Even if the radicals and revolutionaries succeed in destroying the evolved traditions, the raw ingredients, which they attempt to use to form their new societies, will themselves naturally evolve more or less the same wine-making and cooking techniques all over again, because human nature does these things.
It is better to carefully revitalize the customs and traditions, reforming yet conserving, or even revitalizing as a means to conserve, which seems far more reasonable, practical and possible than attempting to start all over again from scratch.
The forms of wine and cooking techniques will vary from one people to another, as Burke’s “Chartered Rights of Man” develop from a peoples’ historic experience. Destroying customs and traditions dehumanizes men. The savage and the brute–and not the noble savage–lurks beneath the evolved customs and traditions.
A good society needs not only good laws but also religion, tradition, customs and the complex relationships that make up the ingredients of a successful, healthy society.
It is the revolutionaries and radicals who think that perfection is possible, who therefore destroy the long-evolved things, attempting to make more perfect things from simple ingredients, which they never accomplish.
Contrary to what the modern liberals say, conservatives are not against change, change is seen as the way nature works. When conservatives seek to modify the strange and ugly alterations to custom and tradition, they are following nature, where 99 of 100 new mutations don’t survive.
It turns out that traditions, customs and ethics are founded on permanent human nature, more or less, which includes such traditional things, seen in virtually all cultures, as gender differences, territoriality, kin-centeredness, monogamy, hierarchy and even xenophobia. Modern science, e.g. sociobiology or evolutionary psychology, have now affirmed this view of human nature. The traditionalists, at last, can claim science as affirming the basis of traditions and customs.
However, we cannot rush to found our entire worldview on science, since we adjust culture and politics to nature, including human nature, with its many arts and mysteries, and we do not merely adjust to science, which is only a part of human nature. Science alone is like one of those basic ingredients before they are developed into fine cooking or fine wine. The Enlightenment, for example, tried to base their new societies on basic, uncooked ingredients, such as science alone, and this eventually led to the monstrosities of communism, fascism and decaying liberal democracy.