A follow-up

Though not debated here, my previous post stirred up some criticism. I admit that, being nothing more than a ramble written in an already rambling English class that was focusing on an extremely rambling novel, it may not be particularly clear.

If my critics glance here again, please, there is no need to be offended. Notice that I did not cite New York; perhaps this was assumed because of the recent comments by John McCain, which caused a stir among members of my department. I did discuss regions, but I even suggested that this was unfair, that I only have a problem with the generality and not the complete population. Whether that generality applies to many or to a vocal few remains to be determined. But I will stand by this: what some have termed coastal condescension is real. It is not a rule, but it does occur. Among certain segments of the Northeast, as well as people who are not from the Northeast but identify with their impression of it, there is a tendency to frown upon the interior. The flyover states.

But I cannot stress enough that I did not mean to direct anything toward general resident populations of the Northeast or anywhere else. This blog exists for one purpose: to discuss the Academy, primarily American universities, the way scholarship develops, the way it can be biased or misguided by various philosophies, and especially the way learning takes place. And insofar as this is centered around academics, as in, people who work in the Academy, then it does not at all refer to the general American population.

So while I do address America in the post, perhaps I strayed too much from the core point. If someone reads this and says, fuming, "I am from the Northeast and I am not arrogant," then my critique is not about you. I admit I wrote in gross generalities.

Finally, on judgment. I did not especially ask not to be judged (though I admit I used the word). I asked to be allowed to dissent. I wrote:

I certainly do not ask that the people who make up the Academy change their personal opinions—but I do ask that they not ask this of me.

I am concerned about the illusion of "intellectual freedom" in the Academy, where many assume that intelligent, educated people will reach the same conclusion. For more on this, read my earlier post on the Tyranny of the Majority. And notice that I concluded my English class digression with an afterthought, calling for genuine freedom, bipartisanship but not conformity.

Thank you for your thoughts. I will try my best to be clearer in the future; evidently I left my discussion open for misinterpretation, a fault that surely lies more with the writer than with the reader.