The Scope of Conservatism and Liberalism

Here's a thought.  More of a thought experiment -- just a starting point.  The idea is that conservatism, at least in the U.S., is a populist movement while liberalism is a magisterial movement.  That's reformation-type of language.  Some history might be useful here.


Liberalism in the US was the grander system of governance proposed.  Self-government itself is a liberal concept and the US was largely influenced by the several French schools.  Certainly Rousseau among others.

But how did conservatism come to the U.S?  Russel Kirk calls ours a conservative revolution as it found strong popular support in the positions of Edmund Burke.  For instance, in dealing with the matter of excessive taxation ...

Soon, Burke became embroiled in a different political controversy. He and other Whigs charged the advisors of King George with funding the election of "placemen" to seats in the House of Commons. The king had appointed these individuals to government-paid jobs that had few or no real duties. Burke claimed that these "friends of the king" were conspiring to control the House of Commons and Pitt’s government.
Although historians tend to doubt this "conspiracy" amounted to much, Burke wrote a pamphlet on what he believed was royal tampering with the traditional roles of king and Parliament. "When bad men combine," he wrote, "the good must associate, else they will fall, one by one." 

And this not far from the position of today's Tea Party or the specifically "social" conservative movement.

I seems that, at least at first glance, the tax revolt represented popular and commercial "conservative" ideals while the actual governing structure was "liberal" in philosophy.  At least in today's language.

I wonder if the tension we have today is just a continuation of a tension that existed two centuries ago.  Your thoughts?