Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Great news: Even ‘socialists’ love the free market (poll)
Great news: Even ‘socialists’ love the free market (poll)
Jan 14, 2026 1:46 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
A Thanksgiving Prayer
Almighty God, Father of all mercies, we thine unworthy servants do give thee most humble and hearty thanks for all thy goodness and loving-kindness to us and to all men. We bless thee for our creation, preservation, and all the blessings of this life; but above all for thine inestimable love in the redemption of the world by our Lord Jesus Christ; for the means of grace, and for the hope of glory. And, we beseech thee, give us that...
Good News for the Moralists
Here’s some good news for those who prefer bat cultural evil through the edification and cultivation of moral sensibilities: In “Repugnance as a Constraint on Markets,” Alvin E. Roth finds that “distaste for certain kinds of transactions is a real constraint, every bit as real as the constraints imposed by technology or by the requirements of incentives and efficiency.” He also finds that “while repugnance can change over time, change can be quite slow.” This presumably applies to the decrease...
Natural Law and Christian Social Thought
Two new and intriguing books from Cambridge University Press have crossed my editorial desk recently. Anticipate reviews to appear in the Journal of Markets & Morality sometime next year; but in the meantime I wanted to give them each a plug. Both draw on the philosophical tradition of the natural law to address contemporary debates in social/political thought. The argument of Christopher Wolfe’s Natural Law Liberalism is summed up in a blurb by Notre Dame law professor Gerard Bradley: “No...
The Parenting Class
Along the same lines as my earlier post, The Weekly Standard argues that putting the needs of parents first, can form a more stable foundation for an alliance between fiscal and social conservatives. Both fiscal and social conservatives should put themselves in the shoes of the parenting class and focus on petition and choice while also encouraging the growth and strength of the two-parent family. In health care, for instance, conservatives have consistently failed to approach things from that point...
Immigration Policy and the Future of Free Market
I have been quite concerned for some time about the shrill debate over illegal immigration and its potential fallout for free trade. I have argued, at Acton events and elsewhere, that no long-term solution to the flow of illegal immigration from Mexico is possible, without significant economic growth in Mexico. U.S. per capita GDP is 6.5 times greater than the Mexican per capita GDP. The public service infrastructure in the US is far superior to that in Mexico. Taken together,...
Generous Conservatives
Desperate Philanthropist? In a recent column in the National Post, David Frum looks at an “astonishing” new book on charitable giving due out this month from Syracuse University professor Arthur C. Brooks. In “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth of Compassionate Conservatism,” Brooks contends that conservatives are really “more generous, more honest and more public-spirited” than liberals. Frum starts his column with a quote from Desperate Housewives actress Eva Longoria, who asserts: “Everyone on Wisteria Lane has the money of...
The State Which Would Provide Everything
is the title of an insightful article by Fr. James Schall over at the Ignatius site. An analysis of the political contribution of Deus Caritas Est, Benedict XVI’s first encyclical, ments: The Second half of the encyclical is a brilliant treatise on the nature and limits of the State and what lies beyond it. "We do not need a state which regulates and controls everything," Benedict writes, "but a State which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, generously acknowledges...
Wait – You Mean Taxpayers DON’T Have to Pay for Stadiums?
Refreshing news from Major League Baseball: In the interest of full disclosure, I have to say, I have loved the Oakland Athletics for a long time now. I love how they are the anti-Yankees, consistently fielding winning teams despite having one of the lower payrolls in the game, and losing superstar after superstar to richer teams. I love their plucky spirit and their annual belief-defying August winning streaks. I love Billy Beane’s flair for the dramatic. I love that they...
Bonhoeffer on Church and State, Part 3
The following is the text of a paper presented on November 15, 2006 at the Evangelical Theological Society 58th Annual Meeting in Washington, DC, which was themed, “Christians in the Public Square.” Part 3 of 3 follows below (series index). War and Peace I will conclude with a brief word about Bonhoeffer and pacifism, given the ongoing claims about Bonhoeffer’s mitment to the practice of nonviolence.[i] First, it should be noted, with Clifford J. Green, that it is invalid to...
Bonhoeffer on Church and State, Part 2
The following is the text of a paper presented on November 15, 2006 at the Evangelical Theological Society 58th Annual Meeting in Washington, DC, which was themed, “Christians in the Public Square.” Part 2 of 3 follows below (series index). Relationship between Church and State It must first be noted that Bonhoeffer’s conception of mandates was a statement about the ontological ordering of God’s rule in the world, not a particular statement about the precise form that rule would or...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved