Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
When is a Self-Described Libertarian Not a Libertarian?
When is a Self-Described Libertarian Not a Libertarian?
Jan 8, 2026 11:52 PM

A new report by the Pew Research Center finds that about one-in-ten Americans describe themselves as libertarian — and yet hold views that do not differ much from those of the overall public. As Pew’s Jocelyn Kiley says, “Self-described libertarians tend to be modestly more supportive of some libertarian positions, but few of them hold consistent libertarian opinions on the role of government, foreign policy and social issues.”

Overall, 11 percent of Americans describe themselves as libertarian and have a general idea about what the term means. Another 3 percent who described themselves as libertarians were unable to choose the correct term that applied to “someone whose political views emphasize individual freedom by limiting the role of government” (choices were: libertarian, progressive, authoritarian, Unitarian, munist). Unfortunately, they weren’t the only ones confused: only 57 percent of those polled were able to choose the correct term; 1 in 5 thought the term applied to “progressive” and 6 percent thought the answer was munist”(!).

Almost twice as many men as women self-identify as libertarian (15 percent of men and 7 percent of women). The percentage of Whites and Hispanics who self-describe as libertarian is almost identical (12 and 11 percent, respectively), while only 3 percent black Americans refer to themselves using that term. Libertarians are also more likely to consider themselves political Independents (14 percent) than either Republican (12 percent) or Democrat (6 percent).

The beliefs held by these self-described libertarians were somewhat surprising.

More than half of libertarians say government regulation of business does more harm than good (56 percent vs. 47 percent). However, four-in-ten libertarians say that government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest (41 percent).

More than half say “government aid to the poor does more harm than good by making people too dependent on government assistance” (57 percent vs. 48 percent), while almost four-in-ten (38 percent) say government aid “does more good than harm because people can’t get out of poverty until their basic needs are met.”

Libertarians are more supportive of legalizing marijuana than the public overall (65 percent vs. 54 percent). But they are also more likely than the general public to favor allowing the police “to stop and search anyone who fits the general description of a crime suspect” (42 percent of libertarians, 41 percent of the public) and to think “it is best for the future of our country to be active in world affairs” (43 percent of libertarians, 35 percent of the public).

Large majorities of both the public (74 percent) and self-described libertarians (82 percent) say “Americans shouldn’t have to give up privacy and freedom in order to be safe from terrorism.”

The results seem to support my long-held opinion that Americans use political labels without knowing what they mean. There are a lot of self-identified conservatives who don’t understand conservatism and self-identified progressives who (obviously) don’t understand conservatism (see above). It wouldn’t be surprising, then, to find the same is true for self-identified libertarians.

But I could be wrong. Perhaps it does represent a shift in the meaning of the term.

Do those who self-identify as libertarian think the results reflect their political views? I’d be particularly interested to hear if those who add a modifier to the term (Christian libertarians, bleeding-heart libertarians, etc.) think it portends a shift away from the “classical” or standard view of American libertarianism. Also, would any of the positions above “disqualify” a person from legitimately using the term? In other words, when is a self-described libertarian not really a libertarian?

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
U.S. surges into top 5 economically free nations
For the second year in a row, the United States has increased its ranking in parison of the world’s freest economies. The good news came as the Fraser Institute released its annual “Economic Freedom of the World” report this morning. “The U.S. has ascended back into the top five most economically-free countries in the world,” said Fred McMahon, research chair at the Fraser Institute, which is based in Canada. The United States fell to 16th place in 2015 but rebounded...
Charles Dickens, poverty, and emotional arguments
Why is it that the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century is so often our go-to mental paradigm for poverty? CapX’s John Ashmore, for instance, recently wrote of those who “feel an argument about poverty is plete without claiming we’ve somehow gone back to the 19th century.” Were there no poor people before that? (There were, obviously.) There are a number of possible answers – an increase in the concentration of poverty with growing urbanization and industrialization, which made poverty...
Political idolatry: A Lutheran view
Is faith in politics “another Gospel”? A distinguished Lutheran scholar has weighed in on the matter, clearly delineating a Christian’s duty as a citizen from his duty to the Christ and his fellow body of believers. Gene Veith, the noted professor, provost, and editor, weighs in on the topic after taking notice of Acton’s article on President Trump’s recent “King of Israel” controversy. In his blogatPatheos, Veith shares insights gleaned from Lutheranism’s traditional “Two Kingdoms” theology. “The state’s purview is...
Every politician is Andrew Yang
Richard Nixon supposedly once said, “We’re all Keynesians now,” referring to the new accepted regime of monetary policy. Today, we have far bigger problems than our Keynesian Federal Reserve. Any present-day politician could just as well say, “We’re all Andrew Yang now.” Andrew Yang, for those who don’t know, is running for the Democratic nomination for president. He’s an eccentric businessman whose signature policy proposal is that he wants to give you cold hard cash. Really. While many, including me,...
UN climate chief: Stop worrying and have babies
Climate change may well be a problem, but the chief of the United Nations’ agency on climate says it won’t destroy the world – and shouldn’t stop young people from having children. Alarmist rhetoric from “doomsters and extremists” that babies will destroy the planet “resembles religious extremism” and “will only add to [young women’s] burden” by “provoking anxiety,” he said. Petteri Taalas is no “climate-change denier.” He is secretary-general of theWorld Meteorological Organization (WMO), the UN’s special agency on weather...
Only an EU ‘empire’ can secure liberty: EU leader
Is a European-wide patible with liberty? A prominent EU leader mended transforming the European Union into an “empire” at a UK political party conference this weekend, to sustained applause. “The world order of tomorrow … is a world order based on empires,” said Guy Verhofstadt, a Member of European Parliament (MEP) and the EU’s chief negotiator on Brexit. He is also leader of the EU’s Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe faction. ments came at the party conference of...
5 facts about the U.S. Constitution
Today is Constitution Day, which is observed every year to remember the Founding Fathers signingthe Constitution on September 17, 1787. Here are five facts you need to know about the Constitution: 1. Neither Thomas Jefferson nor John Adams signed the Constitution, nor attended the Constitutional Convention. Adams served as our representative to Great Britain, and Jefferson represented U.S. interests in France. Both died on July 4, 1826. 2. promisedid e about because the Founding Fathers considered African-Americans “three-fifths of a...
The cosmic battle for economics: Toppling ideological idols with Christian wisdom
When I began my freshman year of college, I didn’t care much about economics. Having been raised in a conservative Christian home, I had adopted a generically pro-capitalism shtick, but it wasn’t much to stand on. As I arrived at my left-leaning Christian college, that lack of foundation soon became clear. I found myself swirling amid campus debates about “economic justice,” infused with lofty religious language. Progressive economic policies were championed with social-gospel gusto and the Acts-2 arguments for socialism...
Status and function: Drucker on the keys to a functioning society
This is the fifth in a series of essays on Peter Drucker’s early works. Peter Drucker published The Future of Industrial Man in the midst of World War II (1942). He was conscious of the need to defeat authoritarian governments beyond the battlefield. Free societies would have to prove themselves superior or the problems of fascism munism would continue to recur. In the book, he offered a formulation that he would go on to repeat in many other books and...
Fact check: 5 facts about the third Democratic debate of 2019
The Democratic Party held its third presidential debate on Thursday night. The 10 hopefuls made at least five proposals that were based on erroneous premises or that would harm the country. 1. Wealth inequality is destroying the world. Senator Bernie Sanders said he felt it was “unfair” pare his version of democratic socialism with the version practiced in Venezuela. But he distinguished himself from most of the field by promising bat wealth inequality: To me, democratic socialism means we deal...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved