The interesting thing about Conservatism is that both the Federalists AND the Democratic-Republicans can be viewed, from different angles, as having represented conservatism.
In some respects, Conservatism bears a resemblance to religious fundamentalism. You look back to the supposed “good old days”, and reject proposed innovations on that basis. The Federalists were looking back to their heritage as Englishmen, and a strong executive was simply an analogue of a King and Parliament (that consisted solely of aristocrats).
The Democratic-Republicans (called simply “Republicans” most of the time back then; this was the Party Jefferson founded) were looking back to an age before strong kings, when feudal lords and farmers ruled the countryside without interference from outside their small realms. One could even take this back, perhaps, to the Germans (Goths, if you will). The less government, the better. One later Republican–John Randolph–went as far as to say that the best legislature is that one which spends all their time sleeping, and that government best that governs not at all.
The interesting thing about Fundamentalism, is that they are almost invariably looking back to an era that never actually existed. They are looking back to a period when people articulated principles which they held, in theory, but which–being human–they frequently failed to actually follow. Jefferson’s anti-slavery rhetoric is so compelling one could easily forget he owned slaves his whole life.
Fundamentalism, then, is actually a sort of cultural creativity which capitalizes its legitimacy by appealing to a mythical past, which can consist of whatever most suits the case you are trying to make.
I find this unsatisfying. Can we not look back, see what SHOULD have been the case–understand what we would want, today, to be the case–and pursue it, without lying to ourselves? Can we not take the PRINCIPLES they articulated, and define them anew, in our current context, knowing we are equally likely to fail, but in new and better ways?
This is what I like to call Liberalism. I see nothing at all with trying to improve the world. In fact, I view that as our job. We simply have to be smart about it, and this includes circumspection, study, and gradualism. These, themselves, are conservative values, but the intent, I would argue, is what the Liberals (when I say this I mean Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill and others of their temperament) had in mind.