Is this what Libertarian success looks like?
So far, in 2025, we’ve had two elections. The results were less than stellar for the federal and Ontario Libertarian parties. Are new strategies warranted?
Halcyon days.
In 2018, I was OLP Chairman. Under then-Leader Allen Small, we tried something new - to prioritize a full slate of candidates for all 124 electoral ridings hoping for a big payoff in media attention and voting results. Unfortunately, none of our 116 ballot candidates was elected and only one exceeded the 2% of votes in his riding required for Ontario’s per vote subsidy.
Jacques Boudreau, current Leader of the federal Libertarian Party of Canada (LPoC), is correct when he states that it is the job of a political party to win votes and win elections. After 50 years of effort, no Liberation candidate has ever won. The prospect of forming a government is extremely remote. What does this say about the job these parties are doing?
Unknown to members of the Ontario Libertarian Party and the Libertarian Party of Canada, a discussion has taken place about an new idea that involves changing how the Libertarian option appears on every election ballot across Canada.
What if, instead of ‘Ontario Libertarian Party’ and ‘Libertarian Party of Canada’, the ballot reads ‘Less Government 4 Ontario/Canada’?
This change would clearly identify candidates whose top priority it to reduce governments’ size, cost and scope of authority.
This Less Government option would be a clear contrast to the big spending BORG ballot alternatives.
Let’s consider some reasons to consider this ballot rebranding idea.
Clarity.
The term “Libertarian” is poorly understood by nearly everyone. It has been associated with right-wing extremism and is constantly maligned by nearly every source of propaganda in the modern age. Politically, I consider it an albatross hanging around the neck of every Libertarian candidate.
Jim McIntosh, former OLP CFO, believes that the best way to overcome this problem is extensive campaigning door-to-door to teach the truth about Libertarianism. How many of OLP’s small list of members have done this in recent elections?
A referendum.
At the most recent OLP and LPoC annual general meetings in 2024, the idea of considering a ballot name change to ‘Less Government for Ontario’ and ‘Less Government for Canada’ was discussed and rejected. However, party members have yet to be surveyed for their opinion.
At the convention, after this ballot rebranding idea was defeated, I told OLP Leader Mark Snow that I would run as an “Independent for Less Government” in the next Ontario election as an experiment to see if my results would be better. Unfortunately, Elections Ontario refused my request and I was listed only as an “Independent” in the February 2025 election.
At the only All-Candidates event held in Lindsay, I made it clear to the attendees that I represent the only Less Government option on their ballot even if the ballot did not specifically state it. I promoted DOGE Ontario after stating the obvious: “The #1 problem in Canada today is too much government at all four levels”. Unfortunately, only the 150 attendees heard my pitch and most were nodding their heads in agreement.
My Independent election results were no better than the six prior runs as an OLP candidate, but at 431 votes they still exceeded the number for the OLP candidate in my riding. This proves nothing, but it also shows that I had nothing to lose by this experiment.
Purpose.
The OLP and LPoC are registered with Elections Ontario and Elections Canada respectively. If their job has been to win elections, they have failed. I have lost faith in their future success.
This partially explains why I chose to experiment by branding myself as an Independent 4 Less Government. I had nothing to lose and potentially more to gain. Would a brand change to Less Government change the future fortunes of those parties?
No one will know unless it is attempted party-wide and over several elections.
My personal “business card” has stated ‘Advocate for Less Government’ instead of “Libertarian” for many years.
I see no value in carrying the baggage of the “Libertarian” brand during elections.
Besides, I do not run in elections to get elected and, as such, I never refer to myself as a Libertarian “politician”. I learned after my first two elections that getting elected as a Libertarian was a pipe dream. I began to refuse campaign donations thereafter because my conscience won’t allow me to make promises that are impossible to keep.
Since 2018, I have used elections to promote libertarian values and less government.
The number of votes I receive as an “advocate” candidate is unimportant.
Only “politicians” takes their vote count seriously because it is vital to their goal to get elected.
I am more interested in winning ‘hearts and minds’ instead.
Political reality.
