This is an excellent description of Western Conservatism that no longer exists. In America particularly conservatism has been replaced by reactionary denialism. I’m beginning to think that this is not just a current aberration but an indicator of a much larger change.
As described here political conservatism emerged as the continuous critique of political evolution in early modern Europe. This is a formalization of tradition as the criteria by which to judge change. This was the center of value judgement in human experience for most of our existence on this planet.
In this sense it was and is the tension against change that forces a new process or idea to prove itself in reality and over time before full adoption. In the long, slow change of the last 100,000 years this has dominated human thought and enhanced survival.
Why has this failed? Growing up in America of the 1950s and 60s there was always a valid, conservative component to our political life. Careful change could come from either party and impulsive errors could also come from either party. That simply meant that conservatism and progressive action was spread throughout the political system. I think it is safe to say that this ended somewhere around the rise of Reagan and conquest of one party by an elite with oligarchy as it’s goal. But that is another topic.
Conservatism has died and what has taken its place in the 21st century is something else. Briefly I think this is the result of the increase in the rate of change producing a qualitative difference that invalidates tradition as a useful criteria to judge change. This also distorts the view of nature and limitations of rationality.
The result is, not the hijacking of conservatism by pseudo nationalists, but the need to find and enshrine a new criteria by which to constrain dangerous aspects of continuous change.
At least this is where I think we are going but I am open to suggestions.