Anastasia Mironiva recently wrote this article titled "Why Children Should be Kept Off Social Media." Her views about the bad effects of addiction to the cell phone are weighty; her proposed fix is very, very bad. It centers on prohibitive laws by governments, and that "cure" is vastly worse than the disease.

The Problem

"Rudeness, advertising, and pedophilia" is Mironiva's summary, and it's fair. Young kiddies are exposed to cruel bad manners, and she gives examples. The anonymity of social media enables writers with nasty minds to break the norms of courteous discourse and express their real feelings, and to a young child especially, that can hurt. There's a big difference between accusing a person of bad or idiotic behavior or speech - even politicians, to whom both come naturally - and saying he or she IS an idiot. Behavior can be reformed; nature can not. And a child needs and deserves reinforcement, to boost his self-esteem and so avoid becoming one of society's losers.

"Advertising" I'm less worried about, because if a child's pocket money is limited to a small amount advertisers won't find it profitable to advertise to young kiddies. If on the other hand pocket money is lavish, the fault lies with the parent, see below.

"Pedophilia" is a true danger, but is not a new invention of the Net. Even in my extreme youth, while the Earth was still cooling, it was a clear principle drilled into young children not to "talk to strangers" and especially not to get into their cars. Even young Forrest Gump understood that, when first he entered a school bus. Approaches to kids today via social media may be less easy to detect, but if the parent keeps up to date with the tricks used it isn't hard to train a young child about things never to do on line.

The Right Solution

Government monopoly schooling has almost as much infuence on children as his or her parents, and that needs to be terminated; for the fix to this problem rests with those who most love the child and wish to protect him. This is where Ms Mironiva gets it so terribly wrong: instead of massively pressing down on kids an even greater burden of laws and prohibitions, Mom and Dad are the ones to give loving guidance.

That means getting alongside the child sometimes when on line, pointing out the bad influences that appear and steering her to the wealth of positive material available instead. If a particular forum is routinely hostile, point to one that's more wholesome. Suggest ways to counter ill-written comments with polite rebuttals, and so on.

If the child tends to get glued to the cell phone all the time, sending texts about trivial activities as if her friends really need to know what she's doing every ten minutes, guidance is needed there too; it's a huge waste of time and doesn't begin to compare with face to face communication and play. Once again, that's the parent's job. Not, absolutely not, that of the State! And once again, the way to do it is not to lay down rules and restrictions but to lead him to a positive path.

As emphasized in the "Children" page of The Anarchist Alternative, from the moment of birth a child is her own self-owner and the parent must at every age lead and encourage good choices, not rule and supress the maturing child's right to make his own. It's a delicate balance, and needs to be tailored to each individual by those who love her most.