There Isn't Right. There Isn't Left. There's Just Power.
Sure, there are a few differences between the Democrats and the Republicans, between the right and the left. But they have much more in common, like greed, overweening self-interest, and a commitment to crony capitalism.

At Against Crony Capitalism, Nick Sorrentino explains:

What is fascism?

Basically it is the government working in partnership with the corporate establishment to secure political power (for government) and profits and power (for businesses).

Basically what we have now is a soft fascist system, crony capitalism. It's only soft in the sense that the Gestapo for the most part is not breaking down doors willy nilly (though there are exceptions to this, and more and more). Soft fascism becomes very hard when it comes down on you or your business, but it is not Hitler's fascism, yet.

Interestingly our special brand of fascism is being driven in large part (but by no means solely) by people who would reject the "fascist" term out of hand. Not just because it is a pejorative in modern America, but because they honestly believe that their political ideology has nothing to do with fascism and is in fact counter to it.

There is a whole group of people in this country who associate themselves with what has been called the American "Left" who exhibit all the tendencies of fascism but honestly believe they can't be fascists because "fascism" is an ideology of the "Right."

The overarching problem here is the dated definition of what is "Right" and what is "Left." There used to be some sense to the shorthand, but now it makes little sense at all. In this old way of looking at the world the battle is between 2 clubs seeking the power of the state defined by their own style. The Dems want to expand social programs, the Republicans want to expand the Military Industrial Complex and farm subsidies.

Though the Republicans have appropriated "small government" language for decades, the debate during the modern political era has never really been about more government versus less government. Despite what we have been told our entire lives, the real debate instead has always been about the style of government. Fundamentally modern American politics has been about which constituencies get to leverage the state apparatus for their benefit. So it's understandable that the neo-fascists, the soft fascists, are confused about their own ideology. They are still thinking in 20th Century terms.

He quotes a Drudge tweet that explains it: "It's now Authoritarian vs. Libertarian..."

And he has a great end to his piece but go read it all:

Human progress is (measured by me anyway) is the degree to which the average person can live free of coercion, to the degree he or she can realize their specific potential, the degree to which those who would steal in the name of the king, the lord, or the state are minimized in everyday life. People should be free. This is the great hope for humanity. Free minds. Free prices. Human dignity. Free markets. Freedom, true freedom, to do as one wishes so long as one does not harm others. The opportunity to actualize one's potential (and not to do it at the detriment of someone else.) Truly to lift the collective level of human consciousness.

Those who would stifle the movement toward freedom, those who would stifle an open source society, those who fight the decentralization of systems and the empowerment of individuals are the reactionaries, not the advocates of small government.

Call them the hipster fascists. We all knew them in college. They were the ones enforcing the speech codes, and complaining about oppression when they themselves came from privilege. The kids who wore the Che Guevara shirts without irony. The kids who invariably ended up on the student council.

I don't know about you but I had enough of these people in college. I am not keen on letting them run our society any further into the statist ground.