Alan Roebuck writes:
I know what the President of Iran is up to: he’s counting coup on us.
Last year, in a comment posted at VFR, I observed that liberal writers would rather produce a witty bon mot than make a substantial point, and I likened this the American Indian practice of “counting coup.” To the Indian, the greatest feat of bravery in battle was not to defeat his enemy, but to “count coup” on him, that is, touch him without being touched.
I then gave an account of an Indian warrior who donned his enemies’ clothes, entered their camp, and counted coup on dozens of his enemies. Other Indians who heard of this regarded it as the greatest feat they had ever heard.
Presumably this was regarded as a great feat because the warrior who counts coup has dishonored his enemies: they could have killed him, but they failed. Furthermore, the one who counts coup, such as David against King Saul, could have killed his enemy, who is thus alive only because the one who counts coup lets him live.
Well, Johnnie is counting coup on us. He’s walking into his enemy’s camp and walking out unscathed. There’s only one significant difference between Johnnie’s coup and the real thing:
We’re letting him do it.
Gintas J. writes:
If Ahmadinejad thinks it’s a brave thing to come to Columbia, he doesn’t understand American universities and journalists: he’s being used in a photo-op for our journalists-in-the-making to display themselves as the cringing lickspittles they are. It’s the students counting coup, in front of their own country. How else does a native fifth column develop?
Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 24, 2007 12:22 PM | Send