I'd agree that a lot of his positions can be described as intellectually incurious tribalism. I certainly see what you're saying about his various regressive views, but I wouldn't necessarily connect them with any sort of overarching conservative ideology. I think that all just derives, as with all Johnson thoughts, from his personal self-centred lived experience. These things are personally irritating or inconvenient and thus deserving of scorn/mockery/derision. Thinking of them in a deeper, more societally relevent context is simply beyond him to the point where I don't think he's really interested or even capable of systemic -isms.

nb: I am currently tripping a little tonight, so all of the above might be nonsense.