There is a core attraction to libertarianism, although scholars differ on definition and expressions take different paths, almost all of us can relate to certain articulations. In North America, libertarianism has been hijacked by the right wing and we have this bastardized belief system which frankly borders on the absurd. In Canada, for the first time, we are starting to see the practical manifestations of this hybrid libertarianism and within that we see the convenient mirage, the simplistic belief system which bears no relationship to any world humans actually populate.
On the national scene, Harper is slowly but surely dismantling the federal core, in favour of free market forces, unencumbered by checks which have evolved out of necessity, rather than some misplaced argument against the nanny state. Environmental reviews came to be because the free market failed to protect the citizens, their amoral zeal for profit resulted in destructive impacts for society, they fouled our water, our soil, our air, etc. The "state" intervened because intervention was required, only here was their any detached moral underpinning to counter naked greed that operates without consequence. To now see the environmental review processes as intrusive may have validity in terms of degree, but it is dangerous and nonsensical when one doesn't incorporate how we GOT here in the first place.
If you want to see the new absurdity of the Canadian libertarianism, Wildrose is the case study. Listen to a Danielle Smith, WORSE her apologists like a Joan Crockatt for example and you just don't understand that libertarian spirit in Alberta, somehow intolerance is flipped around into a virtue, it's about letting everyone express themselves, it's actually about tolerance! Oh bull, the notion has been taken to such an extreme to render the assertion paralyzed. The state has no role in admonishing views which think homosexuals will burn in a lake in of fire, that's your new libertarianism Canada! That people actually turn a lack of leadership into an enviable trait, only serves to demonstrate that this libertarianism operates in a fantasy land that humans have never visited. There is nothing admirable in tolerating intolerance and failing to distance yourself, failure to do so is tantamount to sanction, that is your libertarian end game here.
Nobody likes being told what to do, nobody likes excessive intervention in the affairs of men. However, in a practical world we accept compromises between individual liberty and a greater interest that is the sum of our parts. There is a naive idealism with these modern expressions of libertarianism, certain legitimate "beefs" taken to the level of borderline absurdity. I would argue having a person who hopes to "lead" a province fail to admonish outrageous views is the byproduct of a simplistic view of the world that leads to dangerous practicalities.
If recent expressions are representative of Canadian libertarianism, Harper, Smith, the minons and their tortured tenets, I reject it all, see it as dangerous, reckless, woefully simplistic, lacking nuance, ironically close minded and the beginning of the true end of the Canadian federation, at least in any meaningful, cohesive expression. Time is my unwanted friend on that score. I believe we are just NOW beginning to digest the impact of rule under misguided ideologues and their almost fairy tale world they think humans can operate within.