"Conservative" in that way is the attitude of "wanting to conserve the world as it is in a certain moment".
In those terms, everyone will have anything conservative on them, only in most cases one part overweighs the other one. For some then it's the conservative part, for others that part who keeps its look directed into the future.

I don't suppose anyone is wholly and unswervingly conservative. After all it's impossible to live in the past. The world moves on however much you may resent it and you can't entirely isolate yourself from the current.

I'm afraid I have to say if you are some bigwig with a ton of money, you can live almost in every life circumstance as you want. Why? 'Cause you can make the whole world dance to your pipe.

A few centuries ago, the nobles and royal dynasties had this power. (During the times of the Congress of Vienna, they restored the map of pre-French-revolutional times. Half a century of history thrown into the trash can because they didn't like the results of it...)

The powerful generally want to conserve their power- which is understandable- but they're not necessarily conservative in other matters.

But I wasn't thinking of the powerful. I was thinking of conservative journalists, writers, commentators- people who aren't particularly into power or money but would like the clock turning back to "happier times".

I'm not sure if they're not part of the circle of "power" too and so that's why they argue as they argue or report as they report.
You know, 'cause... if you got a lord who wants the world to remain as it is, socially, does he employ or let someone under his payment live who totally talks the opposite of what the lord has in mind? I don't think so...
In the end, it's also they're afraid of falling down the ladder and being worse off than they're now. So the "cure" to that also gets impregnated into their minds.