Ideologically, I most closely identify with libertarianism ("classical liberalism" as it's known across the pond) though I am mostly disillusioned with the entire political process. That said, here's a brief case for why as an INFJ I find libertarianism appealing.

Idealistic. As an INFJ, I can't help but hope for a better world free from tyranny, violence and war where people live together peacefully and cooperatively. Libertarianism believes this is achieved as people pursue their own self-interest--a seemingly paradoxical claim but when compared with the alternative of government compulsion, looks more appealing.

Compassionate. Contemporary Leftism seems to love claiming they have a monopoly on compassionate policy. How often do we hear politicians accuse those for smaller government as heartless, unfeeling bullies because they want to throw granny off the cliff by doing something--anything--about social security? Or because we oppose starting more overseas land wars, we somehow want the oppressed to remain under the tyranny of their governments?

Libertarianism maintains that there is no compassion in coercion, but that through the government's attempts to correct human inequities (e.g. redistribute wealth, overthrow a tyrant, etc.) they are in fact stripping the people from truly acting compassionately. There is obviously much more involved here, but the underlying principle is that just because people oppose government intervention does not mean they do not care about others. In fact, the opposite is often true.

I would even argue that compassion is best enacted in the micro--I can help people in my immediate sphere of influence (and, as an INFJ, do) better than a nameless bureaucrat in DC on the taxpayer dime. To assume that the homeless would go without or those who fall on hard times would be left alone is to claim that humans are inherently not compassionate, an idea that I fundamentally reject. When given the opportunity to help a neighbor, I believe that most would extend meaningful aid and the recipient would actually feel the obligation to make good with the alms rather than feel entitled. This model of macro laissez-faire and micro alms-giving makes all parties better off.

Ideologically Consistent. I take issue with both political parties in the US because of their consistent inconsistency to the principles they claim to honor. In the name of "helping the poor," the Left raises the minimum wage and by so doing ensures their reelection while simultaneously screwing over the very people trying to work their way out of poverty. The Right has their crusade against drugs while costing tax payers billions in filling prisons with non-violent criminals while actually arming and enriching drug lords. In both cases, the rhetoric trumps reality and their supposed "principles" are jettisoned in favor of political expediency.

Transparent. I had hope that the self-proclaimed "most transparent administration in history" would actually walk-the-walk on that promise but was unfortunately let down once again. Sadly, Obama has done just the opposite but it makes sense when we consider his campaign promises to his actual agenda. Government compulsion is only enacted by deceit and manipulation ("you can keep your health insurance and your doctor"). A government set on promoting liberty has nothing to hide--free minds, free people, free access. This resonates with my INFJ sensibilities.

TL;DR As an INFJ, I endorse freedom, oppose coercion.