True Left

"90sRetroFan has summarized that leftist Romanticists draw inspiration from the ancient past, whereas rightists draw inspiration from the traditional past. (He may be able to expand on this point more.)"

I guess you are thinking of this quote:

Rightists have sneakily duped into their camp many people disillusioned with the drudgery of the present-day world and who seek answers in myth and ancient history by crudely associating leftism with modernity and deceptively presenting rightism as the only camp that offers connection with the past. To counter this, the True Left must distinguish itself from the False Left by heavily emphasizing that we too offer a connection with the past – merely not (unlike the rightists) with the traditional past which we justly abhor. The past which inspires us is the romantic past of chances missed, of paths untaken, of the long intellectual legacy of anti-tradition that dates back to ancient times.

You explained the same point very well in your post. The only thing I might put differently is:

"rightists wish to preserve everything from the traditional past on the arbitrary basis of the customs/practices simply having existed in the past. There is no quality judgment there, merely identity."

I would say rightists wish to preserve traditions on account of traditions having proven survivable for so long. The survivability of the traditions are the assurance to rightists that the traditions are compatible with natural selection. So rightists do make a quality judgement, just according to Demiurgic standards.

In contrast, that certain superior practices from the past (e.g. Catharism) failed to survive only ascertains their value in our eyes. It proves to us their ultimate incompatibility with natural selection, which we take as a compliment. Which is not to say that everything that failed to survive is superior (of course not, duh!). But something which is superior - which we deduce separately - is almost certain to not last long, because natural selection will not allow it to.

"we open the doors that history has closed so we can take the path that should have been taken all along."

I would say we reopen the doors that natural selection has closed.

"FAIRNESS IN JUDGMENTS is the real principle we yearn for"

This is true, but I also want to emphasize that another possible scenario we are trying to avoid is fairness in judgements but under BAD CRITERIA. For example, if it were decided that the only criterion for judging a civilization is its ability to innovate machines, then to conclude the superiority of Western civilization over all others would be a perfectly fair judgement. It would also be a terrible conclusion. Thus fair judgement alone is insufficient.

So, to clarify, we are not the only ones yearning for fairness in judgements. All absolutists yearn for fairness in judgements. We are distinguished from other absolutists by which criteria we want to be used for fair judgements.