Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Great news: Even ‘socialists’ love the free market (poll)
Great news: Even ‘socialists’ love the free market (poll)
Jan 27, 2026 8:59 AM

A Gallup poll released Monday made headlines: “Four in 10 Americans Embrace Some Form of Socialism.” However, the headline could have read, “Seven in 10 Americans reject the central premise of socialism.”

When Gallup asked if “some form of socialism” would be “a good thing or a bad thing,” 41 percent said it would and 52 percent said it would not. However, the public’s response to an ill-defined “socialism” reveals less than a more detailed question buried deeper in the same poll.

Gallup also asked Americans “whether they would prefer mostly free market or government control over several economic and societal activities.”

The poll shows that Americans trust the “free market” to be in charge of nearly every facet of society, including “the distribution of wealth” (by 40 percentage points), wages (27 points), and “the economy overall” (29 points).

Fewer than 41 percent of the people surveyed want the government to run any of these concerns, which are central to socialism. Clearly, some of the people who reportedly favor socialism are confused about socialism’s ends and means. If they oppose government redistribution of wealth and economic intervention, whatever economic system they think they support, it isn’t socialism.

The cognitive dissonance goes deeper, as Gallup noted that citizens prefer the market to take care of “two areas in which Democratic politicians have made proposals to greatly expand government involvement”: healthcare and college. And their skepticism of government is well-earned.

The UK’s outgoing prime minister, Theresa May, wanted to encourage apprenticeships – a laudable goal shared by many leaders across the Atlantic. Her Conservative government introduced a tax on large corporations to fund a new, government-controlled apprenticeship program under the Department for Education. Corporations then withdraw these funds to run the apprenticeships they had already been offering.

A new government report shows that public control reduced opportunity and disproportionately hurt the least advantaged. Apprenticeships fell by more than 125,000 after the introduction of the program. Furthermore, The Telegraph reports that “people with lower skills, and those from munities risk losing out due to employers’ preference to spend their levy on higher level apprenticeships.”

Simply put, the government taxed away the money these corporations would have used on apprenticeships for the less skilled. With less capital to spend, corporations prioritized high-quality programs that gave them the greatest return. The empowerment of the poor was redistributed to government bureaucrats in the name of helping the poor.

National healthcare, too, has increasingly visible problems. Single-payer systems demand rationing, and a Canadian appeals court recently ruled that doctors who participate in Canada’s government-funded system must facilitate abortions and assisted suicides, even if doing so violates their deeply held (and constitutionally protected) religious beliefs.

The only undertakings that respondents wanted government to handle are online privacy and environmental protection – and there are excellent arguments against trusting the state to oversee either of these sectors, as well.

If two-thirds of the American people remain skeptical of increasing government, why do so many say they support socialism? Thank the socialists themselves for the confusion.

Even today’s Communists have repackaged their dogma as decentralized hedonism.

British viral celebrity Ash Sarkar brandsher ideology as “fun Communism.” She explains, “Communism is a belief in the power of people to organize their lives as individuals – their social lives, their political and their economic lives – without being managed by a state.” Shedescribes Communism as “the desire to see the coercive structures of state dismantled, while also having fun.”

This is, to put it mildly, not the “lived experience” of any nation under Marxism.

Religious leaders who do not clarify their historic opposition to socialism only further this double-mindedness. All three Abrahamic faiths have traditionally supported the right to private property.

Even those who muddy the waters by calling Europe’s social welfare state “socialist” violate a core Christian objection to socialism.

“Socialists,” wrote Pope Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum, “by endeavoring to transfer the possessions of individuals to munity at large, strike at the interests of every wage-earner, since they would deprive him of the liberty of disposing of his wages, and thereby of all hope and possibility of increasing his resources and of bettering his condition in life.”

