EDITORrnThomas FlemingrnMANAGING EDITORrnTheodore PappasrnSENIOR EDITOR. BOOKSrnChilton Williamson, jr.rnEDITORIAL ASSISTANTrnMichael WashburnrnART DIREGTORrnAnna Mycek-WodeckirnCONTRIBUTING EDITORSrnHarold O./. Brown, Katherine Dalton,rnSamuel Francis, George Garrett,rnE. Christian Kopff, Clyde WilsonrnCORRESPONDING EDITORSrn6(7/ Kauffman, Jacob Neusner,rnJohn Shelton Reed, Momcilo SelicrnEDITORIAL SECRETARYrnLeann DobbsrnPUBLISHERrnAllan C. CarlsonrnPUBLICATION DIRECTORrnGuy C. ReffettrnPRODUCTION SECRETARYrnAnita CandyrnCIRCULATION MANAGERrnRochelle FrankrnA publication of The Rockford Institute.rnEditorial and Advertising Offices:rn934 North Main Street. Rockford. IL 61105.rnEditorial Phone: (815)964-5054.rn.Advertising Phone: (815) 964-5811.rnSubscription Department: P.O. Box 800,rnMount Morris, IL 61054. Call 1-800-877-5459.rnFor infoniration on advertising in Chronicles,rnplea.se call Rochelle Frank at (815) 964-5811.rnU.S.A. Newsstand Distribution by Eastern NewsrnDistributors, Inc., 1130 Cleveland Road,rnSandusky, OH 44870.rnCopyright © 1995 by The Rockford Institute.rnAll rights reserved.rnChmnides (ISSN 0887-5731) is publishedrnmonthly for 539.00 per year by The RockfordrnInstitute, 934 North Mam Street, Rockford,rnIL 61103-7061. Second-class postage paidrnat Rockford, IL and additioiral mailing offices.rnPOSTMASTER: Send address changes tornChmnides, P.O. Box 800, Mount Morris,rn11. 61054.rnThe views expressed in Chnimctes arc thernauthors’ alone and do not necessarily reflectrnthe views of The Rockford Institute or of itsrndirectors. Unsolicited manuscripts cannot bernreturned unless accompanied by a self-addressedrnstamped envelope.rnChroniclesrnVol, 19, N D . 7 )U1V199SrnFuulcd lii (lie .v,ic(i St-ifei ‘>( AuKucarnPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESrnOn Jury RiggingrnChristopher Baldwin’s description of hisrntime spent on jury duty (“Jury Rigging,”rnMareh 1995) was spellbinding. What hernwitnessed behind the closed doors of thernjury room is exactly what your fine magazinernhas been pointing out repeatedly:rnit’s not the judges, lawyers, congressmen,rnand the media that are causing our countryrnto become a moral wasteland, althoughrnthev indeed pla’ a part. It is thernmoral vacuum that exists in the soul ofrnthe average American. And until thatrnchanges, the soul of the nation cannotrnchange,rn—Brent BaldwinrnLebanon, TNrnCULTURAL REVOLUTIONSrnT H E APRIL BOMBING in OklahomarnCity told us a lot about ourselvesrnand how we respond to adversity. Whenrna bomb destroved the federal building inrnthat city, politicians and journalists werernswift to place the atrocity in some kind ofrnwider context, offering interpretationsrnwhich ranged from the accurate to thernvulgar. In the latter category, we havernthe “loss of innocence” that has so regularlyrnbeen announced in American history,rnfrom the Great Depression throughrnthe years of Vietnam and Watergate.rnThe bomb attack also marked perhapsrnthe hundredth occasion in recentrndecades on which it was soberly declaredrnthat “Terrorism has now come to thernUnited States.” Official interpretationsrnwere less informatie than the numerousrnunspoken or unheralded messages,rnwhich proved yet again the gross inferiorityrnof the mass media to the public theyrnclaim to serve. Few remarked on therncontinuing religiosity of the Americanrnpeople and their resort to religious institutionsrnat a time of apparent crisis. Thisrnoutburst of faith is astonishingly differentrnfrom what might have been expectedrnin comparable circumstances in anyrnnation of Europe or the Pacific Rim. Reactionsrnto the bombing also presented arnpicture of a surprisingly united Americanrnnation, despite all the intercommunalrnstrains of recent years.rnWhile these arc values in which conservativesrnmight take comfort, otherrnmessages were far more troubling. Afterrnan atrocity of this sort, the quest for culpritsrninevitably taints not just the actualrnoffenders, but any who might be thoughtrnto sympathize with them, and the namingrnof “accomplices” illustrates muchrnabout prevailing social prejudices. In thernimmediate aftermath of the bombing.rnArabs and Muslims seemed destined forrnpersecution, but the investigation’s subsequentrnfocus on the radical right drewrnattention to a wholly different cast of villains.rnWith dazzling speed, the media inrnthe days following the first charges hadrnplaced the bombers in a context of “haterngroups,” a term which (it now appeared)rnwas synonymous with “armed citizenrnmilitias,” “tax protesters,” “survivalists,”rnand the perennially popular “gun nuts.”rn”White supremacist” was another handyrnif inaccurate collective phrase for the assortedrndissidents. The implications deservernserious thought. While I find quiternludicrous the image of myself donningrnfatigues or carrying an assault rifle in arnwar game in some Midwestern forest, Irnrespect the opinions of those vho believernthat the United States was founded onrnthe basis of an armed citizenry, to bernsupplemented by regular forces in timernof need. These individuals logically supportrnthe fundamental right to bear armsrnfor self-defense, and not merely forrn”sporting” purposes. While disagreeingrnwith them, I recognize that others havernprincipled objections both to the constitutionalityrnof our present tax system andrnto the purposes for which the proceedsrnare used. Others still exercise what theyrntake to be a litcralK’ God-given right tornlive in remote settings where they canrnpursue their own values free from therndemands of a tainted and probablyrndoomed society. All, I now find, arern”white supremacists,” “hate groups,” arncollective public enenry number one,rnand the urgent official priority is to removernthe weapons with which they seekrnto terrorize “legitimate” society, and perhapsrnto limit the insidious propagandarnwith which such goals are pursued. AfterrnOklahonra City, the right to dissent fromrn4/CHRONICLESrnrnrn