[Psudo]

Four years and a month ago, I wrote a post in an entirely different forum describing different types of conservatism. I had just read a book that had made some of the classifications, and was rather fascinated by it. Since then, I've reformed it, forgotten it, and rediscovered it repeatedly. Today I want to revisit that thinking.

People who call themselves conservatives can be one of the following types identifiable by their conclusions and based on their reasoning and background. Of course, several of them claim to be "true", "pure", or "ultra-" conservatism at once despite some mutually exclusive issue positions.
Paleoconservatives - claiming heritage back to the Roaring 20s, Teddy Roosevelt/Howard Taft days, and even 19th century anti-federalists, the paleo- believes that America and Americans are great as they are. Leading the world is unnecessary, international trade is unnecessary, and immigration is unnecessary, but holding to traditional American values, opposing communism and it's states, preserving American sovereignty against international/UN authorities, and protecting the prosperity of domestic industry are all sacrosanct.
New Conservatives - originally a small movement of anti-Communists in the 30s, a new conservative movement began with conservative university students looking to establish a more consistent philosophy devoid of the KKK racism of "old" conservative views. It quickly gained ground as a backlash against the hippy, anti-war movement of the 1960s. It speaks of God to defy communists rather than adhere to Christianity, demands a small, unobtrusive government, commends law and order, and welcomes immigrants willing to assimilate with open arms. They generally think things will work out alright so long as we stay the course and don't make hasty decisions. After 80 years, the name "new" doesn't really apply, so I typically refer to them as mainstream or standard conservatives. That also helps differentiate them from...
Neoconservatives - these johnnies-come-lately were the progressives in the roaring 20s and perhaps even during WW2... until the living skeletons of the Nazi concentration camps were discovered. Then they reworked their entire belief system based on a new absolute truth: Hitler should have been stopped sooner. This forced them into an aggressive, international activist kind of military policy and a sense of American duty to prevent horrors even if they must act unilaterally. Their domestic views moved slightly to protect against the kind of government abuse of it's citizenry seen in Nazi Germany, but still range generally from progressive to moderate.
Big Business Republicans - even amid the financial crisis, a quarter of the world's 100 largest companies and a fifth of it's wealth lie in the United States. The business of America is business, and a good chunk of political thinking in the United States wants these businesses and their industries to thrive and grow. They want government to give business whatever it needs to achieve those ends; lower taxes, more subsidies, and political issues they can sell. They'll oppose environmental regulations until they are already following them and their competitors are not, then they'll use the government like an anti-competitive weapon while hocking their compact florescent light bulbs. What helps them all helps the nation's economy, but they'll always be looking for government to give them a leg up on each other.
Right-Wing Libertarians - our government shouldn't be interfering in our lives, socially nor economically, nor in foreign governments' affairs. But maybe a temporary, minor exception would be OK if it effectively keeps the peace or preserves public morality. But the economy is sacrosanct. Even centralized banking, government emergency services, and national forests and parks are potentially suspect. It might've been a bad idea to give up the gold standard, too.
Religious Right - (in character) Since Patrick Henry advocated for Christianity as the official national religion and Ben Franklin called for prayer at the Constitutional Convention, this has been a God-fearing nation. We fought slavery to the tune of the Battle Hymn of the Republic. Even the modern idea of religious tolerance is a byproduct of the various sects learning to get along together in the New World after escaping the violence of the Old World. This is a (Judeo-)Christian nation, and as long as we live by God's commandments, provide charity, and keep ourselves and the media sexually pure, God will grant us the peace and prosperity to be the city on a hill, the beacon of hope and righteousness to the world.
Republican Moderates - it's important to have a consistent ideology as the basis of one's political beliefs, but it's not so important as actually passing laws and running the country. In the interest of moving forward, it's necessary and right that we occasionally make ideological sacrifices in trade, to gain popular support, to make friends, or to keep our party in power. Pragmatism is the ultimate principle. Critics call them "RINOs", Republicans In Name Only. I disagree: they are the true Republicans, putting loyalty to party (or opposition to Democrats) above loyalty to ideology.

Asking a conservative for issue positions can help determine which type they are. Keep in mind that these are abstract philosophies personified, and that people are typically more complex. A real conservative is probably some compromise between these.
- Paleos may support trade regulations and oppose legal immigration rate increases whereas standard conservatives will not.
- Business Republicans will support corporate subsidies and bailouts, whereas standard conservatives will not.
- Right-wing libertarians might support legalized marijuana or prostitution, or an end to the Federal Reserve whereas standard conservatives will not.
- Moderate Republicans might advocate in favor of abortion, no-fault divorce, gay marriage, or the National Education Administration. Standard conservatives will not.
- A standard conservative might reason that we went into Iraq for the wrong reasons but not that we're there we have to stay. A neocon will say the perception of a threat was enough; it's better safe than sorry. As a reverse of that, a neocon might reason that an openly gay soldier should be allowed to continue his work as a translator in Iraq, whereas a standard conservative will reason that "rules are rules" (or worse) and dishonorably discharge the guy.
- A Religious Righter would oppose a Muslim placing their hand on a Koran instead of a Bible for a swearing in. A standard conservative would not.
- A paleo might oppose the war in Iraq (or Afghanistan or Vietnam), whereas a neocon will not.
- A business Republican might support an industrial regulation if it mandates the use of something industry makes. A paleo will oppose the industrial regulation on principle.
- A right-wing libertarian will defend illegal immigration on the basis that immigration law was wrong. A paleo will not.
- The Religious Right would advocate for a constitutional amendment certifying that the United States is a Christian nation. A paleo would oppose that amendment; either it always was one and the change is unnecessary, or it never was and should never be.
- A business Republican would advocate for international standards for labelling, shipping, and other trade infrastructure. A paleo would oppose those rules.
- A business Republican would advocate for dramatically reduced taxes even if it created a federal budget deficit, whereas a neocon would call for "fiscal responsibility" in order to leave the tax rate as it is.
- A neocon would support environmental regulations on industry, whereas a libertarian would oppose them.
- A neocon would never call the war on terror a "crusade" or a "religious war" or claim all Muslims are culpable, but a Religious Righter would.
- A Republican moderate might agree to a date to bring the troops home. A neocon absolutely will not.
- A business Republican would support corporate bailouts or subsidies. A right-wing libertarian would not.
- A business Republican would oppose the prohibition of alcohol sales on Sunday as advocated by a Religious Righter.
- A moderate Republican might propose tougher consumer protection regulations or a corporate tax increase to balance the budget. A business Republican would oppose both.
- A libertarian would advocate against ratings on TV, movies, and video games, whereas the Religious Right would advocate for them.
- A libertarian would want the Federal Reserve dissolved, whereas a moderate Republican would never support that.
- The Religious Right would support the overturn of Roe v. Wade, while a moderate Republican would take a carefully-worded moderate stance.

I wish I knew some similar classification of the ideology of the US left/Democrats.