32 / CHRONICLESnstudents a politically tolerant “environmentnthat is supportive of theirncoming to decisions about life-stylesnand political views and religious viewsnthat are best suited to them.” Despitenthe profession of these commendablenideals, no action at all was ever takennon behalf of the terrorized conservatives,neven after Professor Foley carriednout her threat of assault. In that leftistnnever-never land of academia, freenspeech is the dearest value and thenwellspring of truth — for the left.nInCAR stated the ground rules whennthey shouted down Eldridge Cleavernfrom a university podium where henwas attempting to give a speech: “Nonfree speech for fascists!” Needless tonsay. Northwestern chose not to censurenthose responsible for that incident,neither.nIt is, however, possible even for anleftist to traverse the bounds of decorumnat the modern university. A postscriptnto Professor Foley’s academicnterrorism of the past three years wasnwritten this summer when she wasndenied tenure for an incident in whichnshe stormed the podium where Nicaraguannfreedom fighter Adolfo Caleronwas speaking, threw animal blood onnhim, threatened to kill him, and incitedna mob of kindred spirits from Chicagonto storm the stairways of thenapartment to which Calero was forcednto retreat.nFoley will leave, but she has madenher mark, having clarified Northwestern’snguidelines for professorial conduct:nPublicly slandering students whonhappen to disagree with you is definitelynOK. Assaulting students whonhappen to disagree with you — stillnOK. Shouting down public figuresnwho happen to disagree with you—nOK. Shouting down and threateningnthe lives of public figures who happennto disagree with you—not OK. Untilnthe final episode, Northwestern condonednProfessor Foley’s escalating spiralnof violence, though it really muchnprefers forms of intolerance that generatenless publicity.nThe most telling episode in Northwestern’sndrive to gag conservativesnbegan this spring, when a radical disruptedna speech by Reed Irvine. Unablento get past the first line of his text,nIrvine tried to defuse the disruption bynoffering her the podium. The podiumnshe accepted, and at the podium shenheld forth, until dragged away, a shortneternity later, by the police.nThe faculty-student panel chargednwith handling such matters conductedna Kafkaesque “trial” of the disruptingnstudent, Jill Bloomberg, in which ThenNorthwestern Review often seemed tonbe more on trial than the student. In ancircus of brazen procedural and judicialnerrors, the board, which includedna personal friend of Ms. Bloomberg’s,nexamined ominous “fascist trends” atnuniversities worldwide before acquittingnMs. Bloomberg, deeming hernheckling (for which she was convictednin Cook County Court of disorderlynconduct) “not excessive.”nWhile one arm of the modern universityndecried fascist trends, anothernarm, the campus police, prepared anninvoice for the conservative group thatnhad invited Mr. Irvine. Billed by campusnpolice for their frequent sallies tonrestore order and faced with severalncancellations by prominent conservativesnwho are now afraid to speak atnNorthwestern, student groups on thenright can only watch in incredulity asnfree speech is quietly suffocated.nThe situation in the classroom is nonless insidious. An archetypical inquisitornfor Reason is Northwestern’s distinguishednGarry Wills himself In mynAmerican culture class, the noted authornused “Socratic dialogue” as anmeans of first venturing his ownnunique insights on the greatest issuesnof the day (“Right-wingers really wantna nuclear war” or “Most personal hygienenproducts, including deodorant,nare cynical attempts to rob the public”)nthen soliciting opinions from the class.nThe student cannot go wrong by offeringnleft-wing slogans, no matter hownradical or sophomoric. On the othernhand, undergraduates who venturenconservative opinions are subjected tonunrelenting, usually sarcastic denunciations.nIn the classroom of one ofnour deans of culture, crimethink isnpunished by public humiliation.nPerhaps it is unfair, though, to singlenout Mr. Wills. His mossbackednteaching/indoctrination style is not unusual.nIt is the new orthodoxy.nConservative students at Northwesternnsoon learn that many professorsnand students dismiss them with anlabel—racist, fascist, etc.—withoutneven recognizing the sincerity of theirnopinions. “HAVE YOU GOT ANYnnnMORE RACIAL SLURS WE CANnUSE / WE HAVEN’T MESSEDnWITH NIGGERS LATELY.” This,nand some even more malodorous specimensnof name-ealling were maliciouslyninserted into Northwestern Reviewncopy for one of our issues. Afternwe deleted these epithets, more appearednin the final edition. When wenreported the incident to the universitynand the publishing company it subsidizes,nneither showed the slightestnconcern. In matters of tolerance, then”Harvard of the Midwest” has alreadynmade it into the mainstream of the IvynLeague schools it emulates.nPaul Herron was a founding editor ofnThe Northwestern Review.nLetter From thenLower Rightnby John Shelton ReednRaw BitsnSome undigested odds and ends thisnmonth. Let’s see — let’s start withnsome survey research on regional differences,nreal and perceived.nFrom California comes word thatnthe Stanford Research Institute hasncome up with a typology of Americansnbased on their (excuse the expression)nlife-styles. Not surprisingly, the typesnare not distributed uniformly acrossnthe U.S. Three in particular are geographicallynconcentrated. “Achievers”nare more likely than others to benwealthy, middle-aged suburbanites innSouthern California and the Midwest.n(George Babbitt lives!) The “SociallynConscious” tend to be younger, welleducatednfolk, also financially well-off:nThey pile up in New England and onnthe West Coast. “Belongers” make upn37 percent of the U.S. population:nThey are patriotic, family-oriented,npolitically conservative, and tend tonhve—guess where.nMeanwhile, the Roper Poll hasnbeen asking Americans how they seenregional differences in the U.S. Overall,nthe West is seen as the “mostnexciting” region, the prettiest, and thenbest place to vacation. The WildnNortheast is seen as most dangerous—nmost cosmopolitan and most expen-n