Talk:Libertarian Party of Canada

John Shaw
None of the John Shaw listings are even up here. Try, www.ourcampaigns.com don't care for their administrating of members, but many of the facts they have are better than this place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gzlfb (talk • contribs) 16:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Dennis Young
Should be Dennis M Young given how garden veriety the name is; for info on him there's www.westernstandard.ca and it's blog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.17.145.232 (talk) 18:33, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Number doesn't add up
According to this page, in 2008 federal election - they garner a little over 1,000 votes - but according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election,_2008, the LPC garner 7,300 votes - obviously either this one or the other result is incorrect - though Election Canada said 7,300. Either way, someone made a mistake by a wide margin as it seems REDSoC (talk) 03:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I made corrections to the vote that they garner according to the result of the election at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadia_federal_election,_2008 - please make sure you get the right numbers, not sure what you been getting the other numbers from though —Preceding unsigned comment added by REDSoC (talk • contribs) 03:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Anarchism
The Libertarian Party seems to represent anarchism more then libertarianism, if you look at their policy -they even go as far as abolition of national/provincial park and selling them to private interest and the abolition of taxes, government healthcare and even privatizing schools —Preceding unsigned comment added by Green Liberal (talk • contribs) 22:44, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Their platform is minarchist, not anarchist. Epigrammed (talk) 01:29, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Anarchism is defined as absolutely NO government. The Libertarian Party of Canada wants government to be strictly limited to National Defence, Police and the courts, as defined in their Statement of Principles on their web site, www.libertarian.ca. LibertarianCFO (talk) 18:25, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Political position
I'm going to change the "ideology" from "libertarianism", which has come to be utterly meaningless, to "minarchism". I would also like to ask if perhaps the "political position" can be changed to something like "right-libertarianism" or at least "libertarian", since "right-wing" does not even remotely do justice in describing the party's politics. Epigrammed (talk)` —Preceding undated comment added 17:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Provincial governments
The article states that the LPC is a federal political party, so it will never form a provincial government. Why has this been added to the infobox? I propose to remove it. Comments? Ground Zero &#124; t 01:09, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

== "In the 2015 federal election, the party fielded 72 candidates and solidified their position as the 6th federal party in Canada. With growth over 500% from the 2011 elections, the party is the fastest growing party." == 199.7.156.128 (talk) 11:24, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Since its vote totals in 1979, it has grown about 233%.
 * Since it's (apparent) first election run in 1984, the Green Party of Canada has increased its vote totals almost 2250%. It has always got more votes that the Libertarian party in every federal election since.
 * While Green Party candidates had, I think, 9 candidates running in 2015 (Green Party of Canada candidates, 2015 Canadian federal election), the Libertarian party had only 3, one of which Lauren Southern, was/is a staunch Donald Trump supporter and supports his anti-immigrant views. The LPC seems to ignore this.

199.119.232.214 (talk) 07:40, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Recent changes
Hi, I see you recently made some major change to this page on 22 September. We should be using reliable sources when making claims and I don't see what reliable sources you were using to justify your changes such as changing the party's ideology from libertarianism to classical liberalism. Helper201 (talk) 22:04, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for your comment. First, I do not see how those were major changes, since they propose classical liberalism, economic liberalism, and fiscal conservatism, as is stated in the lead; do you even disagree with this? Second, as reflected by the template, this article needs additional citations for verification anyway. Third, laissez-faire capitalism, non-interventionism, and voluntaryism are either redundant or not proper ideologies; ideally, we should have just one main ideology, like social democracy for the SPD and Christian democracy for the CDU. Fourth, it is not NPOV by using American-centric terms like libertarianism (clearly, this party is similar to the Libertarian Party in the United States) when in Europe that is simply known as liberalism and really advocates economic liberalism; incidentally, we precisely say that libertarianism has been co-opted for economic liberalisations, so the real "unreasoned and seemingly unevidenced" changes are acting like this party represent broad libertarianism rather than a rewording of economic, classical liberalism like in the United States, or right-libertarianism. That they identify as neither left or right is irrelevant, as free-market capitalism belongs to the political right and right-libertarianism does not necessarily mean it is right wing, just that it is to the right of other libertarianisms. I would be saying the same thing for a more left-leaning party; I would suggest to have left-libertarianism or libertarian socialism rather than a generic libertarianism that can include pro-socialists, free-market capitalists, and anything in between, and does not really say anything or is helpful in categorizing a party. Davide King (talk) 06:25, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the reply. It’s not that I agree or disagree with these ideologies per se, it’s just that I didn't see what sources were being used to support such claims or what justified one over the other. The problem is I think your reasoning strays into original research. I'm not saying this because I necessarily disagree or agree with your arguments or reasoning, it’s just that we should not be using our own reasoning as editors. We must simply go by what reliable sources explicitly state. Therefore, if one wants to remove uncited information, I see no problem with that, just so long as whatever it is replaced with / changed to is cited. I also wouldn't say libertarianism is an "American-centric term", it’s an ideology that exists globally. Helper201 (talk) 09:13, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks again for your respectful comment and apologised if I sounded patronizing or something. I definitely see your point but I think this can be an exception. Just like communism is used to mean not generic communism but Communist states and Marxism–Leninism, what matters the most, and can avoid OR (it also goes both ways, as just because the party is a Libertarian party, it does not necessarily mean its ideology is libertarianism or that it necessarily represents the small-c libertarian movement; several right-wing populist parties can also be categorized as New Right/radical-right libertarian parties for favouring economic liberalism over the interventionism of like-minded parties; I am not saying it is the case of this party), is the context in which the term is used; by your stnadard, any paraphrasing we make is or could be OR. We have a section at Liberalism that explains this, where libertarian is used to mean what in Europe is called economic liberalism or just liberalism.
 * The lead (ending drug prohibition, ending government censorship, lowering taxes, protecting gun rights and non-interventionism) and iPolitics source ("Canada's own Rand Paul? Libertarian Party amps up for election") make it clear that it is a party based after the Libertarian Party in the United States, where libertarian has became a synonym for classical liberals or liberal in the European sense. Again, we should really ideally have only one or few links at Ideology. Laissez-faire capitalism, non-interventionism, and voluntaryism are either redundant or policies rather than ideologies. If you agree, I think we can reduce it to classical liberalism, economic liberalism, and fiscal conservatism, since libertarianism is too broad and depends on the context and makes more sense for the Libertarian Party in the United States, as we have a country-specific article about it, and so it is perfectly fine. As you noted, it exists globally and especially outside the Anglo-Saxon bubble it is not used for economic liberal or free-market capitalist parties, such as this one. Economic liberalism is particularly apt because most such parties focus on economic terms, and even their civil or personal liberalism is based or justified on economic grounds or terms, while more left-leaning libertarians justify them on egalitarian (equal liberty) grounds. This is based from sources I have read on the broad topic, and I do not think it is particularly controversial. Davide King (talk) 05:14, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I disagree. There is a lot of WP:OR in your response, such as "make it clear that it is a party based after the Libertarian Party in the United States, where libertarian has became a synonym for classical liberals or liberal in the European sense". This is your view/interpretation. With all due respect whether you are right or wrong we go by what reliable sources explicitly state. Helper201 (talk) 11:45, 26 October 2021 (UTC)