Arrogance – ORIGIN late Middle English : via Old French from Latin arrogant– ‘claiming for oneself,’ from the verb arrogare; from ad– ‘to’ + rogare ‘ask.’

*

A person can think he is the best at something and not be arrogant. The question is whether he values superiority enough that he would acknowledge and honor a superiority that he cannot claim for himself. If so, he is not arrogant, but excellent.

A person can think he inferior but not be humble. The real question is whether he values superiority that belongs to someone else or resents it because it is not his own. If he resents superiority because he knows he is inferior, his “humility” is actually self-loathing.

*

Arrogance and self-loathing are  two sides of the same coin: the incapacity to love superiority for its own sake, regardless of whose it is. Both love only what can be claimed as one’s individual, exclusive property. Whatever exceeds it is denied.

*

What bothers us about both arrogance and self-loathing is neither is prepared to allow anyone to manifest his own particular form of superiority, in service to others or even themselves, if that threatens its own sense of being unsurpassed.

*

Incidentally: Rogue – ORIGIN mid 16th cent. (denoting an idle vagrant): probably from Latin rogare ‘beg, ask’.

*

Individuals can be arrogant, but nothing is as arrogant as a populist mob. And who do the populist mobs attack? Those they resent. They “go rogue” and indulge in a mass-solipsist arrogance. All mob violence is preceded by invalidation of viewpoints outside of the mob view, denial of any obligation to converse or understand, and finally revocation of human status of the other.