Archive for the ‘Social Commentary’ Category

By R.C. Seely

WE HAVE TO DO IT, IT’S “for the kids.” We have to continue the War on Drugs, “for the kids.” We have to pass gun control, “for the kids.” We have to EPA regulations, “for the kids.” We have to go to war, “for the kids.” We have stop internet porn, “for the kids.” We have to empower NAMBLA, “for the kids.”… Okay that last one could be a little far-fetched but I think you see my point. We have to pass all these laws and give up all our rights, “for the kids.” This could be some of the most disturbing and gross manipulative emotional and psychological tactics utilized by activists. And clearly, it’s used by moralists on both sides, Republican and Democrats alike.

The worst I’ve seen is the rampant manipulation of the children prior to the Parkland shooting, esspecially of David Hogg. I don’t know if the shooting is his only intention or not, and it doesn’t really matter. Either way, Hogg is being used by the gun control activists. He’s still a minor and easily swayed by emotional arguments rather than logical–as we all are when we are younger.

This is not to say he doesn’t have arguments that should be ignored, he has an opinion and he’s entitled to it and to speak freely. It doesn’t mean action should be done because of it. He’s scared and believes stricter gun control is the right course, I doubt he’s read up on the information that discredits that. Before a few months ago, he probably didn’t read anything other than his textbooks. And his biggest concerns were his acne and the girl (or maybe boy) in the row in front of him.

Another activist, Emma Gonzalez, is a different matter, even before the shooting she was a activist for gay rights and started the Never Again movement in response to the shooting. Just what the world needs, another emotional activist, getting her ego fed. I’ll bet these two loved their kudos from Oprah. Yea! You’re a winner!

The mantra during this has been there’s an “epidemic of gun violence” in the US. An epidemic! The numbers reported killed by guns–even if you include the leading cause, which are suicides, according to the CDC study–are in the low thousands. The population of the US is 300 million–what epidemic? How can you possibly be so heartless as to belittle these children? They suffered such a tragedy and are scared? It’s not only gun control activists that are scared after a shooting, it’s gun owners and gun rights activists that are and rightly so.

For that short period after a tragedy, activists will use anything and anyone for their agenda. Children become emotional pawns in the game because they act before they think. It makes them perfect spokesmen for policital action. Calls for gun control, for example, are at an all time high after a shooting but return to normal a couple of months later, that leaves a short window for gun grabbers. Having the children out campaigning for it makes it all the more difficult to say no.

The children activists are basically the political version of the temper tantrums at the grocery store for not getting their favorite cereal. It’s okay to tell them no.

While the focus of this writing has been on gun control, this despicable tactic has been effectively used to advance many other goals, many noted at the beginning paragraph. It’s effective in getting prohibitions passed because we have an innate primordial instinct to protect children, even they are not related to us in any way. That makes it an evolutionary achelles heel, but if you want to protect the children, protect their rights not attempt to protect them from their rights.

The world isn’t perfect and complete security is an unobtainable utopian dream, things happen, some good some tragic, but making your children safe won’t be accomplished by giving into fear or emotional blackmail. That’s the best thing you can do “for the kids.”

R.C. Seely is the founder of and ALTV. He has written books on pop culture and has new upcoming book–Confused Yet?: Understanding the Utterly Incomprehensible–soon to be released.

By R.C. Seely

WITH SO MUCH COMMUNICATION being online and not in person, misunderstanding have become common. This is especially true with online dating when people feel particularly vulnerable. It has gotten better with the advent of emojis–digital symbols that are representative analogues of the human face–but the problems haven’t gone away entirely.

Why is this? Well, mostly it has to do with those who didn’t grow up with the internet still adapting to it. Many of us older millennials–in our mid to late thirties–haven’t fully altered to the digital communication exchanges and treat them as a regular exchange. Even talking on the phone has a lesser chance for misunderstanding since a verbal tone is present.

Another factor is that we have increased interaction with others who are basically strangers, from all over the world. Using a platform with less cues to gather information about the intention of the other person, we are more on guard than in a physically present discussion. Body language comes into play to tell us what is on the others mind, so we can react.

So, what’s the solution? Trust everyone online? No, definitely not. There are plenty of sexual predators and con artists on the internet, so protecting yourself is important, just maybe learn to be better at online interaction.

