'Conservative' has ALWAYS been a code-word for pro-aristocracy, as far back as the days of the fertile cresent. It was well-known and relatively widely acknowledged as such in Greece and Rome c. 2000 BP (Before Present) and then later in England after the Norman invasion. And most incumbents start the transition to 'conservative' as soon as they realize their continued, and increasing, access to power depends on it. Even the nominal 'liberals' are only Very rarely more liberal than socialist, although usually still Somewhat better than the so-called 'conservatives'.
Only a truly balanced system that could keep an emperor, legislature and a judiciary (and often an institutional priesthood thrown in as well for ~leavening) too busy arguing amonst themselves to do almost Anything else, has ever even come close to fixing the problem. And, at that, it assumes a Competent, fair and conscientious emperor as a minimum requirement ... None too likely, nor has it happened for more than one or two reigns in a row, nearly ever, anywhere, at least that I've ever heard of.
(no subject)
Only a truly balanced system that could keep an emperor, legislature and a judiciary (and often an institutional priesthood thrown in as well for ~leavening) too busy arguing amonst themselves to do almost Anything else, has ever even come close to fixing the problem. And, at that, it assumes a Competent, fair and conscientious emperor as a minimum requirement ... None too likely, nor has it happened for more than one or two reigns in a row, nearly ever, anywhere, at least that I've ever heard of.