Please give your persuasion prior to becoming a Mises supporter/enthusiast.
Were you a left-wing/socialistic/Democrat Party loyalist?
Were you a right-wing/neoconservative/Republican Party loyalist?
What was your enduring rationale for your prior persuasion?
What was it about Austrian Economics that you discovered that made you change your mind?
I myself was (to my eternal shame now) a hardcore neoconservative Republican partisan. Growing up, I had listened to talk radio with my mother (who was a hardcore republican and still is quite devoted to republican ideals while not having the loyalty to the party apparatus): people like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, etc. I was often self-righteous, believed my views to be correct and everyone else to be stupid, etc.–exactly like the child I was, honestly. I remember my first exposure to the very idea of libertarianism was a small poll done in the school newspaper of my private school when I was around…ten, I think. There were only about four questions asked and I was completely conservative according to it but the idea of libertarianism intrigued me at the time. I asked my mother what it was and she gave me a simplistic answer (I forget what exactly–something like “They want to get rid of all taxes” which is true enough but not the whole story). I briefly flirted with the idea of becoming a libertarian but dropped it and forgot about it for years.
But I digress. What cured me of my party loyalty, somewhat ironically, George W. Bush. His absolute FAILURE of a presidency (though it took me a LOOOOONG time to come to terms with it) broke me of my unswerving loyalty to the party. I floundered for a while, though, calling myself a member of the Old Right but sort of in transition. I drifted a bit more towards libertarian ideals once I began college and started reading more nonfiction books to try and work out my ideas (not BECAUSE of college, though; it was simply a coincidence that I truly started searching then). I really went towards libertarianism when I discovered Ron Paul and he, in turn, introduced me to Austrian economics rather recently. From that point, I called myself a minarchist Austrian libertarian but nowadays I feel myself moving towards anarcho-capitalism the more I learn. I’ve fought it–my God, but I’ve fought it–but the logical train of my beliefs is dragging me, kicking and screaming, to anarcho-capitalism. It’s only a matter of time, I think, until I openly and truly become one. From there, who knows where I’ll go?
Were you a left-wing/socialistic/Democrat Party loyalist?
Leftwing. I didn’t care about the size of government, I was concerned with re-structuring society. I was a neo-nazi, a communist, I kind of moved around between the two for a bit, before I became a minarchist/libertarian, and now I’m ancap 
Immigration plan: setup machine gun nests, mow em down while they cross the border. That was my immigration policy. I was going to vote democratic-socialist.
Were you a right-wing/neoconservative/Republican Party loyalist?
Neither. I was a communist.
What was your enduring rationale for your prior persuasion?
It made sense. It made my headache go away
What was it about Austrian Economics that you discovered that made you change your mind?
It works in practice. There’s a lot of examples of that, look around you. Besides, I was never concerned with general inequality, the poor, etc. I was concerned about my own inequality, and it all can be bottled up to one work - envy. Envy fueled my anger. I now know that socialism is crap. I’m still envious of others, but now it’s my motivation, not my prison.
My persuasion has always been ‘leave me alone’. I have always thought gov’t politicians/officials to be a nuisance, boring to watch, stupid, and liars. I grew up where it was common sense that individuals think on their own, cooperate with others, and politics was only something on TV that interupted my shows (when I had TV). Politics has only become louder and my common sense over the years has come across scientific theorizing that backs up what always has been a hunce. This, for me, is just the latest finding to strengthen my intellectual arguments and experience like-minded in far distant places for I’ve always had friends and family that have been like-minded.
Were you a left-wing/socialistic/Democrat Party loyalist?
I was a Democratic socialist environmentalist. I don’t know. With me I was like a loyal Democrat at first. But then when I learned more about the left-wing ideology I became even further to the left and I was convinced that capitalism was the cause of wars and the banking crisis, but, little did I realize there was another way.
What was your enduring rationale for your prior persuasion?