Misunderstandings are generally on both sides so consider how you may have contributed to it. Were you to eager to make a judgement on the other person? Did you get too personal too soon in the discussion? If you wouldn’t share the information about yourself on a first date, you probably shouldn’t in your first online discourse either. Learn to read online cues and don’t get frustrated, it gets easier. As in real life, it could also be the timing.

Online dating sites have made measures to assist you in staying safe. After all, in the information age a bad review or rating has more clout than word of mouth. It teaches more consumers a lot faster, so keeping visitors safe is a top priority. Look through their suggestions. Most of all remember what you’re there for, if you joined a dating site, treat it like such. It’s not a social site like Facebook, it’s for meeting people. Don’t get upset at others when they want to meet up.

I’m not suggesting blind trust but what author Stephen M. R. Covey (son of Stephen R. Covey, author of The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People) calls “Smart Trust,” the concept a certain amount of trust is appropriate. If you start out with distrust for others that’s what you will get in return. So, give them the benefit of the doubt until they give you a valid reason not to trust them. In regard to online interaction, where you can simply “block” or “unfriend” anyone, this should definitely be put in practice.

A meme that I found is a fitting description of what dating has become:

So many good women have dealt with the wrong man and so many good men have dealt with the wrong woman that by the time you to finally meet, you‘re both afraid of each other.”


R.C. Seely is the founder of and ALTV. He has also written books of pop culture the most recent Victims of White Male: How Victim Culture Victimizes Society is available at Amazon.

By R.C. Seely

THE MEDIA HAS REPORTED that “malls across the country are dying off.” The supposed culprit for their demise is the internet and its impact on the business models. I don’t think so. The internet simply demonstrated the vulnerability of big business, they over extended themselves.

At times of excess before the great recession of 2008, the biggest retail organizations in the United States just kept building while ignoring the looming change in business. The internet did what mail order did and gave the customer more options; in areas with few brick and mortar stores, this proved to be a saving grace; in areas with more stores losses were inevitable.

And with both additions to the market, the “big boys” complained about the competition, but ignored the fact they were responsible for the damage by not adapting when they should have. So, they had to perform massive scaling back measures closing many stores and cutting the jobs. That’s the bad news.

The good news is that the internet has made it easier for the little guys to fill the niches. Online commerce has proven to be the leveler of the market that had been distorted by big corporations, all thanks to the minimal regulations and restrictions on the “information superhighway.” The internet is mostly tax-free on products, and fees for advertising and selling are minimal, making it ideal for growth.

The internet was sent up in the 1980s, and started showing the signs of the coming changes in the nineties. By the early 2000s if you didn’t have an email address for your business you were behind the curb, the big companies least affected by the web already designed a solid online infrastructure. Target, Walmart and Home Depot, didn’t lose as many stores as the other large corporations. They welcomed the new manner in doing business and fewer local economies were hurt.

The damage done wasn’t due to the internet but short-sightedness on the part of the large companies who foolishly believed the internet was simply a fad–a similar sentiment about mail order, I’m sure. It’s a fairly effective way to avoid culpability for your failures, and make the other guy look bad for doing so.

Many of us do business almost entirely online thanks to Amazon. All my books couldn’t be possible without the services of Createspace, one of Amazon’s subsidiaries. That doesn’t mean I agree with everything the company does, but they perform services along with selling discounted products that benefit the consumer and that can’t be denied.

Amazon has also given another point of consideration, while many are shutting down their brick and mortar stores, this retail giant recently opened its first one. Clearly, they don’t see this as the end of malls and they have been pretty accurate in their predictions so far.

R.C. Seely is the founder of and ALTV. He has also written books on pop culture the most recent Victims of White Male: How Victim Culture Victimizes Society is available at Amazon.

By R.C. Seely

CRITICS OF CAPITALISM ARE eager to point out the hypocrisy of us capitalists statement of “Communism (or Socialism, or Progressivism, or any other isms) has killed X number of people.” They point out that many have died from capitalism. Since capitalism doesn’t make the promises of perfection that the other mentioned isms do, that’s a false comparison but it’s not the only problem. It also discounts the lives that have been improved or saved because of capitalism.

The instinct to assist perfect strangers in disasters in one such example. Charity is a free market concept, the isms are by force, hence not true charity.

Now take that and multiply it and you have the potential for good that a company is capable of. During the natural disasters–the hurricanes Harvey and Irma, for example–one of the first organizations to help out is also one of the largest, The Home Depot. Volunteerism is a large part of the core culture of the company and it’s not by government force but free market forces. At the end of the day, it’s charity and because of their name recognition that to they act. Two concepts of the free market.

