Jonathan Haidt on how smartphones have harmed children growing up with them

The New Neo Posted on by

Haidt makes an excellent case that smartphones have harmed a generation and are working to harm the next one:

What happened in the early 2010s that altered adolescent development and worsened mental health? Theories abound, but the fact that similar trends are found in many countries worldwide means that events and trends that are specific to the United States cannot be the main story.

I think the answer can be stated simply, although the underlying psychology is complex: Those were the years when adolescents in rich countries traded in their flip phones for smartphones and moved much more of their social lives online—particularly onto social-media platforms designed for virality and addiction. Once young people began carrying the entire internet in their pockets, available to them day and night, it altered their daily experiences and developmental pathways across the board. Friendship, dating, sexuality, exercise, sleep, academics, politics, family dynamics, identity—all were affected. Life changed rapidly for younger children, too, as they began to get access to their parents’ smartphones and, later, got their own iPads, laptops, and even smartphones during elementary school.

I believe another element in the acceleration of these problems were the lockdowns, and I would wager that the leftist indoctrination in many schools has had a role as role. But I have little doubt that phones are a very significant driver of the angst.

What is the remedy? The first step would be for parents to step up and delay the introduction of smart cell phones for their children, and should only allow them to have old-fashioned stupid cell phones that are limited to making phone calls. However, how many parents will actually do that? And there is also the reality that unless most parents refuse to get smart cell phones for their kids, some children will borrow the smartphones of others. In addition, people of any age can buy cell phones if they have the money; should the sale of smart cell phones, like cigarettes or liquor, be banned for those under eighteen?

Haidt’s article is long, but I highly recommend reading it. The discussion isn’t limited to smartphones and their affects, either; Haidt goes into many other aspects of modern child-rearing. Towards the end, he suggests some possible remedies, including this one that I think would be a good thing to try to implement:

Even without the help of organizations, parents could break their families out of collective-action traps if they coordinated with the parents of their children’s friends. Together they could create common smartphone rules and organize unsupervised play sessions or encourage hangouts at a home, park, or shopping mall.

I’m glad I raised my own child in a pre-smartphone and more traditional age, but as a grandparent, I’m especially concerned about all of this.

Will Judge Cannon dismiss the Trump documents case?

The New Neo Posted on by

I very much doubt it. But I hope I’m wrong and Julie Kelly is right:

Schumer’s call for new elections in Israel to get rid of Netnyahu …

The New Neo Posted on by

… is a continuation of the Obama administration’s demonization of Netanyahu. In that sense, it should come as no surprise. Not only is it a political move to placate the Democrats’ anti-Israel anti-Jew pro-Hamas wing, but dislike of Netanyahu has been a staple of Democrat thought even among those Democrats who basically support Israel. Think of it this way: Netanyahu equals Trump in their eyes – if not exactly, then approximately.

Schumer certainly wasn’t acting on his own. He is merely the mouthpiece for a long-held Democrat policy. But let’s examine what he actually said:

“The Netanyahu coalition no longer fits the needs of Israel after October 7. The world has changed – radically – since then, and the Israeli people are being stifled right now by a governing vision that is stuck in the past,” says Schumer.

It is, of course, the Democrats who have lost their way and who are clinging to “a governing vision that is stuck in the past” – that is, the fiction of a 2-state solution with a Palestinian leadership that merely wants its own small state rather than to utterly destroy the Jewish one as well as kill all Jews and (with other radical jihadis) take over Western Europe as well.

Next:

Netanyahu has “lost his way, putting himself in coalition with far-right extremists like [Finance Minister] Bezalel Smotrich and [National Security Minister] Itamar Ben-Gvir.”

“Extremist Palestinians and extremist Israelis seek the same goal: from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, they aim to push the other from the land,” Schumer adds.

Here Schumer is equating “extremist Palestinians” with “extremist Israelis” when the two are very very different. First of all, there are the numbers. Gaza’s government is run by murderous terrorists who are in charge, and the West Bank is only nominally better. These jihadis have the support of the vast majority of the Palestinian population. They speak openly and proudly of murdering Jews as one of their goals, and for decades have perpetrated widespread and repeated murder and mayhem in Israel, limited only by Israeli defenses. On October 7, those Israeli defenses failed, and the result was a horrific barbarous murder and torture spree that killed 1200 in cold blood (violating a ceasefire, by the way), up close and personal. These acts were defended and applauded by the Palestinian people in figures that are above 70% of the population. And the goal is to do it again and again, and obliterate the single Jewish state in the entire world. Arab countries have no Jews in them, so most of the Middle East is already free of Jews and controlled by Arabs, but the Palestinians – who are essentially indistinguishable from their Egyptian and Jordanian neighbors – refuse to be absorbed into that greater Arab/Muslim world. No Arab or Muslim nation wants the Palestinians because of their destructive and jihadi ways, and their history of destabilizing (or attempting to destabilize) countries that took them in.

In Israel, there are indeed some people on the right who would like to drive the Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank and have them settle elsewhere. Such people do not control the government. However, it is an understandable position, considering the fact that the vast majority of Arabs in Gaza and the West Bank support the destruction of Israel and the murder of the Jews. Who would want such neighbors, neighbors whom Jordan and Egypt despise as well? In addition, there are two million Arab citizens of Israel who aren’t going anywhere.

So what is it that Smotrich – one of those who were criticized by Schumer – has been saying [quotes from back in January, for example]?:

… Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich on Wednesday reiterated his support for encouraging “voluntary emigration” of the Strip’s population to other countries as part of his postwar vision.

The leader of the far-right Religious Zionism party claimed in a statement that “more than 70 percent of the Israeli public today supports” encouraging emigration as “a humanitarian solution,” but did not provide a source for this statistic.

A resettlement policy is necessary, he said, because “a small country like ours cannot afford a reality where four minutes away from our communities there is a hotbed of hatred and terrorism, where two million people wake up every morning with aspiration for the destruction of the State of Israel and with a desire to slaughter and rape and murder Jews wherever they are.”

The other man criticized by Schumer in his speech, Ben-Gvir, agrees. Note that they don’t seem to be advocating any sort of change for the Arab Israelis; just those in Gaza and the West Bank. He is also saying it would be voluntary and “encouraged” rather than forced or accomplished by violence. I think it’s an understandable wish, considering the murderous impulses of the vast majority of the Palestinians residing in those places. And it certainly would be nice if they all picked up and left voluntarily and were accepted elsewhere. I believe the reality, however, is that this would never happen. They will never leave voluntarily, and no one else wants them. Plus, Netanyahu isn’t in accord with either of the two.

Schumer also said this:

If Prime Minister Netanyahu’s current coalition remains in power after the war begins to wind down, and continues to pursue dangerous and inflammatory policies that test existing US standards for assistance, then the United States will have no choice but to play a more active role in shaping Israeli policy by using our leverage to change the present course.

What chutzpah. Talk about election interference! But that’s the legacy of Obama, as well. But what also is strange about that statement is its time-travel aspects: Schumer first talks about something that might happen after the war “begins to wind down” – which probably will take quite a few months, by my estimation – and then says that if that happens, the administration will use its leverage “to change the present course.” It doesn’t make sense on the face of it, except for its threat aspect – which is what it is.

Even the more “moderate” Israeli politicians weren’t keen on Schumer’s statements, nor of course were Netanyahu and his party:

[National Unity party chairman Minister Benny Gantz said that] “… Israel is a strong democracy, and only its citizens will determine its leadership and future. Any external intervention in the matter is incorrect and unacceptable.”

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Likud strongly condemned Schumer’s speech, saying, “Israel is not a banana republic but an independent and proud democracy that elected Prime Minister Netanyahu. Prime Minister Netanyahu leads a determined policy that is supported by a huge majority of the people.”

“Contrary to Schumer’s remarks, the Israeli public supports a complete victory over Hamas, rejects any international dictate to establish a Palestinian terrorist state, and opposes the return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza. We expect Senator Schumer to respect the elected government of Israel and not undermine it. This is always true, ll the more so in times of war,” the Likud stated.

Earlier, former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said that “Regardless of our political positions, we strongly oppose external political interference in Israel’s internal affairs. We are an independent nation, not a banana republic. The danger of terrorism is on the way to the West and it would be good if they would help Israel in its justified war. In the long run, they are defending themselves as well.”

Meanwhile, Biden prepares to give Iran ten billion dollars:

The Biden administration on Wednesday reapproved a sanctions waiver that unlocks upwards of $10 billion in frozen funds for the Iranian government, according to a copy of the notice submitted to Congress late Wednesday and reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon.

The sanctions waiver—which has drawn fierce GOP opposition on Capitol Hill—allows Iraq to transfer electricity payments to Iran via third-party countries. The sanctions waiver was last approved by the Biden administration in November and set to expire this month, putting the White House in a tight position as a mounting chorus of GOP lawmakers express concern about sanctions being bypassed. The authority granted in the latest waivers allows Iraq to convert dinars into Euros and transfer payments into Iranian banks accounts in Oman.

