damnum absque injuria

August 2, 2006


Filed under:   by Xrlq @ 12:02 am

Jon Henke rightly takes Glenn Greenwald to task for dishonestly accusing Xrlq Jacoby of dishonesty for having the audacity to attack the world’s lamest epithet, chickenhawk, according to its traditional definition (and one Greenwald himself has used in the past) rather than having the common decency to anticipate the new definition Greenwald was fixin’ to create on the fly. Greenwald’s ex post facto definition, which he skewered Jacoby for failing to divine, is as follows:

Chicken-hawkism is the belief that advocating a war from afar is a sign of personal courage and strength, and that opposing a war from afar is a sign of personal cowardice and weakness. A “chicken hawk” is someone who not merely advocates a war, but believes that their advocacy is proof of the courage which those who will actually fight the war in combat require.

Henke calls bullshit on this being a definition of chickenhawk, but proceeds to argue that the concept is valid even if the nomenclature is not. Fortunately or unfortunately, his comment thread never reached that issue, being 90% about Greenwald and 10% about his resident sycophant, Mona. Thus, I’d like to invite my readers, and his, to address that topic here. Given that the term chickenhawk is already taken, what should we call a person who thinks his mere advocacy of a war makes him as courageous as those who will actually fight it?

I have a few suggestions of my own, but hijacking my own thread, I’m going to withhold them for now. Comment away, and I’ll join the fray at a time of my choosing.


Powered by WordPress. Stock photography by Matthew J. Stinson. Design by OFJ.