61 CHRONICLESnJesse the farmer has been makingnheadlines in the Midwest. Now credentialednas an American diplomatnpromoting peace with Syria, Cuba,nand the Soviet Union and as the onlynlegitimate spokesman for oppressednminorities, Jesse Jackson has recentlynproclaimed himself a leader of thennation’s troubled farmers. Last spring,nthe Rev (wearing overalls and a hatnbearing the slogan “I’m Proud to be anFarmer”) drove the lead tractor in an50-vehicle protest parade in Chillicothe,nMissouri. In a speech, Jacksonnoffered sympathy for the farmers’nplight and called for “a state of emergency,na moratorium on farm foreclosures.”nAs an agricultural expert, Jacksonnhas few credentials—except perhapsnas the country’s leading breeder of bullnoff-the-hoof The thought of Jessenbuckin’ bails, milkin’ cows, hoein’nbeets, or doing a lick of farm worknstrains credulity, but—not to worry—nJesse believes that a coalition of “theneaters and feeders” can effect ruralnjustice. An area farmer quoted in thenChicago Tribune praised Jackson fornhis advocacy of the farmers’ cause:n”The colored people understand ournproblems a lot better than a lot ofnwhite people.”nThe “white people” that farmersntrust least these days may be thenJews. According to a recent Louis Harrisnpoll commissioned by the Anti-nDefamation League of B’nai B’rith,nmore than one in 10 rural lowans andnNebraskans now blame Jews for theirnproblems. The number of anti-nSemites in overalls is still relativelynsmall—only 13 percent—but the AssociatednPress quoted a prominentnfarm leader from Iowa saying thatnanti-Jewish attitudes “have workedntheir way into the mainstream of ruralncommunities.” This poll gives a freshnperspective on all the recent propagandanagainst “the bankers” and suggestsnthat the Rev. Jackson may be finding anfresh audience for his own uniquenbrand of humor. With The Order innCULTURAL REVOLUTIONSndisarray, Jesse stands to add a newncolor to his Rainbow Coalition.nDemocracy is stiffing the arts in Tacoma,nWashington. At least that’s thenperception of the Kultur Kritiker atnARTnews. They are afraid that a recentnTacoma referendum on taxsubsidizednart could be “a harbinger ofnchallenges to come in all kinds ofncities.” Back in 1975 Tacoma followednthe lead of Seattle in passing a lawnrequiring 1 percent of its constructionnbudget to be spent on public art. In thenearly 70’s champions of public artnurged civic leaders across the countrynto adopt such measures as a way ofnstimulating civic character. Many cityncouncils bought the argument andnsucceeded in littering our cities, parks,nand highways with unsightiy “modern”nsculptures and murals producednby tax-subsidized “artists”—the culturalnequivalent of WPA.nBut now Tacoma has become “thenfirst local government in the countrynto overturn, by popular initiative, anone-percent-for-art ordinance.” Theynhad taken it for 10 years, but a wildn12-by-96 neon “light sculpture” innpink, red, blue, and green designed bynStephen Antonakos for the city’s newnsports center apparently had the residentsnseeing only one color—red. Then$272,000 would have bought an awfulnlot of modeling clay and finger paintsnfor the kindergartners—better art, too.nThe divisions in the American rightnbegan to look like volcanic fissures atnthis spring’s Philadelphia Societynmeeting held in Chicago. The oldnright charge against the neoconservativesnwas led by Paul Gottfried andnStephen Tonsor. Gottfried, who hasnrecentiy joined the editorial staff of TftenWorld and I, made a serious and welldocumentedncase for not papering overnimportant differences between paleoandnneoconservatives. The major bonenof contention is the whole array ofnnnNew Deal policies which, he argued,nconservatives reject and neoconservativesnaccept with only minor reservations.nTonsor, professor emeritus atnMichigan, mounted a stunning andnquite unexpected rhetorical attack onnnon-Christians and ex-Marxists whoncall themselves conservatives.nQuestions and responses from attendingnneocons and supporters highlightednthe breach. Arnold Beichman,nboth at the meeting and in a laternWashington Times editorial, warnednagainst the dangers of sectarian disputesnand defended the contributionsnto conservative thought made by ex-nMarxists. He went on to say that conservatismnwas nothing more than anpolitical coalition held together bynanticommunism. Later in the day,nBrigitte Berger, William Kristol, andnRussell Kirk pointed out that neoconservatismnis an umbrella covering anvariety of opinions, some of which arengenuinely conservative. Kirk made annappeal for a united front—especiallynagainst the libertarians—and madena few apposite remarks on the moralsnand education of journalists. Thenyounger Kristol made one of the mostntelling criticisms of the entire eventnwhen he wondered, out loud, whynthe debate had not centered on somensubstantial issue rather than on somethingnso hazy as the conservativenidentity.nWith friends and allies in bothncamps, it is hard to utter an opinionnwithout causing pain, but the subjectnis important enough to require one orntwo observations. First, Paul Gottfried’snarguments cannot simply bendismissed. There are significant differencesnbetween the two camps; therenhas been a tendency among somenneocons to take credit for reinventingnthe wheel. Anglo-American conservativesncan claim a richer intellectualnand literary tradition than the reformednliberalism advocated by manynof those who sail under the neoconservativenflag. It is high time fornmore recently arrived conservatives ton