What a wonderful idea.

More:

While the State Department maintains the funds can only be accessed by Iran to pay for humanitarian supplies, like food and medicine, critics of the sanctions waiver argue that money is fungible, and that the waiver frees up cash for Iran to spend on its global terrorism operations. …

“Under these waivers, no money has been permitted to enter Iran,” the [State Department] official maintained. “Any notion to the contrary is false and misleading. These funds, which are held abroad in third countries, can only be used for transactions for the purchase of food, agricultural commodities, medicine, medical devices, and other non-sanctionable transactions. The money goes straight to the trusted vendor or financial institution in another country. The money never touches Iran.” …

Iran, the [Republican] lawmakers argued, “has a history of lying about humanitarian transactions. There is no reason to think that they will not try to skirt these restrictions again. Additionally, money is fungible, and the waiver and subsequent transfer will free up billions in funds that Iran can now spend on its terrorist proxies, nuclear activities, and military.”

I don’t think even the State Department is so stupid as to think this doesn’t free up money for Iran to use on its favorite pastime: jihadi operations in Israel and elsewhere.

Open thread 3/14/24

The New Neo Posted on by

The time has come,’ the Walrus said,
To talk of many things:
Of shoes — and ships — and sealing-wax —
Of cabbages — and kings —
And why the sea is boiling hot —
And whether pigs have wings.’

TikTok ticking away

The New Neo Posted on by

The TikTok divestiture bill has passed the House. It’s bipartisan, and Ace explains why:

The bill does not outlaw TikTok or shut it down. What it does is required the ChiCom owner of TikTok, a state-controlled entity called ByteDance, to sell the US part of the operation (I believe) to some non-China-controlled entity within (I think) six months or so.

If the ChiComs do not sell, then TikTok gets shut down.

But they have plenty of time to sell. …

Well, there’s no doubt that Red China is using TikTok both for purposes of espionage as well as a really vicious demoralization campaign against America’s children. China has its own version of TikTok, but that platform encourages pro-social activities, studying, being dutiful to one’s parents, etc.

The American version of TikTok is 24/7 transgender conversion therapy.

Oh, and the Chinese version of TikTok imposes a time limit on usage, so that children do not spend their entire f***ing young lives endlessly scrolling through crap content. …

On the other hand, of course, the left has agreed to the divestiture bill for TikTok because they have the Real Prize in mind: Twitter. They would like to pass the same bill to force Elon Musk to sell Twitter to representatives of the Democrat Party.

Republicans can object and say that the TikTok bill was only justified because it was owned by a hostile foreign nation, doing the bidding of that hostile foreign nation’s intelligence services.

Democrats will say, no, the action was justified because TikTok “causes harm” and nothing causes more harm than Pepe the Frog memes on Twitter. They will say that Elon Musk is much, much more dangerous than Red China. …

On the other other hand … the right constantly argues that “we can’t do x because that will free the left to do something horrible,” but this argument has been proven hollow: The left is doing horrible things whether we grant a precedent they can claim to justify it or not.

And the libertarians are in la-la-land about all of this:

This is a huge deal. TikTok is heavily influencing the youth of our country in particular, and it is under Chinese control. This fight about TikTok is emblematic of the entire question of the pernicious influence of social media, whether to go about controlling it, and if so how to control it and who should be controlling it.

1000 Family Dollar stores to close

The New Neo Posted on by

Here’s the story:

As part of its portfolio optimization, initially announced late last year, the company will close 600 of its Family Dollar stores in the first half of 2024. An additional 370 Family Dollar stores and 30 Dollar Tree stores will close over the next several years once their leases expire, the company said in its fourth-quarter earnings report.

One would think, with inflation, that stores of this budget type would be prospering. But the problem with Family Dollar appears to be “unexpected costs from a recall of various over-the-counter drugs and medical devices in nearly two dozen states last fall.”

I sometimes shop in Dollar Tree stores; I’m not so familiar with Family Dollar, but I assume it’s similar. These types of stores are good for very basic supplies that don’t need to be fancy and whose prices can add up quickly in other stores.

To get an idea of the scope of the closings, there are 8,359 Family Dollar stores in the US right now, so the closings will affect about one-eighth of the total. There are 8415 Dollar Trees, and with only thirty of those closing, that line will remain largely the same.

