![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
I keep trying to write this up and wandering off into verbal flourishes and logical snags. The analogy here doesn't work 100%, but definitely the part about only the House winning, in the casino sense, does.
And only some people ever have the option of becoming part of the House.
I see a lot of people talking about history, politics, and justice (social and otherwise) in terms of zero sum games. People on various sides work hard to convince everyone else that the issue is or isn't really a zero sum game. I consider that a distraction from the real issue.
The real issue is that most of us-- possibly all of us-- are trapped in thousands of intersecting rounds of the Prisoner's Dilemma. Our risks and the cost we're putting on other people are real. And once a person receives the highest penalty from one round, the penalties for them in later rounds get bigger and nastier, the hole the backstabber can push them into get deeper.
Unfortunately, the level of penalty for being an asshole who's willing to sell everyone else down the river also seems to go down over the long term. At least, this is my best explanation for vast swathes of history and politics.
I think that it's easy for all of us to overlook that the Prisoner's Dilemma is like any form of gambling-- Only the House wins. It's never a choice between a good thing and a bad thing or between a good thing and a better thing. It's a choice between penalties.
And only some people ever have the option of becoming part of the House.
I see a lot of people talking about history, politics, and justice (social and otherwise) in terms of zero sum games. People on various sides work hard to convince everyone else that the issue is or isn't really a zero sum game. I consider that a distraction from the real issue.
The real issue is that most of us-- possibly all of us-- are trapped in thousands of intersecting rounds of the Prisoner's Dilemma. Our risks and the cost we're putting on other people are real. And once a person receives the highest penalty from one round, the penalties for them in later rounds get bigger and nastier, the hole the backstabber can push them into get deeper.
Unfortunately, the level of penalty for being an asshole who's willing to sell everyone else down the river also seems to go down over the long term. At least, this is my best explanation for vast swathes of history and politics.
I think that it's easy for all of us to overlook that the Prisoner's Dilemma is like any form of gambling-- Only the House wins. It's never a choice between a good thing and a bad thing or between a good thing and a better thing. It's a choice between penalties.