I used to believe that a world without classes would be much better than what we had now. I felt that there was so much division in the world and that people needed to have more equality and that we couldn’t keep on doing what we were doing.
What was it about Austrian Economics that you discovered that made you change your mind?
Learning about division of labor really changed my world-view. I guess that’s not so much as unique to the Austiran view. But… I guess what really changed my mind was learning about the libertarian rational for being against the bailouts and for being against wars. I learned about libertarianism because of Ron Paul. I wouldn’t consider myself a libertarian. I don’t really go by any label per se. But just learning that there was another way… learning that there was another way that still was for capitalism, and, that you didn’t have to be a war monger to be in favor of capitalism really pulled me over to the other side.
“Please give your persuasion prior to becoming a Mises supporter/enthusiast.”
I was a left-wing democrat loyalist who supported redistribution.
“What was your enduring rationale for your prior persuasion?”
I put my self on a fake moral pedestal, where altruism was all that mattered.
“What was it about Austrian Economics that you discovered that made you change your mind?”
Well, it didn’t start with AE. It started with Ron Paul. He made too much sense.
Before I was a misesean I was a platonist -I believed in theologico-philosopher kings who would justly rule over a pseudo-free market. Therefore I guess you can say I was a rightist but with many diverse influences from Humean skepticism to the Transcendentalism of Emerson and then the statism of Mussolini and Hitler.
The rationale for my prior persuasion was the theory of the forms which I found in my mind to be irresistibly true. I always look for new ideas though, so it was only a matter of time before I came to mises.
AE was the most logically consistent school of economics for instance, it takes subjectivism to its logical conclusions as opposed to my view of neoclassicalism which stops just short of it. It definitely makes my headaches go away.
At one time I was the emperor of my own micronation. I ruled the galaxy. I rule the galaxy no more. Ron Paul destroyed my empire, and now I’m ancap. 
Naevius,
That is strikingly similar to my history. Throw in Ron Paul around 2007 and we would have nearly identical stories. I’m just a little further than you in the “kicking and screaming to anarcho-capitalsm” since I’m already there, 
Well, it didn’t start with AE. It started with Ron Paul. He made too much sense.
Very true. I heard him say something like:
“Hold on, so now we are borrowing from the japanese to bomb the iraqis, who did nothing to us, so now we destroy their bridges, then we borrow from the chinese and rebuild those bridges”
haha
I was a Republican and I still am a Republican. But when I was younger I was a liberal Democrat. My freshman year in college I met a hardcore Republican and over time I came to see that he understood things a lot better than I did so I started learning about the right wing political philosophy and I found it to be more appealing than the left wing political philosophy. I’ve been a card carrying Republican ever since.
I was a NeoConservative Republican who was very pro-war and not really all that free-market compatible. In the summer of 2009 after GWB’s complete and absolute failure of a presidency, I picked up Ron Paul’s*, The Revolution: A Manifesto*, liked what I had read and pre-ordered, End The Fed. Presently, after reading countlesss blog posts and what not since August, and about 15 books within the last 3 months, I would consider myself a libertarian in the ultimate sense of the word (anarchist). With that being said however, I’m pretty damn content with shrinking the American government in size and depth for the time being though.
I just hope that whatever happens in the next few years, everything remains peaceful and the American people wakeup from the nightmare we’ve been in for awhile.
Despite the opposition, Ron Paul is pretty damn popular, so let’s hope his ideas stay that way too.
Heh, thanks. Glad to know I’m not the only one. In all honesty, I’m pretty much an anarcho-capitalist already. I’ve been drug here but my preconceived notions about anarchy (it’s violent, it’s kooky, etc.) are objecting as they are destroyed. They won’t last long, though. Exposure to the Austrian school has really been one long breakdown of just about every preconceived notion I held. I once thought that governments were necessary, now I’m starting to believe they aren’t. I once idolized Lincoln, now I know him as the war criminal he is. I once was ashamed to be in a state (Alabama) that had seceded from the Union in the Civil War because I thought it was about slavery, now I know better. The list goes on and on. While it’s sometimes painful to part with the comforting illusions, knowledge has also brought me a degree of peace.
