Recently on the show, Politicking with Larry King, King asked Ron Paul whether he felt a kinship with Bernie Sanders.
Dr. Paul answered, "Yes."
I have a problem with this answer. Sanders is a self-proclaimed socialist. His views on the best form that society should take are the exact opposite of those of a principled libertarian.
On the campaign trail, his speeches are packed with promises to give to this group and that group and that group, while never mentioning this means taking from others.
Sanders does not understand the fundamental problem with central power. He thinks that the power once transferred to him will do good. Libertarians understand that central power is fundamentally about coercion and anti-liberty, regardless of who is giving the orders. "Giving orders" is the problem.
To be sure, Sanders may be a bit less warlike than other presidential candidates and because of this, we may be able to form an alliance with Sanders on this issue.
But it is counter-productive from a libertarian perspective to make a broad brush positive statement of Sanders and his campaign. Sanders is mostly advocating evil.
If we are to hold the view that Dr. Paul's presidential campaign was mostly about educating the public about libertarianism, as I do, (SEE: How to Run for Office Like Ron Paul), then any kinf of general support for Sanders is misplaced. It is presenting and putting on a platform an individual who holds dear the confused and evil socialist perspective.
So while, there is potential for an alliance on the war issue, in general, Sanders should be bashed and bashed hard so that it becomes clear for those seeking to understand socialism or libertarianism that the two philosophies do not emerge out of the same foundation of appreciation for freedom. The consistent advocacy of freedom that is fundamental to libertarianism is at the core non-existent in the socialist view of central power and coercion.
Bernie is evil.