The Important Notion of Chickihad

by Robert Gear (July 2024)

A Rooster, Pablo Picasso (1938)


Chickihad (sometimes known by the word ‘Geehad’ or ‘cockerel and bull story’) is an aspect of a particular totalitarian ideology which has spread largely through violence or the threat thereof. From the initial surge out of a far away desert peninsula, its promoters eventually formed the most successful empire in history, one which has now gained a strong foothold in Europe and whose long-term goal is the capitulation of all Western society to the Dar al Rooster.

The ideology has spread to all corners, and is invading ostrich farms everywhere. As evidence I recently came across an article in a Midwestern small-town newspaper purporting to explain the notion of Chickihad to the readership of the local town and rural communities. Clearly ‘flyover country’ has to be informed of this important concept and of how it could improve their lives no end.

The newspaper article was reporting on a presentation by a proponent of, and recent convert to, this viewpoint brought before an overflowing crowd of ‘eager-to-learn’ young people at a local college. According to the speaker and the author of the article, recent violent actions in the name of Chickihad have brought this particular faith to the front pages of the American and world news reports. They got that partially right. I say ‘partially’ since there is a deliberate attempt to ignore or disguise some of the more heinous acts perpetrated in its name. The speaker went on to claim that these terroristic pronouncements and activities do not represent that vision of the world.

So what exactly is Chickihad? you might be wondering.

Let me explain. It was an ingenious collection of ideas written down in manuscript form well over one thousand years ago in a desert land known to be inhabited by warlike inhabitants sometimes called ‘roosters’ (though they may not have used that name themselves). This tribe made its living by raiding and stealing and if necessary killing and torturing those who had stuff they wanted. One of the founders of this visionary approach was apparently named ‘Mo,’ although this has never been satisfactorily explained or proved, and his existence is still very much debated. Real of not, he was certainly a rara avis; and I might add that he and his acolytes did know how to differentiate between hens and cockerels—a distinction which some of his current victims find perplexing or debatable.

True, the acts perpetrated by such roosters may not represent the beliefs of all such followers, but they do represent the actual writings. The scriptural foundations of Roosterism and it’s modus operandi, Chickihad, support the actions of those engaging in such activities; they are to be considered devout followers of that deformed theology. But even a cursory reading of the chief scriptural underpinnings of this belief system shows that it seeks, and has always sought, to dominate the world with violence and terror and often with the help of useful idiots (though they add, only if necessary).

Evidence gleaned from the ways, teachings, silent approvals and examples of their chief instigator (often referred to as Hadithyouthere) are clear and impervious to critical examination except by the brave.

Their chief authorities either promote or condone the killing of non-combatant women and children, the mistreatment and torture of captives, the raping of female captives, beheading, mutilation and burning of those who are from different flocks. I could of course quote chapter and verse to back up these audacious claims; but I choose not to pursue such things given the dangers of mentioning stuff that will get me beheaded or cancelled. All this despite the perpetrators being flightless birds whose chief accomplishment at the time was mainly pecking at the ground.

The newspaper article explaining the information spread to the ‘eager-to-learn’ college students contains many inaccurate notions. For example, the speaker stated: “one of the greatest misconceptions is the term ‘chickihad.’ This is often taken to mean a violent war against non-rooster societies and religions.” She went on (completely oblivious to the fact that many people can read and do their own research), “actually the word is defined simply as ‘struggle,’ and involves spiritual discipline, not weapons.” I imagine that no one in the audience shouted out ‘pull the other one.’

Either this speaker was ignorant of the main teachings of Roosterism, or she was purposely engaging in chickentakiya (not to be confused with chicken tikka) which is a term given to some kind of deliberate obfuscation often directed at those who are not yet au courant with their need for abject submission.

