If a Regressive is a Fascist, What is "Conservatism"?

Once one's Egalitarian faith is broken, there are two possible reactions. One is to reject the breaking, and the other is to accept it. 

The dispirited theocrat can either try to squeeze more Communism out of the world, or surrender to the world's alleged imperfection. I would say there's a zealot/non-zealot distinction, but "conservatives" are still zealous, emotionally speaking. The distinction is more about immanent Fascism vs. transcendent Fascism. 

If you ask a "conservative" they'll often say a perfect realm must be run by angels. If you get details you'll find "Christian" "conservatives" think God runs Heaven as a Communist utopia. They will tell you - albeit not in so many words - the world is "fallen" because you can't perfectly implement Communism in a physical country. You can often get a "conservative" to admit the races aren't equal, for example, but they will consider it a tragedy. "In Heaven we will be stripped of our sinful flesh, and thus there will be no further obstacles between us and Equality." (Secular "conservatives" think the same thing but don't believe in Heaven.)

"Men and women aren't the same (but it would be better if they were)." That sort of thing. 

You will never get them to admit to inequalities that are most relevant to their own lives. They will never admit there is a King, and that King is strictly a better person than they are. It is as obvious as the sun rising in the morning that some are natural slaves. Aristotle mentioned it in passing because it no more requires proof than the fact a triangle has corners requires proof. However, you'll never catch a "conservative" admitting it has even occurred to them, let alone observe one accepting it. 

(Everyone is Communist about what they know least - and as such they have to frantically pretend not to know the individuals that they know personally, lest they heretically notice they're un-Equal. Friendship is anti-Fascist.*)

If it often appears the "conservative" is merely a Regressive who is somewhat behind the times, it's because that's exactly what they are. While in particulars Conquest's second law is usually the result of direct legal pressure, the legal pressure is unavoidable because "conservatives" genuinely are a variant of Fascist in the first place. America has no right-wing party. America has leftist groups and slightly-less-leftist groups. When the hardcore Regressives manage to inflict a little more Communism on America, ultimately the "conservatives" are happy about it. They only opposed it because they thought that further slice of Communism wouldn't work. When it turns out worldly pressures cannot immediately douse it, they happily embrace the slightly-less-fallen-than-they-thought world.

In a sense, when Regressives call "conservatives" Nazis, they are correct. The "conservatives" are indeed more Fascist in the sense of being more dispirited. They have surrendered to the sinful world to a greater degree. 

 

Secondarily, the "conservatives" capture the less-fanatic vote. While American peasants are Fascist, they cannot suppress their natural instincts as perfectly as the upper crust can. Their faith in Fascism is often weak, just as the peasantry's faith in Christianity was... imperfect. Devotion is a virtue and like all virtues the peasant's supply of devotion is limited. Their dedication reserves are depleted even before they fully manage daily life, let alone before they can fully act out the bizarre madness a Regressive demands. These heresy-contaminated voters have to be roped into Fascist elections somehow, and "conservatives" are perfectly placed to pretend to be on their side.

The unfortunate part is that "reactionaries" are also merely less-left. When I say America has no right-wing party, I mean it has no right-wing groups at all. Even the monarchists I've seen are merely Fascists in cosplay. 

Fundamentally Cthulu always swims left because every American, without exception, wants him to swim left. Every American, without exception, is upset when he flinches right.

*P.S. Apparently I just worked out why Fascism == narcissism. 

P.P.S. The term "conservative" also needs to be rectified, but my known options don't work on anyone who can't rectify the term themselves. Transcendent Regressive? Nobody who hasn't read this post knows about the transcendent/imminent divide among Regressives. (See also: many that have read it.) Masochist Regressive? Again, references those who remember a specific post from some years ago. Non-observant Regressive? Refers to a post that doesn't exist, also involves two inferential steps and has too many syllables.

Anyway the point is to know what the thing is. The name is just a crutch. I suppose I shall continue calling them Regressives and less-left-Regressives.To be honest only Regressives need care about the difference, so perhaps I need not talk about them at all.