People don't agree on what the status quo is - one can perceive it as the situation now, whilst someone else can perceive now as an aberration and prefer the status quo twenty years earlier. That's the problem.Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
Conserving isn't done for the sake of it - although the less persuasive arguments in favour of conservatism do tend to degenerate to that level. It is done in reaction to calls for change, and a conscious decision is made on what to focus on. One isn't ever totally conservative, at least not if the aim is to be taken seriously."Reactionary" is a pejorative, usually used by "progressives" (or revolutionaries/radicals, if you want to start using pejoratives).
Just to make things clear, the above are some reasons why I don't see 'conservative' as a worthwhile definition in serious discussion. It is however too easy to use in political rhetoric to be abandoned altogether. As definition it's worthless, more important is how people differ in how they perceive it. Hence, I presume, this topic.
Bookmarks