"The opposition is indispensable. A good statesman, like any other sensible human being, always learns more from his opposition than from his fervent supporters"

Walter Lippmann’s observation that opposition is indispensable emphasizes the critical role dissent plays in politics and leadership. A wise statesman does not merely tolerate reproach or alternative viewpoints; rather, he esteems them as vital sources of insight and progress. Supporters, while essential for morale and momentum, often mirror a leader’s biases and reinforce existing beliefs. Their admiration can be comforting, but it runs the risk of insulating leaders from reality, encouraging complacency and groupthink.

Opposition, on the other hand, challenges assumptions, exposes blind spots, and compels leaders to refine or rethink their policies. Critics and adversaries probe for weaknesses, question motives, and bring uncomfortable truths to the surface. This friction, although at times unpleasant, sharpens decision-making and fosters resilience. Far from being solely antagonistic, dissenting voices help calibrate a leader’s vision, reminding them of the plurality of interests and perspectives within their society. Engagement with the opposition cultivates adaptability and humility, traits indispensable to sound governance.

Moreover, the presence and acknowledgment of a strong opposition ensures accountability. When leaders listen only to supporters, they risk confusing popularity for correctness. Engaging critics compels a leader to justify policies on their merits, defend decisions with evidence, and embrace transparency. This process can uncover unforeseen consequences or ethical pitfalls that might otherwise go unnoticed.

Learning from the opposition does not necessarily mean agreeing or capitulating. It is a matter of intellectual openness and the recognition that no individual or party holds a monopoly on wisdom. The crucible of debate and the test of counterargument help policies withstand the rigor of practical reality. Ultimately, the vitality of democratic institutions and the quality of statecraft depend on leaders who value, rather than silence, opposing views, using them as tools for personal and collective growth. Consequently, a statesman’s growth is measured not by the fervor of supporters, but by the depth with which he is challenged and the lessons he draws from his critics.