Question

In a 2021 column about solipsism, you wrote:
It seems to me that in a significant part of the Haredi world (especially the Lithuanian sector), the solipsistic approach is prevalent….. A Haredi person is generally unwilling to risk his own spirituality or that of his children, for example by sending them to educational institutions where children also study who, in his view, are in a more spiritually deteriorated state, since his mission is first and foremost to take care of his own spiritual condition and that of the circles close to him, even if the price is harm to the spiritual condition of the rest of the world. Therefore he is also generally unwilling to hold meetings with other populations and refrains from contributing to society through military service, employment, and education, since that threatens his own spiritual condition.
 
This sounds like a very softened formulation on your part regarding Haredi society, certainly compared to your later texts.
It gives the impression that you analyzed the ideological foundation behind the Haredi isolationist outlook—based on educational considerations and so on—in an almost apologetic way, or more precisely as a kind of conceptual justification in which the Haredim (in evading the army and work) are just the other side of the coin when it comes to globalism versus solipsism.
 
Have you changed your mind since then?
Did I misunderstand the spirit of what you were saying when I read it?