I often comment here about the arrogant, condescending attitude of the left and many of those in academia - yes, I know, somewhat redundant. What's so amazing is their apparent inability - or unwillingness - to recognize their glaring flaw in this area. As I also often point out - arrogance is a blinding vice. Or, perhaps they do recognize it but believe it's actually justified. A number of CW bloggers, academics, and others who approach history from the left constantly lament that much historical analysis just isn't "sophisticated" enough - Read: "They don't agree with me and my leftist worldview and the analysis that follows it. Therefore they aren't as smart as I am."
Many of them want to go so far as to silence those who would disagree with them - even put them in jail. Their own feelings of superiority just won't allow opposition to their views and historical analysis, which is also why they are quick to ban those who disagree with their perspective from commenting on their blogs or turn disagreements into personal, ad hominen attacks - the last refuge of those who have nothing of substance left to say. As a recent piece appearing in the Washington Post (of all places) by associate professor Gerald Alexander at the University of Virginia points out:
"American liberals, to a degree far surpassing conservatives, appear committed to the proposition that their views are correct, self-evident, and based on fact and reason, while conservative positions are not just wrong but illegitimate, ideological and unworthy of serious consideration . . . leading liberal voices have joined in a chorus of intellectual condescension." (Emphasis mine).
As the writer of that piece further notes:
". . . there is no need to take seriously the arguments of 'these people' -- only to plumb the depths of their errors and imagine hidden motives." (Emphasis mine.)
At least more and more folks are noticing.