The conservatives do not look at “reason” for deducing their political norms—they look at historical practices and institutions. I support the conservative method, because the history of last 250 years shows that the movements that are based on reason tend to become totalitarian. One man’s reason can be, and often is, in conflict with the reason of other men and this inevitably leads to a conflict of wills within the movement. There is a temptation in the leader of such movements to project himself as a perfectly rational being. To overcome the conflict of wills in his movement, the “self-proclaimed perfectly rational leader” propagates the view that he is the voice of reason, and all those who oppose him are the enemies of reason—thus he establishes a totalitarian enterprise. The conservative way of treating the historical practices and institutions as the fountainhead of political norms usually leads to much better outcomes for a nation.