Conservatives (not the tribal brand, actual meaning) are only correct by accident:
The philosophy is founded upon appeal to tradition which is a logical fallacy. They will fire up their brains sometimes and rationalize excuses in a reactionary defense which is inherently flawed and anti-science; rather than use their brains to discover truth, they do what feels good (often selfish) then use their brains to excuse what is arrived by thoughtlessness.
Contradiction, hipocracy and distraction a constant problem for them - for some (now a majority) they give up that fight and just embrace it. Their #1 representative believes it's a virtue and you are weak if you limit yourself to sound reasoning and this has accelerated the adoption of what is beyond even comic book villain monologues.
Crime is largely controlled by conservatives defending their profits by using fear and tactics of "the other." They should be called "right" rather than the better sounding "conservative" label, they prefer "conservative" because they can make up principled arguments for that. Facts do not actually matter, unless they are useful props along with the lies, it doesn't matter it's just another tool for maintaining their position.
The "right" historically was the right hand man of the wealthy establishment who serve the powerful above all else; to most, it's corrupt - to them, it's protecting their small group of people from the masses who they fear will ruin their advantages. USA's "conservative" today is stripped clean of principles and constantly demonstrate that they are rightwing stooges.
The "right" comes from France where they literally kept brawling and nothing got done so the pro-king establishment was put on the right side with moderates separating from the left side republicans (term vs name are now ironic) just to keep them from killing each other... just for a while because the two sides were killing each other often in those days. Back in those days, the wealthy ruling elite were connected with monarchies which is why republicans were against the rich kings, but today we have dictators and wealthy ruling elites (some with more cult status than a king) which serve the same purpose. It's a shame that republics / republicans ONLY means no-king because severely limits the scope of the problem so many people fought against for centuries. It's more dangerous now as more people believe they can someday join the royal family if they just make enough money or marry the right person (we've not come too far from back then have we?) This is why USA Republicans look so much like a contradiction in terms.