tive Party opponent, William F. Buckley.rnAlthough Lindsay is portrayed as an “impractical”rndo-gooder and Buckley as arnsober realist who knew that “governmentrncould not solve all the problems blockingrnblack entr’ into the mainstream,” Jacobvrndoes not hide her true feelings.rnLindsay was expressing noble sentiments,rnthough mistaken about specificsrnand clumsy about applying his ideals.rnBut Buckley ran “a pandering campaign,”rnpresumably because his supportersrnwere Catholic ethnics and becausernhe told harsh truths, a point grudginglyrnconceded by Jacoby, who observes thatrn”not everything that Buckley said aboutrnblacks was wrong or racist.” The problemrnwith this analysis is that Jacobyrncomes up with nothing Buckley said thatrnwas noticeably wrong; nor does she revealrnanything Lindsay said that was strikinglyrncorrect. Her judgments are formedrnon the basis of a highly parochial sensibilit)’.rnThus the civil rights movement,rnwe are led to believe, used to be a goodrnthing until it turned against New YorkrnJews and against Israel, at which point itrnbecame bad and deserving of contempt.rnBut even then it was only bad in its derailedrnstate, while those who conhnue tornbe “idealistic” about a socially engineeredrnmidtiracial socieh’, at least for thernUnited States, are seen as praiseworthy.rnTwo of Jacoby’s “idealistic” heroes arernAlbert Shanker and Sandra Feldman,rnleaders of the American Federation ofrnTeachers, who (we are told) stood tallrnwhen black nationalists were allowed tornrun scliools in the Ocean Hill district ofrnBrooklyn in 1968. Wliile the black leadership,rnv hom the New York Cit}’ Boardrnof Education refused to resist, antagonizedrnthe white, predominantly Jewishrnteachers, one might equally criticizernwhat Jacoby calls the “educational establishment.”rnFor more than 30 vears.rnM O V I N G ;rnSend changernof address and tJiernmaiJing label fromrnyour latest issue to:rnCHRONICLESrnSUBSCRIPTION DEPT.rnRO. BOX 800rnMOUNT MORRIS, IL 61054rnShanker and his union associates haverntried to maintain a public schoolrnmonopoly of American education runrnwith minimal parental or neighborhoodrninterference. Thev have raved againstrnthe danger of religion influencing Americanrneducation and have been exemplaryrnsupporters of the big-governmentrnleft. Nonetheless, Jacoby cannot findrnsufficient praise for Shanker in particular,rnas an upholder of educahonal standardsrnin the tunnoil of 1968. This “sonrnof Eastern European Jews, raised inrnpoverty in Manhattan’s Lower EastrnSide,” said “bluntly what no one elserndared to say: that the emperor had nornclothes—that the activists on the governingrnboard did not represent the district orrnthe civil rights movement, that their vituperativernanger would do no good for therncit}’.” It is queshonable that the board,rnconsisting of public figures and black activists,rnhad no support among blacks; orrnthat their black nationalist ideologvrnwould be foreign to the evolving blackrnpolitics of the hme. But, even more, it isrnhypocritical to cast the noisily vituperativernShanker as the voice of reason. Unlikernhis black opponents in Ocean Hill,rnhe would be around for years makingrnnoise, most of it unseemly and highlyrnpartisan.rnLike her sponsors and blurbers, Jacobyrnis a leftist at heart who entertains doubtsrnabout the excesses to which her beliefsrnand policies can he and have beenrnpushed. Only because a credible rightrnhas collapsed or been marginalized hasrnJacoby been able to appear as somethingrnshe clearly is not, a “conservative,” forrnquibbling over race-based affirmative achonrnand for decrying the anti-Semitismrnof some black separatists. But arguabhherrnrelendesslv integrationist vision mayrnbe more dangerous for established communities,rnwhite or black, than the tolerationrnof separate racial and ethnic patternsrnof association. Separate communities dornnot necessarily hate each other, whilerngroups which ha’e been forced togetherrnmay come to dislike each other intensely.rnAnd to solve the resulting tensions,rnever newer “policies” will be inflictedrnupon an increasingly fragmented societ’.rnWith due respect to Jacoby, it is absurdrnto argue that unless we are broughtrntogether through her dreams of integration,rnwe shall be choosing “chaos” overrn”community.” For centuries Americansrnlived in authentic communities, as opposedrnto governmentally orchestratedrnones, without felling into utter darkness.rnOne recent development that particularlyrnoffends Jacoby is a popular Southernrnsign that says, “We should havernpicked our own cotton!” Since the signrnby implication laments the removal ofrnblacks from Africa and their enslavementrnin the Nev’ World, I was initially puzzledrnas to wh’ it might anger the author. Myrnown explanation is that—like other liberalsrnand neocons —Jacoby has adoptedrnsomething like the Catholic concept ofrnthe felix culpa with regard to race. Mimickingrnthe view presented in the GoodrnFriday service, that the Fall of Adamrnwas partly fortunate for bringing Christ,rnJacoby and her ilk rejoice over thernenslavement of blacks for leading to arnmultiracial America. That is the only explanationrnthat seems to fit, given the author’srnobsessive concern about gettingrnback to the integrationist project whichrnshe insists has now stalled.rnFaul Gottfried is a professor of humanitiesrnat Elizahethtown College in Elizahethtown,rnPennsylvania, and the author,rnmost recently, of After Liberalism: MassrnDemocracv in the Managerial Statern(Princeton).rnGenius in thernMakingrnby Chilton Williamson, Jr.rnBecoming Laura Ingalls Wilder:rnThe Woman Behind the Legendrnby ]ohn E. MillerrnColumbia: Vniversitv of Missouri Press;rn320 pp.,’$29.9SrnIn 1995 the University of MissourirnPress published The Ghost in the LittlernHouse: A Life of Rose Wilder Lane byrnWilliam Holtz, who made a small sensationrnby contending that everything thatrnmakes the famous “Little House” booksrnremarkable and memorable was actuallyrnthe work not of Laura Ingalls Wilder butrnof her daughter. Rose Lane —the novelist,rnmagazine author, and libertarianrnpamphleteer—who took what were originallyrndisorganized and amateurish effusionsrnby her mother and reorganized, expanded,rnrewrote, and polished them torn-SO/CHRONICLESrnrnrn