It’s not only because of the need from natural disasters that innovations are born. One such innovation was mentioned in

    “Canadians are pretty good at flying things into tough-to-reach places. We’ve produced iconic backcountry aircraft such as the Twin Otter, the Dash 8 and the Beaver, and if Jay Godsall’s plans play out, the Caracal, the Chui and the Nanuq will soon join that list. These three “buoyantly assisted aircraft” are designed to go where traditional transportation can’t (at least, not easily). And they do it using a small fraction of the fuel that a traditional jet would need.  

Developed by Godsall’s Toronto-based company, Solar Ship Inc., these aircraft gain lift from a wing that pairs buoyant helium gas with aerofoil geometry. Powered by fuel that can be offset with energy drawn from photovoltaic solar panels, the unique aircraft have been dubbed “hybrid hybrids.” They can take off and land in a few hundred metres and come packaged with all necessary storage, energy and communications infrastructure. “You could be dropped off with it anywhere, and you’d have everything you need to get out again,” Godsall explains. No airports, access roads or power lines needed.” 

    The ways that such an aircraft could save lives isn’t difficult to imagine.

    From Cambridge Massachusetts, a startup has developed a form of wearable technology with numerous health implications–the Biostamp. The practically invisible sticker stretches with the skin and is mostly used for monitoring body temperature and hydration of the wearer. But the future innovations planned are for digestible and surgically applied tech. One specific development is that of contact lenses for monitoring diabetics blood sugar levels.

    According to a Pew Research study the number of people lifted from poverty–living on $2.00 or less a day–between 2001-2011 was 700 million. Poverty is and has been a global killer. GMOs help since they can be grown anywhere but are there other options as well. Yes, there’s an app for that. SokoText, is tackling that problem.     

    The for-profit is handling the issues by buying below and selling low, buying at 30% below retail and selling at 20% below to vendors. “By aggregating individual purchasing orders, SokoTech can obtain produce on behalf of local fruit and vegetables vendors at wholesale prices,” reports Canadian Just like so many other tech company this text-message-based firm generates it funding through mobile phone ads.

    These are all fairly recent companies, so the true scope of their impact is yet to be felt. But they are following in the footsteps of many others who have offered us more options, which make our lives better if not saving them entirely. From amber alerts that make children’s lives safer, to the innovation of lamp oil that cut back on whaling for whale oil. 

    Medical tech, communications, entertainment, food and everything else was brought to you by the “selfish” self-interest of its inventor. Whether for profit, notoriety, or charity the motive was some form of gain for the actor. That is the Quintessential Virtue of Greed.

R.C. Seely is the founder of and ALTV. He has also written books on pop culture the most recent Victims of White Male: How Victim Culture Victimizes Society is available at Amazon.

By R.C. Seely

COLIN KAEPERNICK CREATED a sense of notoriety for himself when he decided that he wouldn’t stand for the national anthem. Since then, the NFL and many of the owners have sanctioned the idea and made it the new policy.

Besides the original protests, Kaepernick joined with the Native American “Unthanksgiving” movement. There has been enough discussion on this matter, so I won’t further engage in it (besides at this point I find it simply boring). Critics of Kaepernick and the other players have called him ungrateful, which got me thinking about gratitude … What is it? How does it affect us?

Author Melody Beattie, has this to say:

“Gratitude unlocks the fullness of life. It turns what we have into enough, and more. It turns denial into acceptance, chaos to order, confusion to clarity. It can turn a meal into a feast, a house into a home, a stranger into a friend.” 


As appealing as that literary declaration is, does it have anything more substantial to back it? According to a Forbes article by Amy Morin on the subject, yes it does. Here’s a sample:

… In fact, gratitude may be one of the most overlooked tools [for improving health] that we all have access to every day. Cultivating gratitude doesnt cost any money and it certainly doesnt take much time, but the benefits are enormous. Research reveals gratitude can have these seven benefits: 

1. Gratitude opens the door to more relationships. Not only does sayingthank youconstitute good manners, but showing appreciation can help you win new friends, according to a 2104 study published in Emotion

2. Gratitude improves physical health. Grateful people experience fewer aches and pains and they report feeling healthier than other people, according to a 2012 study published in Personality and Individual Differences. Not surprisingly, grateful people are also more likely to take care of their health. They exercise more often and are more likely to attend regular checkups with their doctors, which is likely to contribute to further longevity.

