to the Editors of the Crimson:

Neoconservatives have been trying for some time now to incarcerate the term "racism" (and "sexism" too), but Michael Nolan's reply (April 20) to my letter (April 19) won't quite do the job.

First, I make it clear in my letter why I prefer the term "neoracist" rather than Glenn Orenstein's "condescending" to characterize Matthew Joseph's silly suggestion that Jesse Jackson's presidential campaign is out of order. I said that 1) the constitutional norms allow Jackson's campaign; 2) the precedent of presidential candidates without prior office as governor and congressman is on his side; 3) the precedent of presidential campaigns seeking to empower marginal strata and policies is no his side. Thus, since there is no factual, legal, or normative support for Joseph's claim. I deduced, rather reasonably I think, that Joseph doesn't favor a Black candidate or at least a Black candidate who is progressive on issues relating to Blacks and other marginal strata or issues. This I call "neoracist."

Second, I can inform Michael Nolan that newcomers to middle-classes in American society--whites and Blacks, but especially whites--experience enormous anxieties connected with this enormous status transition. He might educate himself on the matter by reading the old and new literature on the subject. Or by opening his eyes, by reading the press or watching television, for events in places like Howard Beach, Carnarise, and South Boston. Yes, white-ethnic newcomers to the middle-classes are ideal candidates for neoracist behavior, whether in South Boston or Harvard Yard. Martin Kilson   Professor of Government