Young People and Social Media

While the younger generations tend to be more "woke" in their beliefs, many of them are now moving back towards conservatism as a result of seeing how socialist policies have decimated the US and global economy over the last few years. We have to remember that kids who were 10 years old when Trump first became president would now be 18 years old and able to vote.

Many young people have experienced life under Trump and they saw how much better the economy was back then, and they simply don't believe the Dems will improve the economy because they've had power for the last 4 years, yet life has only gotten harder for them. As a millennial, I don't particularly like most millennials because they are the main proponents of wokism.

So I have to give gen z some respect when I see how many of them are rejecting the mainstream narrative and rejecting the far left lunatics who are trying to brainwash the younger generations. But what is causing so many young people to wake up? Many would argue it's a result of the internet and social media giving them access to information the MSM won't provide.

I would have to agree with that assessment, because when I talk to older people who only watch mainstream media, more often than not they have a severe case of TDS. On the other hand, older people tend to be much more conservative, and they probably make up the largest portion of Trump supporters, but there is a very clear rise in conservatism among young people.

Coincidently, the Australian government just announced a "world leading" ban on social media for anyone under 16 years old... and it's completely the responsibility of social media platforms to enforce those new laws. Don't worry, it's totally not a response to the overwhelming Trump victory... lmao. It's to protect the kids obviously, because parents are clearly useless at controlling their kids.

Let's also consider the fact that many of the platforms, such as Instagram and YouTube, already have seperate rules and platforms dedicated to children. I don't really get what they mean when they say a "ban on social media", does it mean they cannot have an account on those platforms, or does it mean they cannot access those platforms all together? Both are absurd of course.

They claim it's primarily about mental health, but what about the millions of teens who already use social media to keep in touch with their friends and family, will taking that away really benefit their mental health? Of course not, but they don't care about that, because they clearly have ulterior motives. The MSM is becoming very worried about how social media is influencing young boys in particular.

I've never used Facebook, but I think there probably should be age limits, but 16 is totally ridiculous and only reveals their true motives. I think it really should be up to the parents to decide how much technology their kids are allowed access to. I would argue it's much more dangerous to give a child a mobile phone than it is to give them access to social media.

Yet we have no laws about owning a mobile phone or computers, nor should we, because it's just more nanny state nonsense which spits in the face of liberty and freedom. It's crap like that which is causing resentment amongst young people and pushing them to become more anti-establishment and reject all this crazy leftist bs which is destroying or way of life.

What... aren't you going to give us Gen Xers some props, for telling y'all the truth this whole time, or for carrying the Election with our votes? (Tongue in cheek) 😁

It was a real team effort none the less, Team USA!

This is when the real fight begins.

Presidents come and go, and only for four or eight years.

The corrupt career PARASITE politicans, who stay in office, are the real deep creep of DC. As explained in the Omega Agency Research Project. Among elsewhere in threads.

We the People, will need to ensure that the politics after Trump, retain America's Best Interest. America First Always!

There is no benefit to social media.

Those interactions you speak of ARE the problem. It isn’t connecting them to anything or anyone.

The whole I just use social media to keep up with friends and family is the classic path to hell being paved with good intent.

It’s actually isolating you from the real interaction. Go see your friends in person. Go visit your mother in person. Go see grandpa in person. Writing on the wall or giving a little birthday blurb is meaningless.

Social media should absolutely be hard banned until 18. I liken it pornography. Addictive, destructive and deceiving.

And your right giving them a cell phone is worse because a cellphone is just all the social media rolled into one hand held porn device.
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

a reply to: Athetos

Like I said, I don't use social media except basically ATS. I pretty much only talk to my friends in real life and that's how I like it. However, I strongly oppose this nanny state nonsense where we just outright ban everything that might be addictive or bad for our health. It's the same logic used by those who want to ban fast food because it's bad for us... it spits in the face of liberty and I will never agree with those nanny state sympathizers who believe big government has a right to control every aspect of our lives.

It's pathetic and takes away responsibility from the parents. If the parents don't want their kids using social media or eating fast food then they should be keeping an eye on their kids, not rely on the government to do it for them. It's just more leftist nanny state nonsense, I don't give a crap how you try to justify it, these are politically motivated laws. Ultimately, people should have the freedom to make choices which may be bad for their health, and logic such as yours is why we already overpad and overprotect our kids.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: rickymouse

I'm always going to lean towards liberty and freedom when given the choice, rather than allowing the nanny state to decide how I should live. We are each responsible for the consequences of our own actions, we are each responsible for our own health. I'm not a particularly healthy person and I'm sure I will bear the consequences of that one day. But I would still like to have the freedom to experience things that might be unhealthy. I don't eat much fast food but I still very much enjoy a burger from McDonalds every couple of months, it's a great treat.

That's why I get annoyed by these people who want to ban fast food or tax the hell out of it so people can't afford it. It's just more nanny state nonsense and it goes against the spirit of liberty. That's also a big reason why the left is now just as much a threat to my bad habits as the right. Several leftist governments are now starting to completely make smoking illegal. Where I live there's very little chance of our leftist government letting me grow or buy weed legally.

The same thing applies to gambling, and anything else which might be considered addictive or bad for your health. Sure it's easy to say we need to ban all those bad things, but I honestly think life becomes sterile and boring when we remove too much of that stuff from our life. It's like those people who never eat any fast food, because eating something unhealthy once a month might shave a few weeks off their life... I would ask, does that person really enjoy or experience life?

You seem really attached to social media. Not sure why….you don’t even use it.

I don’t care if you keep your face book and stuff your face with all the cheese burgers you like not sure what any of that has to do with addictive and controlling social media effect on the young mind. Its new only a few years old we have no way to gauge how damaging it is on the young mind but preliminary studies seem to be quite damaging.

Classic libertarian fallacy in demanding you have what ever you like available to you just because it exists.


a reply to: ChaoticOrder

a reply to: Athetos

You seem really attached to social media. Not sure why….you don’t even use it.

I'm attached to freedom from government overreach, especially when it's politically motivated, which these proposed laws clearly are. I've seen several MSM reports just in the last couple of days hyping up the dangers of social media and the need for more regulation, the timing certainly isn't coincidental.

Its new only a few years old we have no way to gauge how damaging it is on the young mind but preliminary studies seem to be quite damaging.

I'm in my mid 30's and social media was around when I was a teenager, I remember Facebook started to get really popular when I was around 16 years old, all my friends had it but I refused to share all my personal information with one corporation and I prefer to talk with people in real life.

Furthermore, if social media was very new and we only had preliminary studies, then these sorts of heavy handed laws are even more ridiculous because we don't know the full picture. Unfortunately, children have taken their own lives due to being bullied on social media, and the parents of those kids demand action.

However, I would point out that many children have also taken their own lives due to being bullied in real life, and bullying was much more prevalent in the past, especially before social media existed. Reactionary laws are rarely good laws, like reacting to the death of a very small minority of social media users.

Quite frankly, I would have to blame the parents for allowing their kids to use social media without any oversight, to the point where their kids can be bullied into killing themselves. Sorry but that requires a distinct lack of parenting to take place, as much as the parents may not like hearing it.

Classic libertarian fallacy in demanding you have what ever you like available to you just because it exists.

Actually if you read what I said, I said young children should probably have restrictions regarding social media, but a ban for those under 16 years old is completely absurd. This is absolutely not about protecting young minds, it's about molding young minds.

Do you actually know what mental effect it will have on young teenagers to suddenly take away their access to social media? Are there any studies you can cite? But who cares about any of that, parents can now pay even less attention to their kids because the nanny state knows best right?