I was a neo-con, then I was a moderate Libertarian, then I was a Minarchist, then I was a voluntaryist Minarchist, and when I realized that was a contradiction of terms I settled with Anarcho-Capitalism.
Austrian Economics just reiterated self-evident points I had already known but ignored.
I was a moderate Dem and then a neolibertarian, a la Dennis Miller or PJ O’Rourke. It took a little while for me to see the inner contradictions in my political philosophy. RP actually helped with that.
I was already familiar with libertarian thought prior to the discovery of the Ludwig von Mises Institute and the Austrian School of Economics (which I found out about through the Paul campaign). There are a few things that have changed since; taking anarchist theory a bit more seriously is probably the most noteworthy.
I can’t say I had consistent political views prior, probably due to how I was only around sixteen at the time, at most. I began my “career” as an amateur libertarian thinker on my own accord, reviewing the five or six largest political parties and using deductive reasoning to determine whose case I was most supportive of. It was largely the consistency of libertarianism under the non-aggression principle that swayed my opinion that it was the viewpoint worth backing. John Stossel’s excellent pieces at the time on various preconceived notions held by people helped a bit as well.
Please give your persuasion prior to becoming a Mises supporter/enthusiast.
Anarcho-syndicalist. I left that idea after my teens, staying mostly limited government, though seeing anarchy is a bit of an ideal, and sometimes utopian. I was undecided about economics, though I sticked to socialism a bit.
Were you a left-wing/socialistic/Democrat Party loyalist?
Yes as just noted.
Were you a right-wing/neoconservative/Republican Party loyalist?
When I was a kid I was a bit conservative/jingoistic, though liked freedom and watched a lot of Jon Stossel and 20/20. 9/11, the changing world and discrimination against my background changed that. I had so many questions.
What was your enduring rationale for your prior persuasion?
I took syndicalism in as well capitalism because mostly the persuasion of it’s strong civil rights ethics and views. I didn’t realize the connection of property rights though I never had a problem with small business, I liked them.
What was it about Austrian Economics that you discovered that made you change your mind?
Rothbard and Ron Paul. Ron Paul was making so much sense and stirred up my political interests. Rothbard and watching and reading Stossel again drew me to the free market aspect. I knew by the time I was done with For A New Liberty, that I was an anarcho-capitalist and learned to think of it realistically. Malcolm X and Thoreau made me believe in civil rights, change and freedom, we should live in peace and be left to live. I’m about to start reading Human Action, and I read Defending the Undefendable. Read a lot of articles on mises.org. Feel free to suggest anything.
Great site, very generous.
surprised to hear all the impact of RP.. maybe politics are useful after all.???
for me - I was a lefty as a youth- who isn’t. later to conservative Repub. GW ( Worst president ever got me off that train..) after about 5 years of getting the Mises daily it started to sink into my thick skull
Rothbard’s FOR A NEW LIBERTY blew my mind… though ( as a history buff/major) I think his cold war revisionism was a little too one sided anti US
I agree with the end of the federal gov. but believe we should have state/local. as long as I have 50+ choices I’m good. so I don’t know what my official “title” is - nor do I care much
I was very apolitical up until I was 18. Although the Left always seemed like nutjobs to me with the way they accuse anyone who disagrees with them of being heartless, racist, or irrational as well as their collectivist and egalitarian worldview.
However, the Right (that is, the mainstream Right) didn’t appeal to me either due to their religiosity, lack of principle, and lack of intellectual leadership.
I first became a libertarian by reading and watching Ayn Rand interviews on Youtube. It taught me to think in terms of principles, whereas I discovered that libertarianism is the only consistent ideology. Later on, I started getting into Austrian econ and found people like Hazlitt, Mises, and Rothbard irresistible.