It's like I keep saying, in this day and age reactionarism qualifies as an actual mental disorder. Their cognitive process takes whatever shortcuts it needs in order to adapt their beliefs to their opinions instead of the opposite. They legitimately are not guided by reason. It can be said that reason itself is subverted to defend impulses and drives, like an ego defense mechanism which doesn't let them ever feel the slightest hint of mental distress. Have you ever noticed how reactionaries never seem beset by doubts? That's why. This is distinct from cognitive dissonance, mind you. Everyone has been guilty of that every once in a while. But when you notice it or has it pointed out to you, that dissonance dies in your mind -- you might act petty and pretend you still believe in your point, but that belief is gone. Not so with the pathological reactionary. He can continue believing what he wants to believe, no matter how clear the contradiction, because the cognitive impairment that defines him effectively decouples belief from knowledge. That's genuine doublethink. And since his beliefs can change at the drop of a hat, it follows that he has no real beliefs in the first place. That's why reactionaries are, almost to a fault, perennial hypocrites. They are literally incapable of acting or speaking in good faith, because they are incapable of actually having faith the way a normal person understands it.
This but unironically. Since he is driven by base impulses given a thin veneer of rationality, in Freudian terms, it can be said he have weak or no superego, and thus the ego is the only thing mediating his base impulses. This entails a fundamental aversion to civilization, as it places arbitrary limits on his freedom of action. In practical terms, it means they don't have moral considerations when deciding something, only practical considerations. In short, if they think they can get away with something, they will do it. Although this seems in practice to be the same as sociopathy, the mechanism is distinct. Unlike the latter, the reactionary sociopath is perfectly capable of feeling empathy and compassion, but his cognitive deficit makes it extremely easy to bypass these emotions and spare him the distress caused by these feelings. It's not amorality so much as dismorality.
I really can't emphasize this enough. The disconnect between word and deed at the base of the bourgeoisie ascension is crucial for their legitimacy, as they had to enroll people into their cause without actually fully enfranchising them. But, in typical fashion, they have abused this beyond all shame, and the result is that, now, legitimate sociopathic behavior is masked as political position. This has being going on for so much time that it now presents a legitimate risk to civilization, since pathological reactionaries have normalized their aversion to civilization as an acceptable political position. Mankind cannot afford to play this pretense anymore. We have to adapt our rhetoric now to make it clear that reactionarism is simply no longer acceptable in the modern world, and treat them for what they are, not rivals or even adversaries, but legitimate threats to society.