I took some time to go back and read through this thread. The variety of directions it has gone has been interesting, if uninformative. Going back to my initial query, I began to wonder if there were, indeed, still conservatives at all, or if conservatism has always been a chimera. What I mean by that is that "conservatives" - going back to the early users of that term - have always appropriated concepts that did not, and do not, support their political actions.

I'll take as an example, "classical liberalism." The implications of that phrase are two-fold: First, implying long-held, thus ancient principles; second, that it is informed by "liberal" thought. I will assert here that friend Hatrack does aspire to some aspects of this in his libertarian views on social issues - LGBTQ rights and such. That is commendable, and noted. But, the phrase is more broadly and inaccurately used by neoconservatives to disguise a rather abusive and controlling mindset. There are numerous other examples I have noted in the past.

I, personally, prefer the position that Hatrack first espoused: Conservatives seek to conserve. It is a nice, concise, and understandable turn of phrase, and therefore laudable. But, in perusing history, and current usage, I find that it is not, and never has been, actually true. There are certain things that have been sought to be preserved - mostly privilege - but in other respects they are indifferent to conservation. Is, for example, drilling in the Alaskan wildlands "conservative"? Isn't preservation of pristine lands more conservative? Is preserving the gerrymander a conservative principle? Isn't protecting the right to vote and equal application of the law a more conservative principle? Similarly, how is unfettered money in politics a conservative principle? I am confused by these and other "principles" espoused by "conservatives".

Perhaps a few examples of the conservative viewpoint (as opposed to the "conservative" viewpoint) might be in order. Is it more than "keeping things the way they are (even if they are decidedly unfair)"? Or are there larger principles at work. I am genuinely interested.