OK, so in the US conservatism no longer has anything to do with being safe, cautious, pragmatic, realistic, or anti-utopian.
What makes you think conservatism ANYWHERE has anything to do other then maintaining the status quo?
These people are now a bunch of extremists who think that everyone must be allowed to have their guns regardless of the consequences
Anyway, in my view, old-fashioned grumpy conservatives in both the US and elsewhere will almost certainly see these people as extremists or radicals and not as conservatives.
no True Scotsman fallacy again.
It seems wrong to say that conservatives just want to support the status quo. For example, if you had total chaos in a society, the conservatives wouldn’t just accept it and talk about how great it is. They would say this is what human nature is like when you lose the authority of the church, the family, and the state. Conservatives are also often quite nostalgic and look back to a time when things were a lot better than they are now. This is all quite different from just accepting the status quo no matter what it happens to be.
Moreover, it’s just not clear what it means to accept the status quo. Does this mean the status quo in this small town, or this state, or this country, or the whole world? Also, how far back to we want to go? John Zerzan and the anarcho-primitivists often describe themselves as the real conservatives, since they want to go back to what’s normal for human beings. Humans have lived as hunter-gatherers with no state for 99% of the time, so this is the norm for humanity, and real conservatives should favor living this way again.
So I think it’s better to think of conservatives as having particular views about human nature, human possibilities, social institutions and social engineering. Probably the central idea is that human beings are very dangerous creatures and we’ve got to have the right kinds of social institutions and myths to stop them from tearing each other apart. Unlike the fundamentalists, they see this as being much more important than having the right interpretation of Genesis or the correct understanding of the trinity.