Is the Idaho Freedom Foundation conservative or libertarian?

Is the Idaho Freedom Foundation conservative or libertarian?

by
Wayne Hoffman
October 26, 2021
Wayne Hoffman
Author Image
October 26, 2021

The dirty little secret about political labels is that nearly all of them are creations of the leftist legacy news media. When “news” organizations report that a politician is “conservative,” quite often that label is based on an extremely shallow subset of criteria: Republican party affiliation, pro-life and pro-gun votes, and a stated aversion to national figures such as Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi. In truth, many of the elected officials that the socialists in the media claim are conservative are actually very much leftists. 

The labels are irrelevant, and the loose use of the words by the press makes them largely meaningless.

That said, when reporters write that the IFF is “Libertarian” (with a capital letter “L”) that implies a connection with the Libertarian Party, which is an absolute lie. The IFF is nonpartisan, and is not connected with any political party: Libertarian, Republican, or Democrat. As far as the lowercase version of the word, IFF has never labeled itself as “libertarian.” 

The IFF’s policy concentration is on the limitation of government, which is central to the definition of conservative values, and the conservative spectrum of political ideas sometimes overlaps with libertarianism. Some libertarians believe that no government is the proper level of government. The IFF does not share that objective. We do, however, believe there is too much government, and too much government harms people and denies people their God-given rights.

If one is to label the IFF, it is most appropriate to label it as “conservative,” but more appropriate and specific descriptors would be “pro-limited government,” “pro-free market,” “pro-liberty,” and so on.

View Comments
  • Bee says:

    🤜💣🤛Nicely worded!

  • Marc Seeley says:

    One word labels for political parties obscure what the organization behind the party name stands for. This is why I refer to the current "Democrat " party as the Democrat Socialist Progressive Communist party. I believe this conveys who they really are and what they stand for.

    • Brad Gee says:

      You can be both Socialist and Communist, these are 2 very different concepts.

      • KJ says:

        Lenin said "The goal of socialism is communism".
        Marxists often refer to socialism as the first, necessary phase on the way from capitalism to communism. Marx and Engels themselves didn’t consistently or clearly differentiate communism from socialism, which helped ensure lasting confusion between the two terms.
        Don't get any clearer than that.

    • KJ says:

      As a former communist from my youth I saw the dems as communistic back in the 80's. Now days they are outright about being commies.

  • KJ says:

    Being a political atheist I despise parties and view them as unconstitutional.
    I view politics as division. Several ideas competing for hearts.

    The truth is, all politicians are whores for money. What Idaho needs is a new government made up of people who actually care about freedom and liberty. Hard ticket to fill in the age of entitlements.

    • john livingston says:

      Lumping whores with politicians gives whores a bad name. I hope that wasn't "too political". Whores pay taxes, politicians spend taxes with little accountability----the fruit of our labors. "Value added vs. value stolen Who is more moral?

  • Idaho Freedom Foundation
    802 W. Bannock Street, Suite 405, Boise, Idaho 83702
    p 208.258.2280 | e [email protected]
    COPYRIGHT © 2021 Idaho freedom Foundation
    magnifiercrossmenucross-circle
    >
    linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram