I guess I don’t see conservatism as a political construct but more a condition of the individual’s soul. Again, the constitution is fine as originally written and will enable the order you describe if the voters have their heads and hearts right. You can’t force that from the top down.
Your beef is with the progressivism of the past 150 years and more specifically with its author, the Old Man, the Father of Lies of the Old Testament. It certainly isnt with me or most of those like me.
That depends entirely on how one defines Conservatism - In the greater sense, in the light of great minds (No doubt, Kirk and Burke in modernity) Conservatism is a defined set of principles leading to a way of life - the mindset you infer... But Conservatism as it touches politics, that defined by Goldwater and Reagan is certainly a political construct, and an offshoot of that greater set.
There is a reason why Conservatism (as it touches politics) is not merely civil libertarianism... But includes fiscal, defense, and social aspects too.
For an example of how wrong it can go without those principles, one need look no further than what has happened to classic liberalism as historically defined, as compared to the liberalism of today. The very same is happening to Conservatism, as folks try to hyphenate what it is.
And no - I do not have any beef with you. I agree with you as much as anyone on this board. It is more the children that are spawned from yet another hyphenated movement that will not know from whence these principles come (taken for granted when not defined), or that they understand them at all. Hence the charge of bumper-sticker sloganeering.
In FACT, words mean things.
