I often think about this "Trail of Blood" historical timeline that I've seen in Baptist churches. It clearly shows the inevitability that each established church will later split as it's more Bioleninist members take a swing leftwards to establish new power and authority.

I sometimes try to picture this timeline of Christian churches within an even greater timeline of Western religious thought from Mesopotamia to 100 years hence. Each established authority represents a moment when a norm was established but others would later "progress" past it.

Looking at this timeline I feel the futility of the "conserve" part of "conservatism". Change is constant, authority is fleeting. If you aren't moving "forwards" then you are standing still and becoming a distant reference point on the trail of blood. This is the left's strength.

The lie of progressivism though is the same lie as the Whig view of history; that we are progressing to something better and better with every reformation and revolution. We are certainly always progressing, but certainly not inevitably towards utopia.

The nature of man is to raise one's power. This is why trying to conserve status quos or glorifying the past is useless. Man will always create splits to grasp opportunities of power. Those not of the left need to present something constantly to progress towards to stand a hope.

Anybody who tries to conserve the present (or the past) is doomed to become a half-forgotten dot on the timeline above as distant as the Montanists or Arnoldists. To obtain and keep power you must be thinking of what is the next split and how to position yourself there.