It's Harold Ramis, by the way. Great man.
That Slate article was rather baffling to me, but I'm having trouble putting it into words. I think "intense conservatism" is a strong term to describe the article, because I don't know what Weiss really put it together. Weiss does answer the question in his subhed, "Was John Hughes really in favor of teen rebellion?", with a negative, but in retrospect, just who the hell is asking that question? Hughes never made heroes of the rebel-for-rebellion's-sake types.
It occurs to me that the writer wonders how it is that Hughes could grow up so poor and yet turn out so right wing, as if acting against type. How could he fail to embrace the "egalitarian zeitgeist," and instead desire that rich people just behave more egalitarian? I dunno, Weiss, maybe he doesn't think the rich are the enemy, only the bad rich.