Emmett Rensin has a fantastic essay The Blathering Superego At The End of History on liberalism for the Los Angeles Review Of Books. Rensin says:
The most significant development in the past 30 years of liberal self-conception was the replacement of politics understood as an ideological conflict with politics understood as a struggle against idiots unwilling to recognize liberalism’s monopoly on empirical reason. The trouble with liberalism’s enemies was no longer that they were evil, although they might be that too. The problem, reinforced by Daily Kos essays in your Facebook feed and retweeted Daily Show clips, was that liberalism’s enemies were factually wrong about the world. Just take a look at this chart …
And Vox and The New Yorker and so on. A good example of this is Paul Krugman’s Ricardo’s Difficult Idea. We are told how silly it is to reject free trade. Heterodox economists can see all this because we know the real history: Keynesian economics overthrown by Friedmanism and neoliberalism.
I also loved the line:
The Clinton campaign believed that it would win because it predicted that it would win, and because the capacity to predict and manage was precisely the competence Clinton’s team was selling. But then Clinton lost. The car crashed in the desert instead.
The article is written keeping in mind the UK referendum on the EU membership (“Brexit”), Clinton’s loss/Trump’s win and Jeremy Corbyn’s rise and liberals’ reaction to it and how what Rensin calls the “intellectual authority” is suddenly ripping away.