Chickenhawk

By James Ruhland
web posted May 17, 2004

By the time this is published, I'll be in Basic Training at Fort
Jackson, SC, having joined the U.S. Army. Let me start off by
saying the views I express here are my own, not those of the
U.S. Army. That is the very point, though – the right to express
one's views, whether you are in the military or not.

You hear the accusation all the time from anti-war people.
Anyone who supports the war but has not served in the military
is charged with being a "chickenhawk". Of course, they have
other arguments for those who are serving – they're just driven
into the military by economic circumstances or for education
opportunities and are duped pawns in Bush's War. Such
arguments are invidious. They are a form of <i>ad hominem</i>,
attacking the person rather than the argument. It changes the
subject from the merits of the case, forcing people to defend
their right to express their views.

Those who serve in the military often say that we defend
people's freedom to believe what they want and speak out.
Ironically, this is most often invoked in the case of opponents of
the war and critics of American policy. But it should apply
equally to supporters of the war and defenders of American
policy. Just as you shouldn't have to have served in the military in
order to be anti-war, you don't have to have served to defend it.
The vast majority of service members appreciate, rather than
condemn, those at home who speak and write in support of
America's efforts.

In this war, people are needed to fight the battles. But this war is
not just a military conflict, it is a war of ideas. Never let people
imply that those who wage the intellectual battle on behalf of
America's policies are not contributing to the effort. Such efforts
are as vital to our victory as what is done on the battlefield.
Intellectual courage in waging this battle may not be the same as
physical courage, but it is courage none the less.

I have served in the military in the past, as a member of the
Wisconsin Army National Guard. I have also, in my own small
way, tried to contribute in the battle of ideas, through my blog <a
href="http://www.porphyrogenitus.net">Porphyrogenitus.net</a>
. It is a small thing, but no one person is an Army unto
themselves, either (no matter what the slogan says). One soldier
is part of a unit which is part of an army of people working as a
team to complete the mission. One person speaking out or
writing in advocating in support of a policy is contributing to it, as
a citizen in our democracy. Both roles are legitimate and needed.
Anyone who asserts that someone doing the latter who has not
also done the former is assaulting not just the person they are
attacking, but civic debate in democratic society.
 
The fact is, if people don't fight the intellectual battle to determine
policy, the warriors will not be allowed to fight the military battle
to defeat our enemies. The role of the "chickenhawks" is critical
to the war effort – which is why so much effort is devoted to
discrediting them. Both battles, the intellectual and the military,
must be won for us to win the war. So when your right to
support the war and fight the war of ideas is attacked, remind
people that the soldiers defend your right to express your views,
too, not just the critic's rights to free expression.

James Ruhland writes <a href="http:
//www.porphyrogenitus.net">Porphyrogenitus.net</a>.

Enter Stage Right -- http://www.enterstageright.com