Тег: Children

It is not smartphones and tablets that maim children, but adults

Now in the news, you can see yet another official or important “uncle” in a white coat, with a tragic face, preaching about a lost generation, bad smartphones that turn children into depressed zombies, and the need to ban them. This, of course, is nothing new. In the 1950s, politicians accused comic books of increasing juvenile delinquency with equal fervor. In the 80s, the game “Dungeons & Dragons” supposedly turned children into satanists. In the 90s, video games were to blame for everything. And now, the era of the holy war against smartphones has arrived.

But as it turns out, such panic has no basis. Recently, psychologist Christopher Ferguson conducted a monumental study. He analyzed data from more than 80,000 young people. The goal was simple: to find out how the age at which a child received their first smartphone or tablet affects their psyche in adulthood. It turned out that this parameter does not correlate at all with depression, anxiety, or other mental problems in their 20s or 30s.

An alarmed public might point to the emergence of smartphones as the most obvious reason for how widespread mental health problems are among the younger generation today. However, the study did not confirm this. It found that the single greatest predictor of a broken psyche is what scientists call ACEs (Adverse Childhood Experiences). To put it simply, the problem is not that a child watches Peppa Pig on YouTube, but what happens around them when the screen goes dark.

If psychological or, even worse, physical abuse is practiced in the family, if parents scream at each other like victims in a tragedy, if no one cares about the child emotionally—that is when the psyche begins to crack. And it doesn’t matter if that child was on TikTok or gathering pinecones in the forest. Trauma is trauma, and the gadget, being merely a tool, has nothing to do with it. But why then do we hear so much hysteria specifically regarding screens? Who benefits from this panic?

Firstly, it is needed by politicians and bureaucrats. Solving real, difficult social problems is slow, expensive, and does not bring quick political points. You cannot simply pass a law forbidding parents from being jerks, because the state is fundamentally unable to enter every single family and “fix” love and mutual respect there. On the other hand, the state loves to simulate frantic activity! Ban gadgets in schools. Fine the Meta or Apple corporations for “harmful algorithms.” Introduce internet censorship under the slogan “Think of the children!”. As a result, the bureaucratic apparatus swells, budgets are siphoned off, and politicians earn a reputation as saviors of the nation. Meanwhile, children in truly toxic families continue to suffer just as they did before.

Secondly, it is incredibly convenient for some parents. Admitting that your child became anxious because of your outbursts at them, that you completely failed as a parent—that is painful. It is much easier and more pleasant to say: “It’s all because of that damned phone and the Chinese algorithms!”. An artificial enemy is found, and the conscience is cleared.

No one is arguing that balance is needed in everything. Of course, it is beneficial for children to breathe fresh air, play ball, experiment, and read paper books. Endless screen time, where eyes become square, cannot be defended. But one must also not fall for this cheap trick. The panic surrounding smartphones is a smokescreen that shifts the focus of public attention away from the only thing that truly matters: individual responsibility. The responsibility of adults for the atmosphere they create in their home.

Neither Mark Zuckerberg nor Steve Jobs can inflict a trauma on a child as great as their own parents can. Children need to be loved, spoken to, respected as free individuals, and provided with a safe haven at home. And then no tablet or smartphone will harm them!

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Machiavelli in Diapers: How Overprotection Creates Bureaucrats

Have you ever wondered where all these officials come from, the ones who couldn’t care less about our rights and freedoms? Where is the factory that produces dictators, fans of “state regulation,” and those who love sticking their hands in other people’s pockets? Of course, they don’t teleport into leather chairs from other galaxies; they grow up in ordinary children’s rooms where parents, without even realizing it, install the wrong program in their heads.

Of course, all parents can make mistakes in upbringing. But a recent study published in Current Psychology provides a stunning hint as to what exactly should not be done. Psychologists analyzed the “dark triad” (psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism) and found exactly how our parenting style influences whether a child grows up to be a supporter of freedom or becomes a small domestic (and later, state) tyrant. So, let’s take a closer look at what they discovered.

Many think that villains only grow up where they are beaten and humiliated. This is partially true, but it doesn’t always happen only that way. The study showed that one of the main triggers for the development of psychopathic impulsivity and narcissism is excessive indulgence. Imagine the scene: a child falls to the floor in a store, demanding their one hundred and fifth toy, and the parent obediently pulls out their wallet. There are no boundaries and no refusals; all desires are satisfied at the snap of a finger.

Does this remind you of anything? It is the ideal model of a welfare state. When we raise a child with the mindset that “everyone owes you simply by virtue of your existence,” we break the basic principle of cause and effect. Growing up, such a person sincerely does not understand why they cannot take what belongs to others (through taxes, lobbying, or direct violence). They have no brakes, because they are used to resources coming from a bedside table and that restrictions exist only for losers.

Another nail in the coffin of a healthy personality is the restriction of autonomy. These are the “helicopter parents” who decide who the child should be friends with, how to tie their laces, and what to think. When you deprive a person of the right to make mistakes and violate their personal boundaries (even with the best intentions), you foster hostility and dependence on authority. From infancy, the child learns: my choice doesn’t matter; the one who is stronger controls everything. First, it’s an overprotective mother, and later—Big Brother. People grow up who are panicky about freedom and beg a stationary thug to introduce new laws and regulations, not understanding how to deal with problems any other way.

But how do you raise a free person? The study gives a clear answer: the secret lies in adequate praise and the recognition of the child’s intrinsic value. First and foremost, independence should be encouraged, and praise should be given for effort, not for status. One should say, “You did great solving this difficult problem yourself,” rather than “You are the best, beat them all at the Olympiad at any cost!”.

It is also necessary to teach a child the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) while they are still in the sandbox. The motivation “don’t hit Petya, or I will punish you” is authoritarian morality. Whereas the motivation “we don’t hit Petya and we don’t take his shovel because it is his shovel, and you wouldn’t want yours to be taken” is libertarian ethics.

And finally, do not be afraid of frustration: the word “no” does not traumatize a child forever. It may be unpleasant for them, but it teaches them to respect reality, other people’s property, and other people’s boundaries.

Think about this: libertarianism doesn’t start with reading the works of Mises or Rothbard, but with our attitude toward children. And the state becomes merely a reflection of the people who compose it. If we raise children in an atmosphere of respect for the individual, without overprotection, but with a clear understanding of personal responsibility and others’ boundaries, we will simply cut off the oxygen to authoritarianism. After all, where will the thief-officials and manipulator-politicians come from if self-sufficient, empathetic people grow up in society, valuing their own autonomy and not demanding that someone else pay for their whims?!

Voluntarist, Bitarch