Kids Are Natural Libertarians

Different cultures or religious backgrounds may see newborn humans as having different natures—some view them as purely good, while others see them as sinful. For me, young kids are natural libertarians.

With all their so-called sinfulness (typically "selfishness"), kids naturally implement libertarian and voluntary principles when interacting with each other. Interestingly enough, I have found that grownups have no issues teaching kids libertarian principles (unknowingly), yet the majority fail to apply the same rules when encountering real-life matters.

One day, after watching an ad on YouTube about NSW police targeting drivers without seatbelts, my son remarked, “We need to wear seatbelts, or the police will catch us.”

This led us into a lively conversation about laws, safety, and personal responsibility.

I asked him, “Why do you think we should wear seatbelts?”

“To stay safe,” he replied confidently.

“Sure, wearing seatbelts will protect us, right?”

“Certainly,” he answered.

“If we don’t wear a seatbelt, who will get hurt?”

“We will,” he said.

“Then why are the police catching people who get hurt?”

“Oh, yeah... the ambulance should come instead,” he mused.

“Exactly! But then why would the police want to catch people who have already been hurt?”

This was a gotcha moment. He thought for a moment before admitting, “I don’t know.”

I continued, “In your opinion, what is the role of the police?”

“To catch bad guys, like people speeding because they could crash and hurt others,” he said without hesitation.

“So,” I asked, “if someone punches themselves at home, they’re hurting themselves but not others. Should the police get involved?”

He giggled. “No, that would be silly!”

“So if a driver chooses not to wear a seatbelt, they’re putting themselves at risk. Should the police stop them?”

This again stumped him momentarily, but he eventually concluded, “No.”

The conversation illuminated a core libertarian principle: personal responsibility. My son, just five, recognised the distinction between protecting others from harm—a legitimate role for law enforcement—and interfering in someone’s personal choices, even when those choices may be risky.

“Sharing is caring” is a catchy slogan taught to children generation after generation. Why do we teach kids to share? Because it fosters kindness and empathy. However, we don’t teach them that sharing is required simply because someone else has fewer toys or feels entitled to what they have.

Imagine if we told them, “You must share because you have too many toys.” It would strip the act of generosity of its meaning and replace it with resentment.

This idea translates easily to society at large. Voluntary charity, instead of compulsory taxation imposed by a government under threat of force, fosters goodwill and mutual respect—just like a child offering a toy to a friend. Coerced redistribution, by contrast, creates entitlement, obligation, and ultimately erodes both generosity and property rights. Kids understand this intuitively—they are far more willing to share when it’s their choice rather than a rule imposed upon them. And, importantly, it's also okay not to share.

Playgrounds provide another fascinating window into how children naturally interact and negotiate. If one child brings a ball, they often take on the informal role of gatekeeper. “It’s my ball,” they’ll say, deciding who can and can’t play with it. While this may seem selfish, it mirrors the fundamental concept of property rights. The ball belongs to them because they brought it, and others recognise this ownership.

However, that’s rarely where the game ends. The child with the ball will often realise that it’s not much fun to keep the ball to themselves, so they start setting up rules for play, offering rewards, and defining roles—including informal judges. While the ball owner may have more say or the final word, all participants willingly play according to the agreed-upon rules. They may even negotiate and evolve the rules to keep the game engaging, ensuring more people stay motivated and continue playing. This spontaneous order mirrors the natural development of a free society.

By observing how children grow, live, and interact with others, it becomes evident that kids are natural libertarians. They value voluntary sharing, respect property rights, and believe in personal responsibility. These instincts provide a foundation for a society where freedom and cooperation thrive.

As adults, we often complicate these principles with rules and systems that override individual choice in the name of the so-called collective good. But perhaps we would do well to revisit the simplicity of childhood wisdom. When even a five-year-old can question the logic of punishing someone for not wearing a seatbelt, it’s worth asking: are we living in a nanny state that over-polices personal behaviour? Are we teaching generosity or enforcing it? Are we encouraging spontaneous order or undermining it?

Returning to these fundamental principles may lead us toward a freer and more responsible society—one that children seem to grasp instinctively, long before they can spell the word "libertarian."