No no sillyo. I am not talking about revolution vs reform. Talking about something quite different. There is the stereotype common people who willingly uphold the power are stupid. The idea is anyone who can reason would conclude the power is a purely narcissist force who only aim for control. Stereotypes indeed rarely if ever hold up when put to the test and this is no exception. In a quite well known book there is a character named Syme. Syme is one of the people behind creating newspeak. Syme is a very intelligent person and sees right through the party yet he is one of the most orthodox and loyal followers of the party. He constantly talks about how his work is helping the party limit the range of thought. With every cell in his body he supports and actively contributes to a system that only aims to control him. The party ends up vaporizing him for knowing too much even though he was one of the most loyal and orthodox person around.
The conclusion of many more traditionalist beliefs in theory seems to be totalitarianism as we know it. Traditional has a prerendered concept of what society should look like and demands it conforms to that shape no matter what. It demands leaders who have these views ingrained into them and demands power gets exercised to enforce this image. Laws exist only for the reason of upholding this image. To pass bills the only available framework is arguing for how it will contribute to upholding the image. How come is it that the traditionalists would bother to even make pricy jails when their supporters would be perfectly happy shooting the unemployed? Go ahead and search up morals. Morals has a quite bending meaning as it only aims to define what is right and wrong in the context of any given system. So many people who bluntly only support the demands of traditionalist at the same time will preach freedoms and liberties. These freedom and liberties seem to fundamentally clash with everything traditionalism stands for.