Blanderizing and loserology = Socialism

No, I didn’t misspell blenderizing, and I made up the word “loserology”. You’ve heard of the 80/20 rule? 80% of any randomly chosen group does 20% of the work, 20% does 80% of the work. That’s cause, substitute “benefits” for “work” and you have the effect. Who decides which subgroup to belong to? Yeah, it’s called “self selection”. How it works: The 20% who do 80% of the work–the producers–volitionally select themselves to work, the rest go with the flow. In a just system, the benefits accrue to the former group, as they should. I don’t know how many truly just systems are around. If justice is defined as reaping what you have sown–and it should be–there will be a marked difference in benefits reaped. The behaviors (of the producers) that reap just benefits include leading with ideas and efforts, promoting teamwork rather than touting their personal achievements, seeking coaching, and accepting rather than shirking compliments on their work. Non-producers who complain, accuse, take credit for the work of others, seek personal approbation, or resist coaching and advice I call losers. Some of the 80% are producers-in-progress, who are smart enough to note and emulate the behaviors of producers. The rest will probably remain losers.

I have seen crabs in a bucket appear to pull each other down when they try to escape. Unlike people who do this consciously or maliciously, crabs pull on stuff when they can’t swim. They’re simply trying to move. If there’s nothing else around, they’ll pull on the other crabs. And there’s nothing else in a bucket of crabs. The “crab bucket” phenomenon is called socialism, but I have coined the word loserology for that aspect of socialism. What I mean is, losers dominate producers in numbers, so most proposals or policies that sound good to the majority are more likely to appeal to the losers than the producers. Socialism is typical of schemes to redistribute benefits from the producers to the losers and thus, loserism!

My other coined word is blanderizing. If you put a bunch of individually tasty foods into a blender, and don’t have a proven recipe or use the right combination or proportions of ingredients, you rarely get a tastier dish. In fact, this mishmash has been blanderized. The combination is usually going to be worse than the individual components, but at least it’s less work to chew and swallow than the components. But that’s the point of socialism and other collectivizations: Grind down what’s creative, tasty, and talented until differences are leveled out and a monolithic mess remains. Did you ever savor Soviet architecture? Did you ever take a train from West Germany to East Germany during the Cold War? Then you know what I mean. But you might say, “we don’t have socialism in our country.” I am afraid you missed the camel’s nose sniffing out the tent. That big, ugly mug has been eating your provisions right in front of you.

Case in point. I fell in love with certain skillful musicians in the 1970’s and 80’s, like Linda Ronstadt, The Who, Emerson Lake and Palmer (ELP), The Mahavishnu Orchestra and many others. I started losing interest in music as it became more monotonous, less skillful, more homogenized. I never confessed to anyone that I thought more recent music was boring and bombastic, because I was an old fuddy duddy and a snob. Then a few months ago I chanced upon an interview with ELP that woke me up to the reality. Keith Emerson, Greg Lake and Carl Palmer were classically trained musicians who came from generations of the same, not just some guys who grabbed instruments. They were asked about “modern” (1990’s and later) music vs. their day. They said and I paraphrase, “when we got started in 1970, you had to be super creative and have a unique sound to attract a following and get a record deal. All the great groups had their own personalities and identity. But technology has been abused, a lot of them are not musicians but rather technicians. Nowadays (2011) in order to get a record deal, you have to sound someone else whose already famous, because corporations own the labels.” Another part of this trend is using electronic vocal enhancements, so often the singing you hear is not really their voice, but it makes them all sound similar.

In keeping with my point about socialism stifling creativity and quality, music, film and art have suffered. Humor especially has suffered. Monty Python’s Flying Circus, Seinfeld, Richard Pryor, and Lenny Bruce would never be televised in the outrage culture of today. The best elements of western civilization, including great rock music, have been blanderized to suit the tripe that mega tech corporations–which make no mistake, are socialist internally–want you to swallow. If you don’t believe my last sentence, ask anybody who works for Google, Apple, Amazon and Facebook about the diversity of opinion allowed. If their cultures were buildings, they would look Soviet.

Author: iamcurmudgeon

When I began this blog, I was a 70 year old man, with a young mind and a body trying to recover from a stroke, and my purpose for this whole blog thing is to provoke thinking, to ridicule reflex reaction, and provide a legacy to my children.

One thought on “Blanderizing and loserology = Socialism”

  1. Beautifully done! I love the idea that socialism is effecting everything, even music. Even the tech companies. We are rejecting everything that has made us great.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s