I'm aware there are degrees of conservatism. You can be socially conservative and economically liberal, for example. I'm talking about the main policies of social and economic conservatism.

I'm not really interested in the psychological question of what conservatives believe, since their beliefs can be rationalizations. Nor am I interested in the rhetorical question of what conservatives say to convince others that they should be conservatives. Again, my reconstruction focusses on the actual effects of the main conservative policies. That takes us to the real-world essence of conservatism, not to the minds or to the rhetoric of conservatives. Do you see the difference?

So if we're using you as an example, I'd ignore what you say you believe, because I'm not a therapist and I'm not interested in rummaging through the contents of your mind. I'd ask you to state what you think are the core conservative principles and policies. Then I'd describe the world that would be created by the enactment of those policies, and I'd gauge the extent to which the social structures in that world would vary from those found in the wild, minus the human trappings.

I appreciate how you revealed the animality lurking below the surface, with your personal attacks, but there was no need to be so generous. I can handle your objections without you giving the game away.