“Anti-individualistic, the fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State, which stands for the conscience and the universal will of man as a historic entity…. The fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value…. Fascism is therefore opposed to that form of democracy which equates a nation to the majority, lowering it to the level of the largest number…. We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the ‘right’, a Fascist century. If the 19th century was the century of the individual (liberalism implies individualism) we are free to believe that this is the ‘collective’ century, and therefore the century of the State.”

Columbia University Professor Robert O. Paxton has written that:

“Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline (emphasis added), humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”

Of course this is an open door for corruption. The coercion placed upon one person is often the creation of income for some other insider cohort of the bureaucrats, or even for the bureaucrats themselves. The government that “robs Peter to pay Paul” will always have the support of Paul.

The most important thing to understand about Fascism is that it progresses through stages. It begins with government “regulating” business. Then it progresses into government actually managing the business. When government manages an entire industry there are no longer any competing enterprises, but there is just one government monopoly. No longer is there any regulation of that monopoly, because the “regulator” is actually the senior partner in the enterprise. Great care is taken to create the appearance that everything is for the benefit of the people. In reality the people are exploited by insiders both in and out of government. In the final analysis it all comes down to money and power for the few.

Every time that the government increases its power we are told that there is some benefit for the people in that increase in the power of government. The increase in the power of government is camouflaged by the assertion that the people are receiving more “services” from government. When government provides a service we should never forget the fact that the government has the ability to use force against its customers, and against its competitors.

Often the first step in this progression is that we move from services being provided by several competing private entities, to services being provided by a government regulated monopoly.  Often the next step is that we move to services being provided by a monopoly that is operated by the government itself.

When services are provided by several competing private entities the customer has the ability to choose between those competing private entities. The customer might be influenced by price, or by the quality of the service, or by any other factor that is important to that customer.

When services are provided by a government REGULATED monopoly the customer has no ability to choose between competing entities, but the assertion will be made that the customer will be protected from the abuse of the monopoly by virtue of the regulation from the government. Of course this assertion is based on the theory that the government has no goals of its own in the regulation of the monopoly, and that the government has no bias of any sort.

When services are provided by a government OPERATED monopoly the customer has no ability to choose between competing entities. More importantly, there is no longer any way to make the assertion that the customer will be protected from the abuse of the monopoly by the regulation from the government.  Of course there will be a claim that the government will regulate itself. At best, this scenario is the fox protecting the hen house.

Of course the jump from services that are provided by several competing private entities, to services that are provided by a government monopoly can be made without going through the stage of services that are provided by a government regulated monopoly.

The blatant assertion that there is no such thing as private property rights has become so audacious that some municipalities have even made a “law” that strips from the property owner the right to park his own car in his own front yard!  When they tell you that you are required to replace the siding on your house, they will also tell you that you are not allowed to do it yourself. You must hire a licensed contractor to do it. The “licensed contractor” paid the city for his license. The “licensed contractor” will also pay the city for a “building permit”.  The “licensed contractor” will include these costs in his bill to you.

“Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” –
–  George Washington

The proper function of government is the protection of life, liberty, and property. Government is an agency of force. The use of force is only morally justifiable if it is in self defense, or in the defense of someone else, who has authorized us to act in their behalf. Government is the agency which we have collectively authorized to act on behalf of the entire population. A law is a statement of a responsibility which is required by government through the use of force, or the threat of the use of force.

Everything that government does involves the use of force. Government uses force to compel the compliance with each of it laws, by providing penalties for violation of laws. Laws may require a specific action from the citizen or they may prohibit a specific action of a citizen. At the very least, in all cases, the actions of government are funded by tax revenues that are taken from citizens through the use, or threat of the use of force. This means that a moral government may only do those things, for which the use of force, would be morally justifiable.

The individual rights for every human being, and government coercion, are opposites.

In any discussion of expanding the function of government beyond its legitimate function of protecting life liberty and property there is a common sense question that should be asked:  Is government doing such a good job of protecting life liberty and property that it seems wise to divide their efforts into other areas? Is there no more crime in your area? If the government cannot perform its primary function, why would we think it wise to give them other duties?

Government must be limited to protecting us from aggressors. There is no human agency; which can morally use force to require or prohibit anything, unless one citizen would have a moral right to use force in the same situation. If there is not a citizen whose life, liberty or property is being put at risk, then there is no government function.

The ends do not justify the means. As soon as you begin to plead the benefits of allowing government to cross this line, there is no where else to close the gate. If we take the first step onto the slippery slope, then we slide all the way to the chasm.

===

One of those “Abuses and Usurpations” was:

“For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury”

These were cited as evidence of

“a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism.”

Are we now at the same point, which caused the American Revolution?

The Constitution of the United States of America ~ By Our Founding Fathers with Introduction by Congressman Ron Paul

http://americanistbookstore.com/books/constitution-of-the-united-states-of-america/

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B012IJ56MC