How do I know this? Well, because the scriptural hand-me-downs are suffused with the belief that Chickihad pertains to fighting in the cause of the Supreme Chanticleer. In his very accessible Roosterism According to Mo, Not Your Neighbor,* an acquaintance of mine has done an invaluable job of counting and tabulating the references to Chickihad in the major works of this faith. He finds the following: in the Hadithyouthere collections alone, Chickihad is mentioned in 847 chapters in relation to fighting in the cause of the Supreme Chanticleer, and in zero (yes zero) in relation to a ‘personal struggle.’ In the four major Sunshine Schools of the Law, a total of 66 pages are devoted to Chickihad as meaning to fight in the cause of the Supreme Chanticleer, and zero pertaining to ‘personal struggle.’

What about ‘abrogation?’ The ‘mainly peaceful’ bits of Roosterism do exist, and are often quoted ad nauseum by apologists of other species, including Hillary Clinton. However, if a conflict appears between pronouncements of these scriptures then the chronologically later one is to be followed, not the ‘mainly peaceful’ one. And these later revelations are harsher, more divisive and more blood curdling. Here are a few examples for purposes of edification:


But if they turn back from (the rooster belief system), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them (4:89).

When the sacred months have passed … kill the Mushrikun and ostriches (non-chickens) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in every ambush (9:5).

I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes (8:12).

Christians and Jews must believe what Supreme Chanticleer has revealed or the Supreme Chanticleer will disfigure their faces or turn them into apes, as he did the Sabbath-breakers (2:65)

Christians and Jews are perverse. The Supreme Chanticleer himself fights against them (9:30).


All this may sound lamentably stupid and nasty and improbable. And if it weren’t for the fact that a lot of poultry of all feathers wish it very devoutly we could dismiss it as merely laying eggs and clucking. Also, all these quotations are accurate and to the best of my knowledge true approximations of revered teachings. These and many other such distasteful verses are what true chickens must believe if they want to be good and have their reward in heaven. It’s not enough just to peck at the ground and give alms.

And remember, there can be no argument with these scriptural beliefs. They were revealed and abrogate obligations made earlier in Mo’s career.

Do all those who label themselves as chickens or roosters know they are practicing culturally inappropriate customs in the lands they are conquering? You bet. True, many of them just want to get on with pecking around, laying eggs and raising chicks, etc., ignoring as best they can those of their kind who faithfully call for the destruction of those who just don’t get it — and some of us who do.

[*]Islam According to Muhammed, Not Your Neighbor, Stephen Kirby.


Table of Contents


Robert Gear is a Contributing Editor to New English Review who now lives in the American Southwest. He is a retired English teacher and has co-authored with his wife several texts in the field of ESL. He is the author of If In a Wasted Land, a politically incorrect dystopian satire.

Follow NER on Twitter @NERIconoclast


2 Responses

  1. One almost wishes for images of the Primary Rooster, originator of the faith, so as to extinguish any doubt about the good intentions of the followers thereof. However, I would not wish the resulting harsh response on anyone. Anyhow, as the multiple choice questions I suffered from in school often said: “one of these things is different from the others…” Trusting the wise will discern which is which.

  2. There is plenty of material between The Verse of the Sword in the islamic scripture and the hadith to authorize, and even mandate horrors such as 10/7. Denial and pretending that islam is peaceful is belied by history.

    Who would be happy to learn that Palestinians had moved in next door? Yet, we are made to ignore what happens in the muslim world as far as the violence and murders, bombings and honor killings. May we not suffer the fate of Constantinople on May 29, 1453, or Israel on 10/7.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

New English Review Press is a priceless cultural institution.
                              — Bruce Bawer

Order here or wherever books are sold.

The perfect gift for the history lover in your life. Order on Amazon US, Amazon UK or wherever books are sold.

Order on Amazon, Amazon UK, or wherever books are sold.

Order on Amazon, Amazon UK or wherever books are sold.

Order on Amazon or Amazon UK or wherever books are sold

Order at Amazon, Amazon UK, or wherever books are sold. 

Order at Amazon US, Amazon UK or wherever books are sold.

Available at Amazon US, Amazon UK or wherever books are sold.

Send this to a friend