Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
When is a Self-Described Libertarian Not a Libertarian?
When is a Self-Described Libertarian Not a Libertarian?
Mar 7, 2026 12:14 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
Note to Sam Gregg
There was an impressive Australian contingent at the World Meeting of Families. I saw one group of at least 50, and there may have been others. They were all decked out in yellow and green soccer shirts that said "Australia" on the back, wore Outback hats and carried a large Australian flag. That was just at the conference. (Cardinal Pell was terrific on the panel, as expected.) At the Parade this morning, I saw the same green and yellow jerseys....
Cardinal Caffarra opened the conference
Earlier this week at the World Meeting of Families: On July 4, the opening day,the program began at 4 PM and was scheduled to go until 8:00. But the opening day had a cloud hanging over it. A subway accident in Valencia claimed the lives of 41 people and injured many others. The conference was originally scheduled to have ing speeches by the major of Valencia, Mrs. Rita Barbera, and the Archbishop of Valencia, the Most Rev. Agustin Garcia-Gascon Vicente....
Initial Post from the World Meeting of Families, Valencia
Blog post: July 5, 2005. 11:30 PM, Valencia time. I am writing from the Fifth World Meeting of Families, held this year in Valencia Spain. This periodic event is sponsored by the Pontifical Council on the Family, chaired by the formidable Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo. I e at the invitation of His Eminence to give a presentation on The Family, the Social Doctrine of the Church and Social Questions. In addition to the Theological and Pastoral Congress, the Meeting also...
Along the Papal Parade Route
Today, my Phillipina demographer friend and I went to the center city of Valencia. We have tickets to go to the Encounter with the Holy Father tonight, and we thought we’d do some sight-seeing during the day. Well, we couldn’t get near the Cathedral, where a cup reported to be the Holy Grail is kept. The streets were already filling with pilgrims waiting for the Pope’s arrival. The streets along the official parade were lined with police barriers, but no...
Live Blogging from Bryn Mawr Next Week
I’m leaving tomorrow to attend the Advanced Studies in Freedom seminar sponsored by the Institute for Humane Studies and hosted at Bryn Mawr College in Pennsylvania. The conference runs from July 8-14, and will “take a deeper look at topics such as spontaneous order, social development, and public choice, considering them in both a historical context and in light of issues today.” Seminar faculty include Randy Barnett of Boston University (Law), Stephen Davies of Manchester Metropolitan University (History), Sandy Ikeda...
Advanced Studies in Freedom Tuesday Edition
BRYN MAWR, July 11, 2006 – One school of libertarian political thought is that of the so-called anarcho-capitalists. Here’s a good summary: “Anarcho-capitalists reject the state as an unjustified monopolist and systematic aggressor against sovereign individuals, and would replace it with cooperatives, neighborhood associations, private businesses and similar non-monopolistic organizations.” I think this view is patible with biblical Christianity. Perhaps you think that this conclusion is rather uncontroversial and obvious. Even so, Christians who are broadly in favor of limited...
Advanced Studies in Freedom Weekend Edition
BRYN MAWR, July 9, 2006 – I arrived safely at Bryn Mawr College yesterday for the beginning of the Institute for Humane Studies Advanced Studies in Freedom Conference. Someone will have to explain to me the economic efficiency of flying from Detroit to Philadelphia by way of Atlanta. The odations are excellent, and the campus is quite beautiful. The program began last night, and continued today with two morning lectures. The schedule is well suited to a good amount of...
Advanced Studies in Freedom Monday Edition
BRYN MAWR, July 10, 2006 – Things are progressing smoothly for me here at the Advanced Studies in Freedom seminar. Our daily schedule includes four major lectures from seminar faculty, each with built in small group discussion time as well as Q&As with the presenting faculty. One of our first activities was to try and self-identify in terms of our view of the role of government (if any). I identified with the endorsement of a limited government, whose main role...
Protestants and Natural Law, Part 3
In Part 2, we saw that modern Protestant skepticism toward reason is one of the most significant factors in the rejection of natural law. mand ethics, particularly of the variety espoused by Karl Barth, quickly came to dominate the field of Protestant theological ethics in the middle decades of the twentieth century. Karl Barth rejected every form of natural theology and, simultaneously, pulled the rug out from under natural law. But among neoorthodox theologians of the 1930s, only Barth and...
Second Post from the World Meeting of Families
Late evening, July 6. My session finally took place today at about 4:15 pm. Cardinal Martino presented the Compendium of the Social Doctrine. He pointed out that the family was given pride of place in the document, listed before the economy or government or international relations or the environment. Most memorable statement: “The family is not a function of society or the state. State and society are functions of the family.” Madame Boutin made her presentation. She is an plished...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved