I would disagree somewhat. Conservatives have a spectrum of beliefs, unlike liberals who strive for philosophical purity.
Much of what conservatives argue about among themselves has to do with what drives their “flavor” of conservatism. Here are some of the different motivations, of which there is considerable overlap:
1) “Classical” conservatives. They see the purpose of government as being managerial, not innovative. They are overall content with the status quo, whatever it is, not wanting radical change in any direction, only gradual, methodical change, except with situations that are intolerable.
2) “Religious” conservatives. They are unsatisfied with popular or relativistic ethics, or the embrace of man-made laws when they contravene the morality of religious laws.
3) “Business” conservatives, who truly appreciate President Harding’s statement that “The chief business of the American people is business.” This group has endless subgroups that reflect the complexity of economics, but otherwise are least likely to integrate the views of non-business conservatives.
4) “Militarist” and “Law & Order” conservatives. They believe that the primary purposes of government is to defend the nation as a whole from external or internal threats, with everything else being somewhat superfluous. W. Bush took this to the extreme, with his War on Terror lashing out at terrorists around the world (good), but also with the promulgation of a police state directed at innocent American citizens at home (not so good), seeing grand threats within that did not exist. They always vote for more money for the Pentagon, the 16 intelligence agencies, and the 100+ federal police agencies.
5) “Libertarian” conservatives. The least appreciated of the conservatives, they really reject the idea of the federal government involving itself directly in the lives of the citizenry at all, instead of through the states. And many do not wish to be annoyed by the states, or corporate entities, either.
6) “Social and Secular” conservatives. An unusual blend of other groups, for the most part rejecting everything leftist, but very dubious about religion as well, though embracing many of its goals. Miscellaneous.
7) “Faux and fake” conservatives, which includes the Eisenhower-era “Country Club” Republicans, the modern RINOs, the “Beltway Bandits”, consultants and spin doctors, lobbyists and corporate proxies, bureaucrat Mandarins and functionaries, and perpetual lickspittles and hangers-on.
8) Yes, I undoubtedly missed some.
Same thing with libs, at least the rank and file, is filled with competing interests (environmentalists, union workers, blacks, gays). It is the nature of the game for both parties.
You can certainly sift out who is conservative and who is not from that bunch. Libertarians cannot be, by definition; while I hear lots of claims towards applying the constitution as written, I hear nothing about the intent of the Founding Fathers (some liberal twisted falsehoods, but never “private morality” or other such things).
Meanwhile, the left greatly rallies around Marx’s twisted philosophies—liberals without realizing it, which makes them easy for the hard leftists to control. That uniformity can be a strength, but it also makes them enemies of the true higher power.
No, conservative is pretty simple, it is liberals who want to try and pretend that someone can be a traditional, conservative American while accepting things that would have gotten them lynched and thrown into asylums in the past, things like abortion on demand, homosexualizing the military, “gay marriage” legalizing and openly advertising Sodom and Gomorrah debauchery etc.