One key for many conservatives and for TC in particular, is their approach to/dismissal of the notion of progress? Progress itself could mean several things. One conservative view of progress is that people are now, and always will be, the same. Clearly there are changes from generation to generation, but are they significant? Caldwell would say no, they aren't. Her novels are full of historical asides to justify this position. Yes, if we go from some species of primates to humans, the differences are significant. I don't know anyone who doesn't agree. Yet the subtler variations between generations as described by her in her novel "Dynasty of Death," don't seem to be changes in generations, but rather a change in the position of those of a different generation from that of their forebears. Can a whole generation change substantially and significantly, from a previous generation, and if so how, in what categories would we measure that and under what circumstances would we think it might last?
To see this working, head to your live site.
Search
A great comment that raises the question: what are the factors underlying the large and meaningful changes within a generation or so of a single family/dynasty such that they reverberate on society as a whole and thereby represent some lasting historical shift - sometimes referred to as progress?
Within a family dynasty or generation, a sudden rise in wealth will be the leading cause of lasting, impactful change. Behind the rise in wealth then lie the wars (key examples in Europe being the 30-Years War, the Napoleonic wars, and the 2 World Wars) and their long-lasting impact on industry and technology. Not that TC would say this is right or good (or that “might makes right”), but she would probably say “what does right or good have to do with it?” This seems to be the stuff behind TC novels like Dynasty of Death among her others work.