Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
When is a Self-Described Libertarian Not a Libertarian?
When is a Self-Described Libertarian Not a Libertarian?
Jan 9, 2026 3:26 AM

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
Are Protectionism and Patriotism Incompatible Principles?
This morning at Ethika Politika, I argue that “acting primarily for the sake of national interest in international affairs runs contrary to a nation’s highest ideals.” In particular, I draw on the thought of Vladimir Solovyov, who argued that, morally speaking, national interest alone cannot be the supreme standard of international action since the highest aspirations of each nation (e.g. “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”) are claimed to be universal goods. I would here like to explore his...
America’s Top Diplomat: Rich People Don’t Contribute to Economic Growth
“There are rich people everywhere, and yet they do not contribute to the [economic] growth of their own countries.” If such a statement were made by an activist at an Occupy Wall Street rally, most adults would chuckle and mend the budding young Marxist take a course in economics. But what do we do when the claim is made by Hillary Clinton at an event hosted by a former U.S. president and in front of an audience of global leaders?...
Acton Commentary: Representation without Taxation?
“No taxation without representation” was a slogan taken up and popularized by this nation’s Founders, and this idea became an important animating principle of the American Revolution. But this was also an era where landowners had the primary responsibilities in civic life; theirs was the land that was taxed and so theirs too should be the rights to vote and be represented. Thus went the logic. But the question that faces us now, nearly two and a half centuries later,...
What is Subsidiarity?
What is Catholic Church’s teaching on the size of government? And what is the principle of subsidiarity? Our friends at CatholicVote.org have put together a brief video to help answer these questions. ...
No Bullies in Schools — Unless It’s the Government
Laurel Broten, the Education Minister of Ontario, stated on Oct. 10 that the “province’s publicly funded Catholic schools may not teach students that abortion is wrong because such teaching amounts to ‘misogyny,’ which is prohibited in schools under a controversial anti-bullying law.” Ontario enacted Bill 13 in June and it casts a wide net against bullying in schools. It is under this law that Broten has declared that Catholic schools may not teach that abortion is wrong. Broten noted, Bill...
The Presidential Debate and Pandering to Women
I think somebody needs to admit that the level of pandering to women in this election is over the top. Whether it is Ann Romney awkwardly yelling, “I love you women” at the Republican National Convention, or the ridiculous “War on Women” meme from the left. The examples are just too many to cite and evaluate for one post. So much of it is focus driven and poll tested and here with us to stay, but the issue still needs...
Diversity Welcome, But Only within Very Strict Parameters
Gallaudet University is a unique institution. Founded in 1864 in Washington, DC to meet the educational needs of the deaf and hard-of-hearing, the school currently serves just under 2000 students in various capacities. As one might imagine, it is a munity, aware that they educate a group of people who have often been victims of discrimination. The school asserts: Gallaudet University as an institution embraces diversity… A university has an obligation to be a place where all views can be...
Acton Commentary: Politics, Social Justice and the Non-Negotiables
For many on the Catholic left, the confusion of “non-negotiables” in Church teaching with matters of prudential judgment has e all mon. In this week’s Acton Commentary (published October 17), Dr. Don Condit looks at how Vice President Joseph Biden’s “facts” about Obamacare were received by the Catholic bishops.The full text of his essay follows. Subscribe to the free, weekly Acton News & Commentary and other publicationshere. Politics, Social Justice and the Non-Negotiables byDonald P. Condit Vice President Joseph Biden’s...
The Market Outlook for the Facts of the Matter
With two presidential debates and one vice presidential debate already behind us, fact-checkers across the nation must be pulling their hair out. A brief survey of factcheck.org sheds some important light on the many claims and figures that have been tossed around in the last two weeks, revealing little concern from either ticket for the facts of the matter. Why is this the case? And must we simply resign ourselves to this dismal state of affairs? Take a look at...
Redistribution and the Sacred Right of Property
“Scandinavian economies are some of the most market-oriented on the planet” says economist Scott Sumner, who adds “Denmark is the most market-oriented country on earth.” This peculiar claim is even more curious considering that it is based on the Heritage Foundation’s 2012 Index of Economic Freedom. On the Heritage Index, which ranks countries based on ponents of economic freedom, the United es in at #10, lumped in with the “mostly free” countries. All of the Scandinavian countries are lower on...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved