Some of you who have followed this blog from the beginning will know that I have considered myself a member of the Rand Paul, quasi-libertarian branch of the party. That all ended about a month ago, while I was watching CPAC. Libertarianism, or at least “conservative” libertarianism, brands itself as promoting conservative economic principles and small government while embracing social liberalism.
Any true conservative will tell you that the two elements of conservative philosophy are inseparable. When a “republican” (Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, etc) embraces his inner Karl Rove and shies away from social issues, he or she is embracing social liberalism. You see, the word “Economy” stems from the greek oikos, meaning house or family interchangeably. When we allow social liberalism to take root and change the meaning of the family, we see a proportional change in the economy. Look at the once-great European nations. All of them moved to the libertarian position ten or twenty years ago. When they began to make socially liberal changes, they began to enter into their present state, where liberty and freedom are as alien as a 4-legged space platypus from mars.
We would see the same thing in a Clinton vs. Paul election. We would take two routes to the same evil. Granted, the Paul path would take five or ten years longer than the Clinton path, but we still end up in the same place.