent way.
Other voices in this conversation
