Posted by Orin Kerr:
Still Need That Word:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_03_15-2009_03_21.shtml#1237529244
Almost five years ago, I [1]wrote a post arguing that the English
language needs a new word. From July 17, 2004:
The Engligh Language Needs A Word for when advocates on both sides
of an ongoing debate switch rhetorical positions, and yet they
insist on decrying the inconsistency of their opponents while
overlooking their own inconsistency. You can see it in politics
whenever there is a change in power. Advocates from the party that
loses power switch to the standard
what-you-say-when-you're-the-opposition arguments, and those from
the party that is now in power switch to the standard
what-you-say-when-you're-in-power arguments. You never have to wait
very long before one side tries to outfox the other by trotting out
what their opponents said back before the power switch: "Aha!" an
advocate for one side will say, "But back in 199_, you took the
opposite position!" Well, of course: back then, everyone took the
opposite position. I don't know of a word for this particular
phenomemon, but I think we need one.
Too bad we never did come up with a word for this; I could have used
it to describe[2] this new essay by Dahlia Litwick.
References
1. http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2004_07_11-2004_07_17.shtml#1090065652
2. http://www.slate.com/id/2214233/
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
