Doublethink, a publication from the young-conservatives organization AFF, has an article by a French Studies major responding to the Right’s critique of academia. National Review and Phi Beta Cons come up more than once, and not in a good way. (I’ve published in Doublethink.)

It’s a little baffling. The author makes sweeping claims about the low quality of right-wing academia criticism, yet only manages to scrape together a few examples. Frankly, she doesn’t even demonstrate that those are truly nothing more than “scoff[ing] at the other side.” She dismisses The New Criterion’s entire May issue with one quote from editor Roger Kimball; I haven’t read the whole thing, but Charles Murray’s piece on “educational romanticism” was fantastic.

And if she really thinks it’s “almost impossible to imagine what a constructive conservative approach to academia would look like,” she should read John Hood’s piece in our current issue.