I am not sure just what Marx had in mind when he wrote that "philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it." Did he mean that philosophy could change the world, or that philosophers should turn to the higher priority of changing the world? If the former, then he presumably meant philosophy in a broad sense of the term, including analysis of the social order and ideas about why it should be changed, and how. In that broad sense, philosophy can play a role, indeed an essential role, in changing the world.

I don't have any oratory skills. But I would not use them if I had.

Democratic societies can't force people. Therefore they have to control what they think.

I have written occasionally on links between my scientific work and political thinking, but not much, because the links seem to me abstract and speculative.

No sane human being devotes 100% of his or her life to political activism.

There's a good reason why nobody studies history, it just teaches you too much.

[Isaiah] Berlin's observation is accurate enough, and applies at home as well, and even more harshly for the reasons already mentioned: the apparatchiks and commissars could at least plead fear in extenuation.