4 ms·
In a zero-sum game you benefit only when somebody else loses and vice-versa. Which means if you make a deal with someone and they benefit from it - you lost. I
by ajuc 2y ago
In a zero-sum game you benefit only when somebody else loses and vice-versa.
Which means if you make a deal with someone and they benefit from it - you lost. In other words - you should only do deals that hurt others.
It's a truly vile view of world, but what's more important is - it's false and counterproductive. There's no place for international cooperation in zero-sum universe. There's just exploitation through military or non-military means.
In a zero-sum game world USA does not join WW1 nor WW2. Instead it waits for Europe to collapse and invade to establish "American Europe". Anything else is suboptimal.
NATO makes no sense in zero-sum game world. NATO clearly benefits smaller countries which means it hurts USA. NATO should be therefore dissolved and let's shake them small countries for protection money.
The funny thing is - in such a world USA loses and China wins.
- Thorrez 2y ago>In a zero-sum game world USA does not join WW1 nor WW2 WW2 is not the best example. The USA got attacked (Pearl Harbor). The USA didn't enter WW2 until the USA got attacked.
- namaria 2y ago> In a zero-sum game world USA does not join WW1 nor WW2. Instead it waits for Europe to collapse and invade to establish "American Europe". Anything else is suboptimal. That would have led to Soviet Europe. This is a very naive take, the involvement of the US on WWII was absolutely a rational calculation based on a zero-sum game (defeating the Nazi and establishing spheres of influence). The game becomes positive sum on the basis of long term economic development.