I’ve addressed this issue in 2016 and 2021, so let’s continue this once-every-five-years tradition and ask whether supporters of economic liberty should stop advocating for “capitalism.”

Instead, they should say they believe in “free enterprise” or the “free market.”

I’ve used all of these terms, but polling data suggests that I’m making a mistake when I defend capitalism.

Here’s some data from Echelon Insights.

As you can see, more voters like “free market economy” than “capitalism.” And the difference is enormous among younger Democrats.

By the way, it is enormously depressing that so many young Democrats have a favorable view of “socialism,” but that’s a topic for another day.

Sticking with the debate between “capitalism” and “free enterprise,” here’s some data from Gallup.

Among all adults in America, the latter term has a much more favorable image. But if you scroll down, you’ll see that Democrats are nearly twice as likely to have a positive view of “free enterprise.”

By the way, it is utterly bizarre that 65 percent of Democrats view “socialism” favorably while the same percentage have a positive view of “free enterprise.” That’s like simultaneously cheering for the Yankees and the Red Sox.

That’s not a partisan jab, however. There are lots of Republicans who say they support free markets but also support big-government politicians like Trump.

But I’m digressing.

Let’s wrap up this column with arguments from two supporters of economic liberty who have different perspectives on the use of “capitalism.” In favor is Rainer Zitelmann. Here are excerpts from what he wrote for the Foundation for Economic Education.

For many people, “capitalism” has a bad ring to it, probably all over the world. That is certainly the case in the 14 countries I commissioned Ipsos MORI to conduct a survey into attitudes toward capitalism. The survey proved that support for capitalism rises significantly everywhere if only you avoid mentioning the irritating word itself and frame your questions to describe what capitalism means using other words. …I prefer to speak of capitalism, even if perhaps a term such as “entrepreneurial economy” would better capture the essence of what I mean by “capitalism.” If a term has negative connotations, there is no point in focusing exclusively on changing the word. On the contrary. Those who avoid a word because they are afraid of criticism are only demonstrating their inner insecurity and weakness. And there is not the slightest reason to feel insecure or weak. Before capitalism came into being, most people in the world lived in extreme poverty – in 1820, the rate was 90 percent. …if the term provokes some people—so much the better: because then the discussion about the benefits of capitalism can start immediately!

Zitelmann is correct. Whatever you want to call it, economic liberty has led to mass prosperity and huge reductions in poverty.

I suspect Alex Salter and Rainer Zitelmann agree on almost everything, but pushing for “capitalism” is an exception.

Here’s some of what he wrote for the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal.

Here’s the essential difference between capitalism and free enterprise. Capitalism is pro-business. Its slogan is, “What’s good for Wall Street is good for America.” But free enterprise is pro-market. Its slogan is, “Property rights for all, special privileges for none.” For defenders of liberty and equality, free enterprise is clearly superior. …Adam Smith, the godfather of modern economics, understood the difference between free enterprise and capitalism. His Wealth of Nations, published the same year America declared its independence, extolled the benefits of free enterprise. Given a level economic playing field and genuine competition, private property is a great boon to national wealth. But political and economic elites constantly try to quash free enterprise. …The conventional wisdom about big businesses hating regulations and taxes is wrong. In fact, big businesses love these things. They know they can cope with these burdens much more easily than their smaller, nimbler competitors. Regulation and taxes don’t promote competition. They stifle competition. If we want to restore free enterprise, we need to reform our byzantine web of economic restrictions. Let people produce and trade freely. Free enterprise means everyone has a right to seek their fortune without big business or big government blocking the way.

What Salter is arguing is that capitalism is the same as cronyism to many people. And even I am sometimes guilty of using the term “crony capitalism” when I should be simply referring to “cronyism.”

For what it’s worth, I’m guessing that Salter would acknowledge that most supporters of capitalism – such as Zitelmann – are viscerally opposed to cronyist policies.

But maybe he’s right about corrupt large businesses making genuine capitalism unpalatable to most people.

To further muddy the debate, Deirdre McCloskey argues the correct term for economic liberty is innovism. She explains that “the great enrichment” was made possible because entrepreneurs in certain nations were largely free engage in creative destruction.

The bottom line is that I should probably increase my use of “free market” or “free enterprise” and phase out my use of “capitalism.”

P.S. Maybe economic liberty in the future will be known as Milei-ism?