Depending on how you look at it you could claim most dystopian series are conservative or even reactionary. A prime example is the Empire in Star wars, we're never quite told why they're evil they just are. But then you consider the size of the galaxy and how much stuff they have to run they're pretty damn functional. It's all fun and games for the plucky rebels to take down the evil Empire but then you see the Empire was the only group keeping any sort of order in the galaxy and it's a free for all in the power vacuum. Usually stories end right before this happens and everyone is cheering and happy that the evil bad guy is gone, but have no system set up to replace the now screwed galaxy's daily management.
If you want to dip into the prequels you can point out how the Jedi gave up their ideals over time and became more loosey goosey with things. This lead to Anakin being put in a position of power he never should of been in which lead to them all being killed. Through that lens you could argue that the prequels are a moral lesson about keeping to your traditions and not letting new shiny things lead to your downfall.
One problem you have with politically correct sci fi is they try to write evil characters of an opposite political ideology. They end up writing characters that people come to really like because they're often speaking truths we're not allowed to say in such a climate. I believe it was Dreamfall chapters which included a guy supposed to be evil because he was anti immigration/had racial bias. He became the most popular character of the first episode and the writer was really pissed off about it. The same thing happened with Archie Bunker, Judge Dredd and many others. It turns out people like masculine personalities who will stand up for their ideals even when it's not something they're supposed to agree with in public.
Alternatively you could claim science fiction has never been conservative by it's nature of including women in hostile environments. Basic biological differences mean unless you're planning to populate an area then you don't want to take women over men. Their bodies aren't designed to handle harsh environments and trauma as well as mens are, if you're putting women in front line space combat or sending them to the science fiction version of the North pole's first exploration then you're already fudging biology massively. The only real exception to this is if you need a stronger immune system for some reason. It's one of my big pet hates in science fiction that leans towards the hard side of things. You have all these ideas it's wanting to explore and then you have a 5 foot nothing woman carrying a smart gun around because the author really likes Aliens. I don't know if it's ignorance of biology, just part of fiction so never considered or an active political stance but it spoils things for me. A prime example of this is Day after Tomorrow, Tom Cruise isn't even that big of a guy and yet his co star (who in the movie was supposedly his equal) found the action scene so difficult on her body she broke down and started crying. The reality of the physical differences are just hand waved away even as it's staring people right in the face.
You could go further with this and argue about the social make up of male only groups, female only groups and mixed groups within a military setting but it's hard to find good evidence for this. Talking to squadies you get a lot of stories about the problems it's caused them, but if you look at the media and people at the top they claim it's 100% the best thing ever and there isn't a single problem. I know my mates weren't happy when they had to find 4 more beds in their overcrowded housing because an entire house had to be given to just the 1 female team member to avoid any potential problems. All of this just gets hand waved away in most settings and they make men and women completely interchangeable. I've considered writing some stories with realistic biology in a science fiction setting but I'm concerned with the laws in my region I could suffer legal consequences for it. With "hate speech" type laws if someone was offended a woman was inferior to a man physically then I could face punishment for it. It doesn't matter that studies have shown after 14 years old every (non-disabled) male is stronger than any woman alive by 30-40% depending on the body part. It's simply too taboo and is it really worth risking punishment for a self published novel? Maybe this last sentence says a lot about the state of science fiction and how much we're really allowed to explore these days and why there's a lack of true conservative ideas in the genre.