Todays "Libertarians" are the true Fascists.

In both the United States and Britain there is a growing "popular" movement towards "libertarians" who are often also called independents. While these people run on popular singular issues or limited issues, their real belief system is quite undemocratic and would actually allow more of what has gone on in our financial and political systems.

The Daily Beast - The End of Republicans and Democrats (And Your Libertarian Future)

While the best example of this in England is UKIP (United Kingdom Independent Party), the American example would be Ron Paul. To disenfranchised Republicans this may sound like heresy; but, let me explain. Lets start with him in his own words.

YouTube - 3.2.12 Ron Paul on the Occupy Movement.

Mr. Paul is against American involvement in wars outside of the United States. He is also against bailing out banks and the Federal Reserve. Many of the left and right can agree on those things as do I mostly. Some of the other things he is against is government regulation and government "entitlements". Rather than limited government regulation as is called for by traditional Republicans, he is against just about all federal regulations. Well, the truth is that those regulations did not come overnight. The history of federal regulations started because people in one state did not care about what they sold to people in another state and this included allowing dead rats in our food supply. Read up on the history of the FDA and you can get an idea of just how bad things were in the beginning of the industrial age.

As a political philosophy, "libertarians" in America don't believe in being taxed or regulated and are more like Social Darwinists. In fact, there is almost no difference between libertarians and anarchists except that one is seen as left and the other seen as right. Neither believes in government. They hold the most simplistic of political philosophy, our ability to regulate and work together as a community with common interests, they do believe in the common good. No successful society has or will ever be built on these beliefs.

The extremist views found within the left and the right are both flawed in logic and history; however, our "middle" (traditional conservative and liberal) philosophies appear to have failed as we have allowed our government to be bought out by special interests. The famous Satanist Alister Crowley in his most famous book said that for the Satanist the whole of the law was to do as one wanted and both libertarians and anarchists pretty much agree. Both groups would legalize all drugs and despise the poor.

Our political understanding in America about the consequences has devolved to nothing and an overwhelmed nation seeks simple answers to correct what is clearly not working. Mr. Paul has stated that the problem with government is that it can make laws and because of that they get bought out to make bad laws. Following his statements and logic the solution is to have NO laws. So why do I call it Fascism, because it is actually worse than Fascism. A Fascist is merely a socialist that believes in government control to the benefit of the state and it's partners and sees the benefits for the state and business as more important than the benefits derived for the individual and society. The elimination of all commercial enterprise is Communism, the elimination of all government has no single name because no society has been suicidal enough to try it.

Here is the difference between Mr. Paul and traditional conservatives. A traditional conservative believes in capitalism; but, believes that there should be truth in lending if you will. A traditional conservative would be against people selling food as "organic" or cars as "new" that were not, they would be against lying in an agreement. In order to make sure that there were standards and rules to make sure that people had a true negotiated deal, they voted along with liberal to create organizations to make sure that weights and measures were standardized, regulated and followed. Mr. Paul would just eliminate governments from making sure these rules were met. While traditional conservatives want to go back to the 1950s, libertarians want to go back to the 1800s.

In the 1800s and early 1900s most people never went more than 20 miles from where they lived, lived in farming communities, knew everyone of their neighbors and knew who they traded with personally. If you cheated your neighbor and others knew about it you would be ignored and nobody would trade with you. I hate to wake them up; but, that doesn't happen much anymore and the multinational company that sells you food does not care about nor worry about your personal trade with them because they can just shift where they sell without any consequences. These companies are not just too big to fail, they are too big to care.

I don't think most people would agree with Mr. Paul if they understood his past voting record and the totality of his beliefs. I disagree with Mr. Paul because I believe in America as more than just a territorial area. I believe that we should have a government of people who choose to live in the country (and have the option of leaving if they so desire) and that the country should be by the people and for the people, the people being the key phrase.

I would love the opportunity to interview Mr. Paul and believe he would be honest enough and happy to answer my questions, I don't doubt the man's integrity or sincerity. Having said that, he has confused capitalism with democracy. While he may like Ayn Rand, I prefer Aristotle. Aristotle determined that the only right and best way to regulate society was by having the majority choose the rules, he took it for sake that all societies other than the most primitive always ended up with some having more control than others. He thought that power should be in the hands of the majority rather than a oligarch (small number of controllers) or a monarchy (single rulers by area).

While getting my Bachelor's degree in Political Science with multiple national and university awards and recognitions, I had a very special professor, he taught Political Philosophy. One day he was discussing Plato and Aristotle and I asked if he would define Plato as conservative and Aristotle as liberal, he said the terms did not apply and I have thought about his words for decades and long ago concluded he was correct. Today liberal means allowing people to do what they want and conservative means letting business do what it wants.

A community is a group of people that decides together and lives under the same rules and consequences. I believe in community because I believe the best government is the one that involves as many people who will have to live under the same rules making the rules.