Normally, if you want radical change you become a revolutionary. "Conservatives" or those who want things to stay as they are, need to do nothing at all.

In the 1500's, if you were sick of Catholicism and wanted a lax religion and watered-down liturgy and morality you left your Catholic church and became a Lutheran. You changed your own life and routine, because you weren't content and wanted a change.

Meanwhile, those who were conservative and wanted to stay Catholic got to stay at their local Catholic parish and continue their normal routine.

But after Vatican II, and after the SSPX opened up to Vatican II/Conciliar Rome, everything was inverted, to wit:

Revolutionaries got to "stay where they were", keeping their same routine, location for Mass, etc. and become something drastically different.  (A de-facto or virtual Lutheran in the case of Vatican II, and an Indult attendee in the case of the SSPX Crisis)

While those who only wanted to stay Catholic -- the conservatives -- had to uproot their lives, start and/or attend alternative "Traditional" chapels, etc.

The same is true in the Resistance today. If I want to convince my fellow conservatives to "stay as they are" (i.e., a Catholic, or more specifically today, a Traditional Catholic), I have to convince them to uproot their lives and attend a new chapel.

How unfair, really! How diabolically clever of the devil to invert things this way. Conservatives by their nature do not like change! They are the faithful ones. Their very tendency to be loyal and faithful will make it difficult for them to become "Traditional" (in 1970) or "Resistance" (in 2014).

What we must be are counter-revolutionaries! Counter Revolution understood as the defense of the the Christian Order imposed by God; and the constant attack to the Revolution, this is, every single thing that wants to destroy or upset the Divine order of Christendom.

 What is the difference between a conservative, a traditionalist, and a counter-revolutionary?

 Normally, a conservative is understood as someone who wants to conserve what he has by a question of habit. So, in face of the Revolution in the Church that changes everything, he opposes part of it because it breaks his habits and destroys what he is comfortable with. His opposition, however, does not have deep roots because it is not supported by principles. For this reason, with the passing of time, the conservative shifts little by little to the left. Yesterday, for example, he was opposed to pop music in the churches, today he approves the Masses with rock ‘n’ roll at the World Youth Days.

 The traditionalist is a person who in face of the changes in the Church – Vatican II, the new Morals, the New Mass, the new liturgy, etc – wants to return to the time before Vatican II. That is, to the time when tradition was respected and there were good Morals, good customs, pious churches and devotions, the Tridentine Mass, of course, and many other salutary things. To return to this ideal, some want to go back to the time of Pius XII, others to the time of Pius XI, others even further. But even if they are inspired by principles, they do not see the entire picture. They do not place themselves inside the scenario of a centuries-old fight.

 The counter-revolutionary is that person who, in face of the modern changes in the Church, wants to destroy the very source of these changes. He sees the changes as being the goal of a bad current – Progressivism – which is the heir of another bad current – Modernism – which was the heir of Liberalism. In its turn, Liberalism was linked to a whole ensemble of other currents that were inspired and supported by groups and associations that always worked and fought against the Catholic Church and Christendom. This movement is the Revolution.

 So, the counter-revolutionary is that person who sees the whole Revolution behind the present-day changes in the Church and wants to destroy it. He wants to establish in the Church and in the civil society the very opposite of what the Revolution desires. This would be an order that would be traditional, but it is a kind of traditionalism that is always in the militant position of counter-attack against evil.

http://www.traditioninaction.org/History/F_001_RCR_ASG.html