Sorry to hear about the screename snafu. I've had this argument a thousand times, and I'm sure we've hashed it out before.

Now, what you just described - disagreeing with intellectuals - is most certainly not anti-intellectualism. But what I took you to be referring to before was. That is, a sociopolitical culture that mistrusts and mocks people who (1) have academic credentials and (2) use them, along with logical research, to advocate policy positions.

The idea that there is some clique or cabal of harvard-educated wine drinkers who set the norms of liberal discourse is a conservative mythology. What there IS, is what I would prefer to call "cosmopolitanism" which is more or less the dominant liberal culture on most metropolitan areas in the U.S. Its a culture that tends to congregate around universities and is generally an upper-middle class thing. From an outsiders perspective who disagrees with their political views, I can understand how it might look like there are a "class" of "elitist" people who look down on others.

Well, its not such a homogenous group, and our disagreeing with others is (in theory) no more "anti-regular folks" as your disagreeing with us is "anti-intellectual". The difference is, our riposte goes something like, "hey, you people don't have your facts straight" whereas yours is "you're an elitist!"