I mean... the nature of the asseveration relative to your conviction doesn't preclude its judiciousness: depending on whether your conviction is objectively veracious, and therefore on the prowess of your skills and the efficacy of your strategies, the asseveration may, or may not, prove to be either profound or judicious.

Also, you've got a tense issue there: "That would proceed to be" is in the conditional future, but "had the proclamation not persist" is in both the conditional past and present, I think. The sentence should read: "That would be a profoundly judicious asseveration if the proclamation did not persist to elect a composition contrary to my conviction." If you wanted to keep it in past tense, you would want: "That would have been a profoundly judicious asseveration, had the proclamation not persisted to elect a composition contrary to my conviction." =P