This is an amazing post by Publius at Legal Fiction regardng, among other things, the impact of calling pro-/anti-war positions “hawkish” and “dovish,” respectively.
These terms are filled to the brim with implicit value judgments and they color our perceptions accordingly. A bigger concern is that the terms themselves are arguments “for war” generally without regard to context or individual circumstances. Take the word “hawk.” A hawk is a cool, fierce predator who is a badass. It’s good to be called a “hawk.” People want to be a “hawk,” or at least “hawkish.” You gotta get those sharp talons attributed to your worldview to hang out with the cool kids.
“Dove,” by contrast, means…well, it means pussy. No one wants to be called a “dove.” And I suspect that people who would have otherwise opposed the Iraq war supported it just to avoid being called a synonym of “pussy bird.” Even hard-core pacificists don’t want to be called “dove” because “doves” suck. They’re fluffy and white and soft. That’s great if you’re talking about Snuggle detergent, but less great when you’re in a political debate.
I suspect the Great Intra-Liberal Iraq Debate would be different if the camps were not called “hawks” and “doves.” But because they are, in any debate between “hawks” and “doves,” the “hawks” will always be right even if they’re wrong because they’re the (cue Metallica riff and echo) HAWKS. And the “doves” – because doves are pussies – will be wrong even if they’re right. Because they are (whimper, whimper) “doves.”
I consider myself relatively hawkish (or whatever), but I agree with Publius that it’s important to not name terms in a way that automatically skews the debate. In any event, Democrats getting stuck with the weak names is a major problem for the left–call it “Mighty Duck” syndrome. You can proclaim that you’re mighty and tough and big, and the voters will nod sagely, but eventually they’ll break down and snicker “you’re a frickin’ DUCK, for crying out loud.” And then they’ll vote for the “Homicidal Psycho Jungle Cats” because they know they’re tough (look at that name!) even though they aren’t that tough at all because they could just play off the name for the past seven elections.
Props to whomever can identify the source for this post’s title.