"One cannot be too extreme in dealing with social ills; the extreme thing is generally the true thing"
About this Quote
Goldman doesn’t just defend radicalism here; she flips the burden of proof. “Extreme” is usually a smear word, a way the comfortable define the boundaries of “reasonable” so nothing fundamental has to change. Her line treats that label as evidence of accuracy: if a social ill is baked into law, custom, and economy, then polite remedies will be structurally incapable of touching it. In that sense, extremity isn’t a temperament, it’s a diagnostic tool. The deeper the rot, the sharper the cut required.
The phrasing is deceptively calm - “cannot be too extreme” reads like common sense, almost parental. That’s the rhetorical trick: she normalizes what her enemies cast as madness. Then she lands the provocation: “generally the true thing.” Not always, not universally; “generally” signals a streetwise empiricism. Goldman’s politics weren’t abstract maximalism for its own sake. They were forged in the era’s brutal facts: violent labor repression, state surveillance, poverty treated as moral failure, women’s autonomy policed by law and church. In that landscape, moderation can become collaboration.
The subtext is a warning about how societies metabolize dissent. They rebrand moral clarity as “extreme” precisely when it threatens property and hierarchy. Goldman is arguing that the center is not neutral ground; it’s often the status quo’s marketing department. Her sentence dares the reader to ask a harder question than “Is this too much?”: “Too much compared to what - the suffering we’ve already normalized?”
The phrasing is deceptively calm - “cannot be too extreme” reads like common sense, almost parental. That’s the rhetorical trick: she normalizes what her enemies cast as madness. Then she lands the provocation: “generally the true thing.” Not always, not universally; “generally” signals a streetwise empiricism. Goldman’s politics weren’t abstract maximalism for its own sake. They were forged in the era’s brutal facts: violent labor repression, state surveillance, poverty treated as moral failure, women’s autonomy policed by law and church. In that landscape, moderation can become collaboration.
The subtext is a warning about how societies metabolize dissent. They rebrand moral clarity as “extreme” precisely when it threatens property and hierarchy. Goldman is arguing that the center is not neutral ground; it’s often the status quo’s marketing department. Her sentence dares the reader to ask a harder question than “Is this too much?”: “Too much compared to what - the suffering we’ve already normalized?”
Quote Details
| Topic | Justice |
|---|
More Quotes by Emma
Add to List



