Modern liberalism robs you of personal happiness in order to provoke your activism

      The sexual revolution was sweetened with the idea that people who love each other will be unhindered by needing to be married in order to express affection.

The assumption was - sex will still be a respectful act and will only make people happier and freer.

This quickly spiraled down into a push to desensitize sexual activity. Free sex would unhinge social shackles. If one feels disturbed that they crossed a line in their sexual behavior, the remedy for that was decidedly not to listen to one's feelings and put limits on one's behavior,  but to quash these feelings by engaging in ever more free sex.

The assumption changed to -  if you feel disturbed by promiscuity, someone brainwashed you to feel that.  

The so called solution was to suppress your modesty, your boundary-feelings, the very feelings that should have alerted you to a crossed boundary.

Sexual repression was replaced with feeling repression.

The real solution is, in Jordan Petersen's words, "we have to be very very very careful with sex."

Chastity until a committed relationship is probably the best path.

      Interfaith marriage was to reveal the underlying humanity among all people and jettison the shackles of religion when it came to limiting who one can marry. Jew should marry Christian, Catholics should loosen up about whether someone is in communion or outside communion. 

The assumption was -  you can intermarry interfaith and still have a strong  family.

 But this quickly spiraled down into family tensions and a creation of organizations devoted to supporting the intermarried, and ultimately tense, family situation.  

The assumption changed from, you will still have a happy and stable family to: tension is a sign of intelligence. 

 Of course some intermarried families are harmonious, it depends upon the assumptions going into the marriage. I was witness to tension among supposed liberals.

The common thread in the above two examples is that the liberal weltanshaung transformed from an ideal of what can add to people's happiness.

People were not in fact happier.

And since they could not go back to how things were, returning to a chaste culture would be admitting sexual repression, returning to a conservative view of marriage would be an exclusive attitude, the underlying assumption changed to the following:

 If you are too happy you will not be in a state of agitation in order to stage the next social revolution.

 The pursuit of happiness itself was jettisoned.

As usual, the modern liberal lifestyle robs you of personal happiness that results from sexual limits and a strong family in order to goad you into bitterness and agitate socially.

For the liberal relativist, social situations are a tyranny

For the liberal relativist, social situations are a tyranny.

Social situations are a venue for building your platform and for pontificating.

 Off hand comments made in social situations are what is expected to shape your world view, not reading primary sources, not investingating the accuracy of news stories or rumors.

 The modern liberal is conditioned to make conclusions based upon impression and feeling.

Those impressions and feelings are dictated through who is more powerful socially, who is more dominant in a social setting.

 This dominance can take the form of people actually behaving in pleasantly, stroking you to make you feel heard and then coming in with the trump argument that wins you over due to their charm or due to their dominance in a social situation.

 When I met the Chassidic Rabbi in Burlington Vermont, all those years ago,  he brought me a piece of paper and a magic marker and asked, "could you please write a sign for me, my English isn't so good."

In a split second I realized - this guy cannot manipulate me. He had spoken Yiddish at home, Arabic on the streets of Morocco, and gone to Brooklyn to yeshiva at the are of 13.

English was his third language, but it was more than that, he spoke straight, with no packaging or manipulation.

On that Sabbath afternoon, he pulled out a five books of Moses and started learning with a visitor. The question came up, how could Jacob our forefather ask for a sign from God, was not that a sign of lack of faith?

 The Rabbi said, "Jacob was a tzaddik (saint) so it  must have been okay."

The visitor said, "you can't say that, him being a tzadik makes the question okay? You can't say that."

The rabbi furrowed his brow and stroked his beard in thought.

He was not trying to outsmart anyone, get them to be on his team or vote for his party or get someone to be his activist.

He was just sharing greater truths that were infinitely larger than him. and that made him act kindly in an interpersonal manner - unhlike the liberals I had grown up with.

When your world view is shaped by off handed comments made in social situations, nothing is really true, nothing is likewise false, so accuracy is less important than your delivery and ability to impress.

"Liberals have it easy, follow liberal ideology no matter how much blood is spilled" - paraphrase from the book Holy Days.

Better to be connected to higher truths than ideologically possessed and pushing an agenda, an agenda that may not even be so good for you.