Andrew Breitbart is famous for observing “Politics is downstream of culture”. The majority of Canadians favour “progressive” policies that require more government size, cost and scope of authority.
Since 1961, the amount of money that average Canadians remit to all levels of government in taxes and other costs has risen from 38% to 55% of their annual earnings. This trend had been the consequence of the “progressive” policy roads that most Canadians have traveled politically for 65 years.
Politics won’t change until our political culture changes.
In my small way, this is the whole point of my “advocacy” efforts in elections, and my Substack writing.
Changing culture.
As Scott Marshall, OLP Deputy Leader, pointed out recently, Libertarian values are very popular with Canadians, especially now after the authoritarianism displayed by our governments during the pandemic years.
‘Freedom groups’ sprung up by the dozens to protest government overreach. Cleverly, however, the libertarian values they espoused were targeted and hijacked by the BORG (blue, orange, red and Green) parties and shape-shifted to suit their progressive political agendas with well-crafted propaganda.
Nothing sells better to “victims” and “bleeding hearts” than a social justice problem backed by new government “solutions”.
Public Relations experts.
Today’s media and public institutions hire PR consultants to infect the consciousness of the masses with very effective propaganda. The BORG, and their NGO friends, have infinitely more money and influence than the OLP and LPoC to engage and leverage the expertise of these specialists.
Meanwhile, the inhabitants of our little boats of Libertarian branding are constantly bailing out leaking water while crashing on shards of icebergs, praying for help that never comes.
Desperate times? Are Libertarian party members poised to jump ship like these lifeboat survivors did when the Titanic sank?
Counter-arguments.
Jacques Bourdeau argued that my idea will fail, citing the PPC which also stands for Less Government but, like the LPoC, performed very poorly in the recent election. I pointed out that the PPC does not appear as a ‘less government’ ballot option either making his counter-argument moot.
In fact, there is not a single party in Canada that offers electors the specifically-stated Less Government ballot choice either.
If average electors saw Less Government as a legitimate ballot choice, how would they react? How many Canadians harbour deep frustrations with everything that governments do to make their lives, and those of their kids and grandkids, more expensive and inconvenient? Would they see Less Government as a protest vote that is more compelling than any of the BORG alternatives?
We won’t know the answers to those questions unless we try to find out, will we?
My options.
What began as an experiment is now a choice between two options. Elections Ontario, Elections Canada and the Executive Committees of the OLP and LPoC have defined these options for me.
To restate: I AM NOT a “politician” who campaigns for votes. I AM merely an ‘advocate’ for a set of ideas. As such, my goals fail to meet the expectations of party leaders like Jacques. Furthermore, election regulations restrict me from running as an ‘Independent for Less Government’ ballot option; only political parties are allowed to define their purpose on ballots. Hence, my choices now are:
Option 1:
Lobby Elections Ontario and Elections Canada to change their policies so that Independent candidates can define themselves on every ballot. Scott Marshall sagely suggested that I can argue my case as a human rights issue.
Option 2:
Find another existing political party that espouses libertarian values and is willing to stand as the only “less government” alternative on every ballot.
While this idea was firmly rejected by the OLP and LPoC executives, perhaps this essay may serve as a referendum question for the Libertarian membership communities and citizens at large to see if they agree with this decision.
Of the two options, the first is more attractive to me but less convenient given the time and effort likely to be involved in dealing with government authorities.
Lost faith.
I no longer consider the party system to be “democratic”. I see no future for Libertarian party involvement in it unless significant strategy changes are considered. However, Libertarian values and principles are the best if real change is possible.
I dream.
Imagine a decentralized political system devoid of parties - a kind of direct democracy governance model like the Swiss had for four centuries.
I aspire to a similar vision of Canada in the future, empowered by the ideas described in the eBook ‘Digital Direct Democracy - An Antidote to Digital Communism’.
If dreams come true, perhaps some day in the future more citizens will choose the same vision by starting to vote for their local ‘Independent for Less Government’ candidates and eventually for ‘Independent for Decentralized Direct Direct Democracy’.
bummer that it is misunderstood