The Australian ambassador's definition of democracy, which Neville adopts and then uses to make a point about words rather than about politics. Today I said I believe in democracy - well, so does Khrushchev, but it is not my concept of democracy. The ambassador at the United Nations defined his country's: democracy to us in Australia is based upon the principle of compromise, but not upon the compromise of principle. All the difference in the world. Neville gives the working example from the two-party system: this part of the world needs help and the man from the mid-West does not need the same kind, but he casts his vote with me so that I may get what the people I represent need, and when his measure comes up I remember his kindness and throw my vote with him - that is not compromising principles, it is simply the principle of compromise. At 1284 the same sentence carries the sharper use: we and those in Romania, Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia all live in what are called democratic countries and we do not mean the same kind of democracy, so the world is Babel - and he goes straight from there to Blake's sixtieth plate of Jerusalem, Babel mocks saying there is no God or Son of God, that thou O Human Imagination art all a delusion, but I know thee, O Lord. Two lectures, and the reason to keep it is that it is one of very few places where Neville treats a political disagreement as a problem of language, which is the same move he makes on scripture. PROVENANCE: coined out of chronological sequence on a canonical supplied by the attach lead (PM 6143), which measured the corpus and found the item carried by no motif. The reader has not read the home lecture in full; the reading is drawn from the passage text alone, so confidence is 0.95 rather than 0.99. The lead confirmed two lectures and no other hit in the corpus, and that nothing in the catalogue held it.