Age and moral understanding

[Pericles(MBA)]

By the time I was in my mid-20's I had begun to hold most of my political opinions, especially regarding the threat of government power. I have noticed that most people, with morals, begin to have similar concerns about the same time, regardless of the influence of Objectivism in their lives. The non-Objectivists become conservatives, Republicans, or libertarians.

Given that the threats to freedom are great, and there is widespread information and daily real-life examples that show this, what age should someone begin to have an understanding of the problem?

I ask because I have noticed that in cases where someone does not notice this by their late 20's it usually is due to a moral failure. I am making it my personal policy to use caution when dealing with such people. Not that I ask people their political opinions when I meet them, but if they speak on the subject I do pay attention. Thoughts?

[Betsy]

By the time I was in my mid-20's I had begun to hold most of my political opinions, especially regarding the threat of government power. 

[...]

I ask because I have noticed that in cases where someone does not notice this by their late 20's it usually is due to a moral failure.  I am making it my personal policy to use caution when dealing with such people.  Not that I ask people their political opinions when I meet them, but if they speak on the subject I do pay attention.  Thoughts?

I think an interest in politics, beyond, perhaps, the personal effects like taxation and regulation, is an optional matter. Some people are too busy pursuing other intellectual and career concerns to pay much attention to politics.

In a more rational society, government will have almost no impact on our daily lives and most people wouldn't have much reason to be interested in politics even on a personal level.

[DavidV]

By the way, I notice that many people (of course, I hang around a certain type of crowd) have an unhealthy obsession with politics. They see politics as a game and a sort of native royalty that they get a (minor) role in. This view is dangerous because politics is in fact a life and death matter that no one should get involved it without understanding the issues and the stakes involved. The vast majority of voters do not have (and do not seek) the relevant knowledge to decide between candidates, especially in economic matters. While no one has a right to make moral and economic decisions for others, the vast majority of the public wants to regulate one or the other in a myriad of ways.

I guess my point is that a disinterest in politics, while misguided in our society, is often preferable to the alternative.