"It is better to be defeated on principle than to win on lies"
About this Quote
Calwell’s line is a politician’s self-indictment disguised as a moral dare. “Defeated” lands first: he’s not selling purity as a feel-good accessory, he’s admitting the likely price of refusing the easy moves. The phrase “on principle” is doing heavy work here. It frames politics not as a sport measured by seats won, but as a test of what you will not trade away, even when the electorate, the press cycle, or your own party machinery is begging for something simpler.
The second clause sharpens the blade: “to win on lies.” Calwell isn’t talking about ordinary spin; he’s naming the foundational cheat of democratic life. Winning via falsehood doesn’t just corrupt an individual candidate, it hollows out the agreement that makes voting meaningful: that citizens are choosing among real options based on shared facts. The subtext is almost accusatory: if you’re comfortable with lies, you’ve already accepted that the public is an obstacle to be managed, not a partner to be persuaded.
Context matters because Calwell’s career sat inside the rougher, pre-social-media version of the same dilemma: fear campaigns, factional warfare, and the temptations of demagoguery in mid-century Australia. Read now, the quote doubles as a warning label for “electability” arguments. It asks whether a victory that requires dishonesty is actually a victory, or just a hostile takeover of legitimacy.
The second clause sharpens the blade: “to win on lies.” Calwell isn’t talking about ordinary spin; he’s naming the foundational cheat of democratic life. Winning via falsehood doesn’t just corrupt an individual candidate, it hollows out the agreement that makes voting meaningful: that citizens are choosing among real options based on shared facts. The subtext is almost accusatory: if you’re comfortable with lies, you’ve already accepted that the public is an obstacle to be managed, not a partner to be persuaded.
Context matters because Calwell’s career sat inside the rougher, pre-social-media version of the same dilemma: fear campaigns, factional warfare, and the temptations of demagoguery in mid-century Australia. Read now, the quote doubles as a warning label for “electability” arguments. It asks whether a victory that requires dishonesty is actually a victory, or just a hostile takeover of legitimacy.
Quote Details
| Topic | Honesty & Integrity |
|---|
More Quotes by Arthur
Add to List