3. Gratitude improves psychological healthGratitude reduces a multitude of toxic emotions, ranging from envy and resentment to frustration and regret. Robert A. Emmons, Ph.D., a leading gratitude researcher, has conducted multiple studies on the link between gratitude and wellbeing. His research confirms that gratitude effectively increases happiness and reduces depression

4. Gratitude enhances empathy and reduces aggressionGrateful people are more likely to behave in a prosocial manner, even when others behave less kind, according to a 2012 study by the University of Kentucky

5. Grateful people sleep better. Writing in a gratitude journal improves sleep, according to a 2011 study published in Applied Psychology: Health and WellBeing

6. Gratitude improves selfesteemA 2014 study published in the Journal of Applied Sport Psychology found that gratitude increased athletes selfesteem, which is an essential component to optimal performance

7. Gratitude increases mental strengthFor years, research has shown gratitude not only reduces stress, but it may also play a major role in overcoming trauma…”

     Kaepernick and the rest of the NFL need to learn a lesson about gratitude, being grateful for their audience. That’s what the major issue has been. Other celebrities have done their protesting at inappropriate times, on the audiences time, and paid the price for it as well. Linda Ronstadt did an anti-bush tirade during a performance in Las Vegas and was booed. That’s not giving gratitude to those who came to hear you sing. Then there are bands like Metallica and Avenged Sevenfold, who can get away with it, but why? It’s more acceptable because both have social and political activism built into their songs. It’s a part of the show that the audience paid for.

    More specifically to the NFL, they not only disrespected the audience, but demonstrated they’re out of touch with them. Many sports enthusiasts are conservative patriots, who view such actions as intolerable. Yes, the players have a right to free speech but at times expressing your views does have consequences. 

    If the NFL wants to gain back the support of their audience they will have to demonstrate they are willing to listen them and the sponsors. Others wise it appears they don’t appreciate them and aren’t dependent on them–which they are! For starters, publicly apologize and don’t let the players protest before the games, save that for their own time.

    As for the issue they are protesting, this is not an effective way to reach people; when a group of rich athletes do a stunt like that they appear out of touch. If they want to demonstrate they truly care, they have to donate their money and time to make those areas of economic turmoil better. Or use your assets to fight against the laws that keep those who live in squalor out of modern slavery–policies such as, the “War on Poverty,” government run Indian reservations or the social welfare programs. 

    I don’t know if Kaepernick, or any of the NFL protestors for that matter, are doing this for themselves or to help others. Fighting against police brutality is an admirable cause but not if you alienate those around you. If you don’t see what you have to be appreciative, you can’t see clearly how fix problems in your life, let alone the world. Gratitude clears your mind and body, making everything better. If Kaepernick had been more grateful he wouldn’t have dropped the ball in his career or his activism.

R.C. Seely is the founder of and ALTV. He has also written books on pop culture the most recent Victims of White Male: How Victim Culture Victimizes Society is available at Amazon.

By R.C. Seely

WHEN A “CRIME” OR SIN, was committed in a Puritan commune, the punishments were severe and inhumane. Probably the most tame was having to wear a sign with a crimson initial–the Scarlet letter–of your transgression where ever you went.

But that was a long time ago, surly we have moved past all that, right? Apparently not. Starting with Hollywood mogul, Harvey Weinstein, we have seen a litany of allegations of sexual abuse and harassment. Weinstein has suffered the worse of it, with many actresses claiming he took advantage of them to advance their careers.

What’s also interesting is how the claims are being prioritized. Those made against Mariah Carey by her body guards have gotten little attention.

Not to sound callous, but the nature of the showbiz industry is not exactly a big secret. You fall in line and do what your told or you move on. This is not to say I condone it, just saying you know what you’re getting yourself into. And now is it possible to change it? Doubt it.

It’s not just Hollywood that has to be concerned, this has affected politicians as well. The two most suspicious ones are the allegations against Judge Roy Moore and Jeff Sessions. The timing is just too convenient. Moore is running for office and Sessions is on the verge of getting replaced. Dirty politics at play here? Very likely. No matter how you feel about those accused of such things, you should be worried. This silences the voice of the voters.

