So, the thread is simple, how have your political thoughts evolved over time?

I probably first started getting interested in politics around the age of 14/15. I had a history teacher who was very political, and his passion influenced me. At the time, I was enrolled in the state-propaganda factory known as the education system, and, naturally, I started off as a "progressive liberal" (not what I called it at the time). My main areas of issue were the environment, global inequality, and poverty.

Then I got into college (age 16) where I studied politics and economics. In here, I learned about things like property rights, but all I was taught was the Keynesian school. As such, although my views on things like global trade improved, I still very much believed in state intervention, particularly in the bad times (I started college in 2008).

In my second year of college, I began to reject the notions of Keynes, but I didn't really know much about alternate schools, I knew that they existed, but that was about it. I started to learn, but I was only focused on economics at the time. Things like history, philosophy, that kind of thing didn't come until later. Really, by the time I left College I suppose you could call me a neoconservative.

And that's how I entered Uni. In Uni, however, I started meeting a lot of people who were from the Israeli/Palestine area, and people with actual knowledge and views about the Iraq war (I come from a predominatly white area... so the only two views I got were "it's needed for our defence", or "not with my money"). It was around this time I started questioning Government on foreign policy.

In the past year, I've been reading a lot, and doing a lot of thinking. I started the academic year (so, last September) as a libertarian...  today, I could probably be described as an anarcho-capitalist.

In short, my progression:

Progressive Liberal -> "Keynesian" -> Neoconservative -> Libertarian -> Anarcho-Capitalist

How about you?

I never really knew much about politics before like a year or two ago. I always voted Conservative (Right-wing party in Canada) just because of family influence...but now I'm more of a Libertarian.

It's a shame though because there are only 3 legitimate choices of party in Canada (which I guess is better than just 2 like in America) but ours are basically all left wing...the Conservative party in Canada is more left wing than the American Democrats. We have no Libertarian or really far right wing option.

No evolution. Always Conservative.

Conservative->Minarchist

My Dads side has always been quite political ever since I can remember so it wasn't too much of a surprise that I became quite political.

My Dads a conservative and at the beginning around 14/15 I was fairly conservative in my view of economics and society. However as I got older and started to study domestic and foreign policy in depth using mainly dissident material as my source, I came to realise the 'mass corporate owned media' was simply manufacturing consent on behalf of the ruling class and feeding it to the masses.

There's still a conservative element to me (Governments should not be wasteful with taxpayers money) but I would probably class myself as something of an anarchist of the libertarian socialist strain. And I'm talking about the original meaning behind those words not the skewed American interpretation.

Why is 3 better than 2 better than 1? The number of parties is inconsequential, it's about what those parties represent. As you say, in Canada you still have very little choice, despite effectively being a 3-party state. The same is true throughout the whole of Europe, there is effectively zero difference between the parties.

There is a lot of truth to this in the USA, too. Particularly at the Federal level. It's only small groups of the parties that hold major differencies (and they seem to be more separate at local/state levels... Michigan is a very different state to live in, compared to New Hampshire).

That's interesting, during my transition period I was obviously a minarchist as I rejected more and more notions of the state.

Which parts of the state do you still believe in? Most minicarists seem to like state-owned law creation/enforcement (police, courts, prisons), and state-militias.

I believe this to be a great myth perpetuated by both the American and European medias. The USA has vast numbers of welfare programs, and have promised more in welfare than any European country. There's also a vast difference in the amount of welfare state-to-state. With the exception of Hollande, Obama is more left-wing than just about any European leader at the moment. He's also the biggest spender in the history of the world, and there are many Democrats and regular voters who agree with him.

What do you mean by that? Those words seem very contradictory, to me.