I happen to have gone to my local mall yesterday for the first time in a very long time. It’s a bit ghost-townish, with perhaps a third of the storefronts empty. I well remember its opening about forty years ago (!). It was a huge event, and the place was always crowded for many decades. In recent years it was already fading, but COVID lockdowns killed it – or at least very much weakened it. Some original stores remain, but most of the businesses that are open are different ones than before.

The number of patrons was small yesterday; my footsteps echoed on the tile. But there was a set-up for kids to have photos taken with the Easter bunny, although I saw neither bunny nor children when I was there in the early evening.

Entrapment and the Whitmer kidnapping plot

The New Neo Posted on by

I’ve written about this before, but now we have more evidence of the FBI’s role in plotting to kidnap Michigan’s Governor Whitmer and entrapping the defendants who are now imprisoned, two of them for lengthy terms.

Here’s the recent news that appeared in The Intercept [emphasis mine]:

But the FBI quickly realized it had a problem: A key informant [Robeson] in the case, a career snitch with a long rap sheet, had helped to orchestrate the kidnapping plot. …

The FBI documents and recordings reveal that federal agents at times put Americans in danger as the Whitmer plot metastasized. …

The files also raise questions about whether the FBI pursued a larger, secret effort to encourage political violence in the run-up to the 2020 election. At least one undercover FBI agent and two informants in the Michigan case were also involved in stings centering on plots to assassinate the governor of Virginia and the attorney general of Colorado. …

Federal agents paid Robeson nearly $20,000 to participate in a conspiracy that evolved into a loose plot to kidnap the governor of Michigan, according to the documents. But FBI agents knew that two other informants and some of the defendants in the Whitmer case believed that Robeson was the plot’s true architect.

So on December 10, 2020, agents called Robeson into the FBI’s office in Milwaukee in an apparent attempt to silence him. In an extraordinary five-hour conversation, which FBI agents recorded, one of Robeson’s handlers told him: “A saying we have in my office is, ‘Don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story,’ right?” Despite federal and state trials involving the kidnapping plot, this recording — which goes to the heart of questions about whether the FBI entrapped the would-be kidnappers — was never allowed into evidence. The Intercept exclusively obtained the full recording and is publishing key portions …

The FBI agents asked Robeson to sign a nondisclosure agreement and proceeded to coach and threaten him to shape his story and ensure that he would never testify before a jury. Their coercion of Robeson undermines the Justice Department’s claim, in court records, that Robeson was a “double agent” whose actions weren’t under the government’s control. The agents also made it clear that they had leverage: They knew Robeson had committed crimes while working for the FBI.

“We know we have power, right?” an FBI agent told Robeson during this meeting …

Federal agents were particularly troubled by messages Robeson had sent to Barry Croft Jr., a primary target in the investigation, that alluded to using violence against elected officials. Croft’s lawyer could use those messages to suggest that the kidnapping plot had been Robeson’s idea, not Croft’s, the agents feared.

Croft was sentenced to nineteen and a half years for his role.

The entire Intercept article is worth reading.

NOTE: You can find many of my previous posts on entrapment and the Whitmer kidnap plot case here.

Countering the mendacious “Palestine” maps

The New Neo Posted on by

You may have seen a series of maps of “Palestine” that have been circulated for a while by pro-Palestinian propagandists. Here’s a refutation. If you ever encounter someone touting these purposely misleading maps, you might refer them to that article.

Then again, the article is long, and a lot of people have very short attention spans these days. For them, this would be a better learning tool:

Creating the J6 narrative

The New Neo Posted on by

It should come as no surprise that the House Select committee on January 6 withheld evidence that tended to exonerate Trump:

Former President Donald Trump claimed vindication Monday after new evidence released by Congress undercut two sensational claims Democrats made about him during the Jan. 6 investigation, including that he tried to commandeer his Secret Service vehicle that day to go to the Capitol and never offered National Guard troops for extra protection ahead of the fateful event.

“These were made-up, fabricated stories,” Trump told Just the News in an exclusive interview.

Trump spoke hours after the House Administration Oversight Subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., released transcripts and other evidence in an interim report that concluded the Democrat-run House Select Committee on Jan, 6 withheld from the public evidence that contradicted its final conclusions.

Lies are effective, though. My guess is that most of the people who believed the “grab the steering wheel” story in the first place still believe it. A lie gets halfway around the world …

And if the MSM weren’t a Democrat propaganda machine, the suppression of this testimony by the J6 committee would be enormous news.