Another politician who has been marked is Senator Al Franken but this one is different. For starters, the accuser–Leeann Tweeden–is not asking for any form of retribution, simply trying to empower of legitimate victims of abuse. Joe Biden too, has been accused of having “friendly hands” by the Senators children.

Inevitably, President Trump has been marked, in yet another attempt by the Democrats to “dethrone” him as Commander in Chief. With numerous claims of impropriety weighing on him, how can he possibly be deemed a valid sitting president? Ask Bill Clinton how he handled it. Or one of the many other previous executive office holders before him.

In yet another lie by the Sleeping Media, during a press conference one reporter asked why the administration called out Franken but not Moore. In a tweet, Trump said that if Moore did do what he was accused of he should step down. And there is photographic evidence to back up Tweeden’s claim against Franken. While Trump is being accused of playing politics, it appears he’s the only one not guilty of that.

Such acts of assault are the worst kinds of power and control over others, and should have hefty consequences if found guilty. But should the false accusations of harassment and those do happen. It’s not even uncommon; sometimes the claims are intentionally malicious, others simply a misunderstanding. Even the harassment accusations can ruin lives and should not be taken lightly. More than that, such laws and work related repercussions are ineffective and many times useless. Think about, basically you’re asking an irrational person to act rationally. So the innocent and rational person will comply and the one capable of such acts will find an easier target. What could help with that is a more clear concise definition for harassment, one less open to interpretation.

It might seem misogynistic but asking for scrutiny of the accusers is not invalid. It’s routine in every other crime but is being scaled down in harassment cases and that’s because of the feminist movements protestations. That’s not to say they didn’t helped changed things in a good way either, by shaking up the “good ole boys” clubs but have taken it too far. There has to be a third route of reason, away from the “good ole boys” and the radical, man-hating feminists. If calm discussion can’t be held, this will one more time when the solution is more bravado than substance. At the moment the current environment feels eerily similar to that of Salem, so who’s the next to hang.

R.C. Seely is the founder of and ALTV. He has also written books on pop culture the most recent Victims of White Male: How Victim Culture Victimizes Society is available at Amazon.

By R.C. Seely

I’VE ALWAYS BEEN AN OPPONENT of Socialism and recent events are one of the biggest reasons why. A few days after Halloween, Rene Boucher, brutally attacked Senator Rand Paul at his residence in Kentucky. The attack has left the Senator in extreme pain and he has five broken ribs from the encounter, which could end up life threatening.

Even with the continuing feud between the neighbors, the motive for the attack was reported as political by the FBI. Boucher is a Bernie Sanders supporter who took his passion to an action and a reprehensible action at that.

This is not a condemnation of Sanders supporters, not all are like this and the ones I know personally wouldn’t do this. But this is bigger than Sanders, it’s about the inherent violence in a Socialist society.

Violence as a source of control is part of the movement because people–such as myself–will never succumb to it any other way. If this is the path to establishing Socialism, what would the Socialist society of the United States be like? Pretty much like Venezuela or Brazil. A state of limited resources and a constant authority presence. A state where basic needs, like toilet paper, are as valuable as gold because of their scarcity. Where innovations are gone and prices are sky high.

And violence has truly become the “new normal,” not from an armed assailant but from a federalized police force. In other words, the violence that anarchists used to institute their beloved social order of collectivism is nothing compared to what is to come if they succeed in the agenda.

Fellow supporters of the cause dismiss such actions as their passion getting away from them. I’m so sick of hearing that! While such heinous acts do happen from the right, they are not common; from the left, they are part of the playbook, literally. Saul Alinsky, author of Rules for Radicals, not only didn’t shy away from violence but encourages it. Neither do Unions, another vessel of Socialism. Or race activists or feminists. Or environmental zealots. It’s difficult to find activist groups of the left that dont advocate or at least tolerate violence for the cause.

One could argue that such violence was used by the nation’s founders, that these attacks are valid now. The acts of violence back then was a response to violence already used against them by the representatives of the King. Rand Paul was mowing his front lawn while beaten. Does that sound like the same thing to you? Does the Senator seem the monarch that stripped his neighbor of his rights? Violence during a revolution is at times necessary but it only holds validation when in selfdefense, which far too often is lacking by Socialism’s advocates.

R.C. Seely is the founder of and ALTV. He has also written books about pop culture the most recent Victims of White Male: How Victim Culture Victimizes Society is available at Amazon.