No, everything isn't relative. But the meaning of a political term can and often does shift over time. "Conservatism" is a concept.
"Conservatism" is a term that embodies the principles that established us as a society and nation; the principles of the Revolution. The principles of the Framing. That includes everything from fiscal responsibility, personal responsibility and morality as rooted in the scriptures and accepted by the Judeo-Christian culture that at one time the people of this nations stood upon as the common foundation for everything that flowed from that.
Since we are no longer a people that share or stand on a common foundation anymore, the very concepts of liberty and freedom itself are now relative and changeable.
As the Founders warned us, a people who are not governed by God, will be ruled by the tyranny of men.
Well here we are. In the midst of the tyranny of men, arguing over definitions that no longer apply to a people that abandoned their foundations for one reason or another.
I'd point out that you yourself have used the term "conservative" with a modifying word -- "social conservatives". What do you call someone who is socially conservative, but who also supports a more activist "generous" government? Or what do you call someone who is conservative in all respects except religious belief. What are they?
The same kinds of people who call themselves "Christian" but believe in homosexual marriage and transgendered rights. They call themselves whatever gets acceptance. Redefine words to mask what they really are and then redefine definitions to remake principles better suited to their lifestyle and wordlview. It doesn't matter that none of those positions reflect the principles of the Founding, because we as a people have already abandoned those principles to sate our own appetites and comfort levels.
Great. So then "conservatives" are really only 10-15 percent of the electorate, and a minority within the GOP , which explains why we don't nominate candidates who fit your definition of "conservative."
True. And yet everyone looks at the symptoms of tyranny and the loss of liberty and blames this group or that group without ever recognizing the actual root cause of the reasons we suffer the miasma of miseries we are experiencing, refusing to even allow themselves to register the warnings of a people destined for subjugation and destruction from within.
A people not governed by the religion and morality that established us, are not a people that are capable of freedom.
Freedom will simply be seen as doing whatever one pleases, and getting away with it. One person's freedom is unabashed sexual conquests and the other person's freedom is imposing Sharia Law on infidels.
No longer any common bridge of foundation to stand upon as a nation.