Liberalism will always lead to rebellion, and for a following reason. At the heart of liberalism is compassion for people who have it bad. The person works with, and empathizes with, the people who have it bad – who, by and large, tend to be people at the receiving end of the negativity in the existing order. So then they decide that the problem with the order itself, and they revolt against the order, however good or bad it happens to be.
I don’t think that this is a necessary course of action. It should be possible to accommodate both those at the winning end of the order and those at its losing end without having bloody revolutions. It should be possible to address the concerns of everyone and let the order go on doing what it is doing right while changing what it is doing wrong.
So at the receiving end of negativity by the monarchic Christian order were thinking people, peasants and entrepreneurs. This lead to the Enlightenment period, which promoted reason, democracy and commerce. Receiving the negativity from the Enlightenment order were feelings, nature and art. This lead to the Romantic period, which championed all three.
We see the same thing with more recent orders. At receiving end of 1980s machismo and competitiveness were women and sensitive types. So in 1990s there was militant feminism and New Age. At the receiving end of 1990s feminism were most men and many women. These then formed the reaction against feminism that we see with Eminem, Osama bin Laden and the fathers’ rights movement. In both cases, people came from an understandable place but went very bad. Which then resulted in the people whom they were hurting responding against them.
All of the above came from a legitimate place. But all of the above were bad for some people, who then decided that it itself was the problem. In fact there can be any number of problems for any number of reasons; and the order that causes the problem is not the only thing that can go wrong.
It is therefore important to keep things in historical perspective. Any order is going to come down harder on some people than others. It should be possible to have benefits of both technology and the arts. It should be possible for women to pursue a safe life inside the home and a fulfilling life outside the home. And it should be possible to have benefits of both nature and civilization and make of both the best thing that they can be.
So that while compassion for people who have it bad is justified, what is not justified is losing one’s perspective. There will always be something good about the existing order, and that deserves to be kept. In most cases, the concerns of the people who have it bad can be addressed without toppling the existing order. And that direction stands to be taken instead of seeking a revolution.