Thankfully, as this Gallup poll shows, even America’s putative “socialists” understand that God created humanity for freedom which is best delivered by the free market.

domain.)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Rev. Sirico on Research on Religion podcast
Acton Institute president and co-founder Rev. Robert Sirico’s Research on Religion podcast went live today. In it, Rev. Sirico sits down with host Tony Gill to discuss his new book, Defending the Free Market: The Moral Case for Capitalism, and a range of other topics, including the morality of capitalism, faith-based initiatives, and Austrian economics. The podcast is available to listen to or download online and regularly offers fresh perspective on relevant topics. Today’s is no exception. Check it out....
Prof. Hunter Baker, 2011 Novak Award recipient, featured on Research on Religion podcast
Professor Hunter Baker recently appeared on the Research on Religion podcast to discuss, among other things, his latest book, The End of Secularism. Baker’s book, like much of the podcast’s discussion, centers on the treatment of religious matters within the public square. In doing so, the podcast covers a broad range of relevant topics and is worth a listen. Baker is an associate professor of political science and the associate dean of Arts & Sciences at Union University. In recognition...
Sirico: The Great Lie of Socialism
Socialism, despite its deficiencies, still has its fans. “Visit the philosophy and English departments on most college campuses, and you will still find intellectuals waxing eloquent on the glories of socialist theory. Students are still encouraged to imagine that it could work,” says Fr. Robert Sirico, in Crisis Magazine. However, Pope Benedict XVI is not one taken in by the great lie of socialism: History is strewn with intellectuals who imagined that they could save the world–and created hell on...
Get a Free Chapter of ‘Defending the Free Market’
Acton Institute has crafted a website for Rev. Robert Sirico’s new book, Defending the Free Market. With this you can give the web address to your friends for an easy-to-remember access point to the book. Other notable things about the site include: Free introduction chapter to Defending the Free Market.List of press mentions for the book from the Acton PowerBlogA video message from Rev. Robert Sirico What are you waiting for? Find out more about Defending the Free Market at...
Women in the World On Call
Elizabeth Knox is passionate about supporting women in their faith and their work, especially when the two overlap. She regularly interacts with women on this topic through her Women of the World Bible study she began over two years ago. Her book also called Women in the World is due e out early 2013 Follow her blog to learn more about her passion for women in faith and work as well as the writing process. You can also follow her...
Video: Rev. Sirico on Mammon and the cultural left
In The Daily Caller, Rev. Robert A. Sirico is interviewed by Ginni Thomas about a graphic in the March/April edition of the radical magazine Adbusters mocks people who throw off all moral restraint in the pursuit of wealth. Adbusters is an anti-capitalist magazine founded by Marxist Kalle Lasn and was instrumental in fueling the similarly anti-capitalist Occupy Wall Street movement. “You notice that they are precisely the ones who don’t tell us what personal responsibilities we have,” Rev. Sirico said....
Virtuous Capitalism and the Financial Crisis
The Acton Institute recently hosted a conference in California with David Bahnsen and the Center for Cultural Leadership. Conference audio is now available online via YouTube. You can learn more about the event here. Listen to Rev. Sirico’s talk, “Can We Be Free Without Economic Freedom,” below. Other speakers included: Dr. P. Andrew Sandlin on “The Theological Roots of the Financial Crisis“Mr. David L. Bahnsen on “What Caused the Financial Crisis: The Left AND Right Have It Wrong” (Part I...
When is a Catholic College Not Catholic Enough for the Government?
What happens if a Catholic college doesn’t require students to attend Mass, doesn’t engage in “indoctrination” or “proselytizing”, and hires non-Catholic faculty? As John Garvey, president of the Catholic University of America, says, the government will likely determine the school is not “Catholic” enough for religious liberty protections: There is a pattern to these cases. The government has been eager to regulate the behavior of churches in ways more to its liking. It does this by defining religion down, so...
Rev. Sirico talks to Human Events about ‘Defending the Free Market’
David Harsanyi of Human Events has shared a couple of videos of Rev. Robert Sirico discussing “Paul Ryan, Ayn Rand, Jane Fonda, Obamacare and the — sometimes unseen — morality of free markets.” He also touches on the core principles of his new book, Defending the Free Market: The Moral Case for a Free Economy. Part 1 Part 2 ...
Are There Rights We Can’t Give Away?
If inalienable rights are, as many people seem to believe, rights which the government cannot take away, does it follow that government can then take away rights that are alienable? As James Rogers explains, it is no less wrong for the government to take away an “alienable” right than it is for the government to take away an “inalienable” right. The difference between the two isn’t that one can be taken away while the other cannot but that an inalienable...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved