Is it possible to be a liberal libertarian

More generally, in the last four decades the political consensus, and the spectrum of policy proposals and outcomes, has significantly moved in a less interventionist, more laissez faire direction. Yet the very coherence of the classical liberal and libertarian view of society, and its consistency with the fundamental tenets of modern democracies, have been questioned.

Thanks to the work of Nobel laureate Amartya Sen, for example, it has long been known that classical liberalism and libertarianism may contradict some fundamental democratic principles as they are inconsistent with the principle of unanimity also known as the Pareto Principle — the idea that if everyone in society prefers a policy A to a policy B, then the former should be adopted.

In a new study, we have analysed the consistency of classical liberalism and libertarianism in the light of the challenges that modern societies face, such as environmental problems and the allocation of resources between generations.

In particular, we have adopted the modern tools of economic analysis in order to provide rigorous answers to the following questions:. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute.

Formally, we translate this intuition as follows: suppose that society chooses policy A — say, a flat tax — over policy B — say, a progressive tax. Suppose next that after this choice, but before the implementation of the policy , your welfare decreases for reasons independent of the policy. Perhaps you have been unlucky and have broken your leg.

Or maybe you have been careless and your house has burnt down. Either way, nobody else but you is affected. In this scenario we argue that, in a liberal perspective, if after the decrease in welfare you still prefer policy A flat tax to policy B progressive tax , then society should not switch to a progressive tax.

The principle captures the idea that an agent can veto society from switching choices after a negative change that affects only her and nobody else. This would run directly counter a liberal ethics.

The Harm Principle, as we formalise it, is intuitive and not particularly demanding. For example, it does not impose the adoption of a flat tax in our example: it says that if a flat tax was chosen, then it should still be chosen in the circumstances described.

Although it does not outline the boundaries of a complete liberal theory of the state, the Harm Principle does capture some of the core liberal intuitions, and in particular a liberal view of noninterference whenever someone suffers a welfare loss and nobody else is affected. This mild and reasonable principle has some rather startling implications.

In particular, a liberal non-interfering approach can help to adjudicate some fundamental distributive issues, including those related to intergenerational justice. Yet, the harm principle has a surprising and counter-intuitive implication when coupled with the principle of unanimity and a basic notion of fairness, known as the principle of Anonymity , — according to which policies should not be ad hominem and be designed independently of individual identities.

We show that, together with Anonymity and the Pareto Principle, the Harm Principle leads straight to the adoption of strongly egalitarian policies — more precisely, policies promoting the equality of welfare among all members of society, as advocated by the American political philosopher John Rawls.

In other words, contrary to the received view, classical liberalism and libertarianism do not provide a radical alternative to egalitarianism: rather, this analysis can be interpreted as showing that if one adopts a liberal view of non-interference and the fundamental democratic principle of unanimity , then one is forced to embrace egalitarian redistributive policies, including progressive taxation and the welfare state. Some important implications derive for both of the main contending approaches in political philosophy.

Alternatively, and perhaps more provocatively, our results can be seen as shedding new light on the normative foundations of egalitarian principles and progressive politics. For a strong support for redistributive policies derives from a combination of a belief in democratic procedures and a liberal principle of non-interference and individual autonomy.

Frederic Bastiat. Alexis de Tocqueville. We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. Close Privacy Overview This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website.

We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies.

But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience. Necessary Necessary. Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. Factor analyses indicate that the variables in Study 3 can be grouped into measures of tight social connection and measures of broad social connection. Libertarians score lower on both of these factors Figure 6.

If we relate Moral Foundation Questionnaire variables to these factors, we find that the values that typify liberals MFQ-harm and MFQ-fairness relate to this first factor, while the values that typify conservatives MFQ-authority, ingroup, and purity relate to this second factor. Notably, libertarians report lower valuation of both typically liberal and conservative concerns Figures 1 and 2 and correspondingly lower connectedness to the groups that typically are connected to either liberals or conservatives Figure 6.

As predicted, libertarians in our sample appeared to be strongly individualistic. Compared to liberals and conservatives, they report feeling a weaker sense of connection to their family members, romantic partners, friends, communities, and nations, as well as to humanity at large. While liberals exhibit a horizontal collectivistic orientation and conservatives a vertical collectivistic orientation, libertarians exhibit neither type of collectivism, instead displaying a distinctly individualistic orientation.

This relative preference for individualism may have been moralized [10] into the value orientation found in Study 1. Libertarians' weaker social interconnectedness is consistent with the idea that they have weaker moral intuitions concerning obligations to and dependence on others e. Moral Foundation Questionnaire scores. Their distaste for submitting to the needs and desires of others helps explain why libertarians have very different ways of relating to groups, consistent with their lower endorsement of values related to altruism, conformity, and tradition in Study 1, providing convergent evidence for the idea that moral judgment is tightly related to social functioning.

While not all libertarians endorse the views of Ayn Rand, our findings can be summarized by the three quotations we have presented from her work.

Libertarians scored relatively high on just one moral concern: liberty. The libertarian pattern of response was found to be empirically distinct from the responses of liberals and conservatives, both in our cluster analysis of participants and in our principal components analysis of measures.

We found strong support for our first prediction: Libertarians will value liberty more strongly and consistently than liberals or conservatives, at the expense of other moral concerns. This lack of emotional reactivity may underlie an indifference towards common moral norms, and an attraction to an ideology where these moral codes are absent, libertarianism.

The only emotional reaction on which libertarians were not lowest was reactance — the angry reaction to infringements upon one's autonomy — for which libertarians scored higher than both liberals and conservatives. This disposition toward reactance may lead to the moralization of liberty and an attraction to an ideology that exalts liberty above other moral principles — namely, libertarianism.

We also found that libertarians showed a strong preference for and enjoyment of reasoning higher on utilitarianism, need for cognition, systemizing, and a greater likelihood of answering correctly on the cognitive reflection task.

We introduced Study 3 with Rand's condemnation of love that is not based on a strong sense of self. We found that libertarians do indeed have a strong sense of self and the self's prerogatives, and a correspondingly lower sense of attachment to others. They exhibit a high degree individualism, a low degree collectivism, and generally report feeling less bonding with others, less loving for others, and less feelings of a sense of common identity with others.

Libertarians have a lower degree of the broad social connection that typifies liberals as well as a lower degree of the tight social connections that typify conservatives. These social preferences were related to their moral attitudes suggesting that libertarians have less functional use for moral concerns. We found strong support for out third prediction: Libertarians will be more individualistic and less collectivist compared to both liberals and conservatives.

The current research extends past comparisons between liberals and conservatives to a third ideological group — libertarians. Our findings are consistent with the emerging view that personality plays a crucial role in the formation of ideology. As is the case with liberals and conservatives [3] , libertarian ideological identification is characterized by specific moral concerns, a level 2 characteristic adaptation in McAdams' [23] model of personality.

But why do people develop differential preferences for specific moral concerns? Both McAdams' more general theory and recent theory specifically concerning the development of moral reasoning [8] posit that these constructs are often related to and constrained by level 1 traits; for example, previous research has shown that people who are dispositionally high on openness to experience are more likely to develop liberal values [1] , whereas people who are dispositionally high on disgust sensitivity are more likely to develop conservative values [14].

Further, consistent with widely tested theories of motivated reasoning [26] , people are likely to moralize their preferences [10] , especially their social preferences, given the interplay between social functioning and moral reasoning [30] , [33]. The current research not only describes an important ideological group, but also tells a coherent story about how and why some people become libertarians while others become liberals or conservatives.

While we cannot establish causality with our correlational data, we can see several cross-level links of the sort described by McAdams and Pals [35] and modeled by Lewis and Bates [9]. People who are dispositionally more at level 1 open to new experiences and reactant are more likely to find themselves drawn to some classically liberal philosophers such as John Stuart Mill and classically liberal values and ideals such as the superordinate value of individual liberty, at level 2.

But if these same people are also highly individualistic and low on empathic concern — if they simply feel the suffering of other people less — then they might feel little emotional attraction to modern liberalism's emphasis on altruism and positive liberty, and turned off by its willingness to compel some citizens to help other citizens through redistributive tax policies.

When they first encounter libertarian philosophy or read an Ayn Rand novel or hear a Ron Paul speech , they find an ideological narrative level 3 that resonates with their values and their emerging political likes and dislikes level 2. They begin identifying themselves as libertarians, which reinforces their moral beliefs. They find it easier to reject statements endorsing altruism or group loyalty or respect for authority than they would have before having discovered libertarianism and its rationalist, individualist ethos.

A related way to describe the links between personality and morality is found in Rozin's [10] description of the moralization of preferences. Libertarians' preferences about how to live their lives may have been transformed into a moral value — the value of liberty — in the same way that vegetarians have been found to moralize their eating preferences [78] or non-smokers moralize their aversion to smoke [79].

From a social intuitionist perspective [8] , this process is no different from the psychological comfort that liberals attain in moralizing their empathic responses e. For those who self-identify as libertarian in our sample, their dispositional and motivational profiles all point toward one supreme moral principle: individual liberty. The current research examined a specific ideological group in the United States, but just as research on other distinctive groups such as patients with brain lesions [30] or psychopaths [80] has been generative for understanding morality more broadly, so too do we hope that the current research is generative for researchers seeking to understand political processes in diverse socio-demographic contexts.

The current research, convergent with basic research on the intuitive origins of moral judgment [8] , suggests that similar patterns may be found in other groups that favor less government involvement in both social and economic matters, such as the Free Democratic Party of Germany, which advocates reduced economic regulation, greater privacy, and increased rights for homosexuals.

Even in countries without a political identity that mirrors American libertarianism, there are likely to be individuals who reject policies driven by empathy for the poor or promotion of tradition, and those individuals may exhibit some of the same dispositional traits that are characteristic of libertarians in the US context, such as a desire for solitude and a preference for rational over emotional experience.

However, without the reinforcing characteristics of a narrative that can bring coherence to these dispositions [36] , these individuals may not have had adequate opportunity to moralize their preferences [10] , and may therefore be more likely to be politically apathetic [81].

This set of studies has two main limitations: our findings rely almost exclusively on self-report measures, and our sample is not representative of the general population. Our reliance on self-report measures is partially mitigated by the fact that we used diverse measures that converge on an extremely consistent picture of libertarianism.

The fact that libertarian performance on the Cognitive Reflection Task and their responses to classic moral dilemmas converges with libertarian self-report of their cognitive and emotional style also mitigates some of this concern. Because so little has been written about libertarian psychology, we believe that our very large set of self-report measures is an important first step in characterizing libertarian psychology upon which more methodologically advanced work can build [16].

We hope that this research will inform future researchers who will undoubtedly investigate the relationships we have found using more experimental, behavioral, implicit, and even neuropsychological methods. Our use of a volunteer internet sample means that we must be cautious in generalizing our findings to the broader population. However, our results generally replicate across gender see Tables 2 , 3 , and 4 , as well as sub-samples based on the four most common methods of finding our website via search engines, the New York Times, Edge.

Since sub-sample analysis uses implicit browser referrer information that is technically difficult to fake, we can be confident that our results are not the result of any systematic deception by participants. In addition, many of our ancillary findings replicate previous research e. Finally, findings based on the yourmorals. Our sample, while far more diverse than most college samples [83] , has specific characteristics that reduce the generalizability of this research.

The sample tends to be more politically aware, educated, white, and liberal than a representative U. This reduces the likelihood of confounds due to race or education, but also means that it remains an open question whether the relationships found would hold within a less educated or more racially diverse group. In addition, political and moral differences are likely more salient in the context of our website, meaning that effect sizes may be increased in this setting.

The mean values for libertarians in our sample are likely quite different than the mean values for these measures if we were able to examine the population as a whole.

However, whereas the mean values derived from our dataset may differ from national averages, the relationships between variables in our dataset have been found to be comparable to nationally representative samples [84]. Our use of a volunteer internet sample gave us at least three benefits in terms of data quality.

First, because volunteers are often more educated and motivated, such samples often show less random measurement error, less survey satisficing, and less social desirability bias compared to nationally representative samples [85] — [87]. Second, unlike many surveys conducted by telephone, we were able to use full and well-validated scales to measure each construct, rather than relying on just one or two items.

And third, because nationally representative samples are expensive to procure, they rarely involve more than 2, respondents. While our sample represents a large number of libertarians, it may or may not represent the majority. Not withstanding our cluster analysis in Study 1, libertarianism may also be studied as a dimension that an individual may endorse to varying degrees rather than as a discrete kind of person, which may be one of the reasons that national surveys typically do not measure identification as libertarian.

William James [88] felt that he could best study the human experience of religion by studying its extreme forms. Our sample may be taken from one end of the libertarian dimension, specifically those who are willing to take the psychological step of self-identifying specifically as libertarian.

Libertarianism may be a dimension that may exist in both liberals and conservatives to varying degrees, as both liberals and conservatives endorse liberty as a moral value in different domains.

In learning about this group of individuals, perhaps we can learn something about the forces that push all individuals towards or away from endorsing liberty as a moral end. Political and social psychologists often study ideology on a unidimensional liberal-conservative spectrum, but the real world is clearly more complex. As psychologists advance in studying the personality traits associated with liberalism and conservatism, our findings confirm the value of this approach and extend its reach by describing a heretofore-neglected yet politically important group — libertarians.

Libertarians have a unique moral-psychological profile, endorsing the principle of liberty as an end and devaluing many of the moral concerns typically endorsed by liberals or conservatives. Although causal conclusions remain beyond our current reach, our findings indicate a robust relationship between libertarian morality, a dispositional lack of emotionality, and a preference for weaker, less-binding social relationships.

These findings are consistent with previous research on the dispositional origins of moral judgment. By focusing on one understudied ideological group, the findings provide further evidence concerning the closely intertwined nature of personality, values, and political ideology. Browse Subject Areas? Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

Abstract Libertarians are an increasingly prominent ideological group in U. Libertarian Ideology Modern libertarians are attitudinally diverse, but all types of libertarianism trace their origins back to the enlightenment thinkers of the 17 th and 18 th century who argued that states, laws, and governments exist for the benefit of the people. The Psychological Roots of the Libertarian Ideology The most obvious psychological characteristic of libertarian ideology is the value placed on negative liberty as an overriding moral principle, as can be seen in this quote concerning a law outlawing online gambling, from U.

Congressman Ron Paul [20] , the most libertarian contender in recent times for the nomination of a major political party: The most basic principle to being a free American is the notion that we as individuals are responsible for our own lives and decisions. The Current Research In this paper, we let libertarians speak for themselves. We begin with three general predictions. Libertarians will value liberty more strongly and consistently than liberals or conservatives, at the expense of other moral concerns.

This expectation is based on the explicit writings of libertarian authors e. Libertarians will rely upon emotion less — and reason more — than will either liberals or conservatives. This expectation is based upon previous research on the affective origins of moral judgment [8] , as well as libertarians' own self-characterizations.

For example, one of the main libertarian magazines is called, simply, Reason. Libertarians will be more individualistic and less collectivist compared to both liberals and conservatives. This expectation is based upon previous research concerning the social function of moral judgment [17] , [29] , [33].

Methods Participants and Sampling Considerations The analyses presented are based on data from , participants Overall Design Our main dependent variable is political self-identification, which we use to compare ideological groups within each specific study.

Download: PPT. Table 1. Results and Discussion Study 1: Describing Libertarian Morality If any civilization is to survive, it is the morality of altruism that men have to reject.

Figure 1. Libertarians have weaker intuitions about most moral concerns, but stronger intuitions about liberty. Ethics Position Questionnaire The Ethics Position Questionnaire [44] is composed of two item subscales measuring moral idealism and moral relativism.

Do libertarians have a unique moral profile? Cluster Analysis. Principal Components Analysis. Figure 2. Libertarians are more concerned with liberty values and less concerned with other-oriented and conservative values. Table 5. Study 1 Summary: What is Libertarian Morality? Big Five Personality Inventory The Big Five Personality Inventory [55] is a item measure of five personality traits often said to be the most fundamental traits in personality psychology: openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism.

Interpersonal Reactivity Index The Interpersonal Reactivity Index IRI [56] is a item measure of empathy, with 7 items covering each of four distinct aspects of empathic responding to others: 1 empathic concern for others, 2 fantasy, 3 personal distress, and 4 perspective-taking. Figure 3. Libertarians report lower emotional responsiveness, but higher levels of psychological reactance. Disgust Scale The Disgust Scale Revised [57] , [58] measures individual differences in the propensity to feel disgust toward three classes of elicitors: 1 core disgust animals and body products that pose a microbial threat, such as rats, vomit, and dirty toilets ; 2 animal-reminder disgust corpses, gore, and other reminders that human bodies are mortal, like animal bodies ; and 3 contamination concerns about coming into physical contact with other people.

Hong Reactance Scale The Hong Reactance scale [60] is an item measure of psychological reactance [61]. Figure 4. Libertarians exhibit a reason-based cognitive style according to a variety of measures. Need for Cognition The Need for Cognition scale [64] is a measure of the extent to which people engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activities.

Moral Dilemmas Six moral dilemmas adapted from Greene et. Cognitive Reflection Task The Cognitive Reflection Task [66] is a set of 3 logic questions that have correct and intuitive answers. Do libertarian dispositions lead to libertarian values? Figure 5.

Structural Equation Model showing relationship between libertarian dispositions and values. Individualism-Collectivism The Individualism-Collectivism scale [75] is a item scale that measures an individual's levels of independence vs. Identification with All of Humanity The Identification with All of Humanity Scale [76] is a item measure of connection to people in one's community, one's country, and the world.

Different Types of Love scale The Different Types of Love scale [77] is a item measure of loving feelings toward four different groups. Does libertarian individualism relate to libertarian values? Principal Component Analysis. Figure 6. Libertarians are less connected to others, including both broad and tight social connections.

Table 6. Conclusions While not all libertarians endorse the views of Ayn Rand, our findings can be summarized by the three quotations we have presented from her work. Personality and Ideology The current research extends past comparisons between liberals and conservatives to a third ideological group — libertarians. Limitations This set of studies has two main limitations: our findings rely almost exclusively on self-report measures, and our sample is not representative of the general population.

Summary Political and social psychologists often study ideology on a unidimensional liberal-conservative spectrum, but the real world is clearly more complex. Supporting Information.

Appendix S1. Liberty Items. References 1. Political Psychology — View Article Google Scholar 2. American Journal of Political Science — View Article Google Scholar 3. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology — View Article Google Scholar 4. Psychological bulletin 3 — View Article Google Scholar 5.

Boaz D Gallup's Conservatives and Libertarians. Accessed Jul 6. Accessed Aug 6. Haidt J The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review 4 — View Article Google Scholar 9. Lewis GJ, Bates TC From left to right: How the personality system allows basic traits to influence politics via characteristic moral adaptations.

Rozin P The process of moralization. Psychological Science 10 3 — View Article Google Scholar Sowell T A conflict of visions: The ideological origins of political struggles.

New York: Basic. Lakoff G Moral politics: How liberals and conservatives think. University of Chicago Press. Personality and Social Psychology Review 5: 2— Haidt J The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science — Locke J Two treatises of government, ed. Berlin I Four essays on liberty. Paul R Personal Freedoms and the Internet. Ron Paul Campaign website. Accessed Dec 7. Rawls J A theory of justice. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA.

Political Psychology 25 6 — Psychological Inquiry 7 4 — Science Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78 5 — Judgment and Decision Making 4: — Emotion 9 3 — Rand A The Objectivist Ethics. Haidt J The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York: Pantheon. Damasio AR The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness.

Mariner Books. Personality and Social Psychology Review — Rand A The Fountainhead. New American Library. Haidt J, Kesebir S Morality. Handbook of Social Psychology, 5th Edition pp. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. McAdams DP What do we know when we know a person? Journal of personality — American Psychologist 61 3 —