home  |  book  |  blogs  |   RSS  |  contact  |
  An American Manifesto
Wednesday June 19, 2013 
by Christopher Chantrill Follow chrischantrill on Twitter

TOP NAV

Home

Blogs

Opeds

Articles

Bio

Contact

BOOK

Manifesto

Sample

Faith

Education

Mutual aid

Law

Books

BLOGS 13

Jun 2013

May 2013

Apr 2013

Mar 2013

Feb 2013

Jan 2013

BLOGS 12

Dec 2012

Nov 2012

Oct 2012

Sep 2012

Aug 2012

Jul 2012

Jun 2012

May 2012

Apr 2012

Mar 2012

Feb 2012

Jan 2012

BLOGS 11

Dec 2011

Nov 2011

Oct 2011

Sep 2011

Aug 2011

Jul 2011

Jun 2011

May 2011

Apr 2011

Mar 2011

Feb 2011

Jan 2011

BLOGS 10

Dec 2010

Nov 2010

Oct 2010

Sep 2010

Aug 2010

Jul 2010

Jun 2010

May 2010

Apr 2010

Mar 2010

Feb 2010

Jan 2010

BLOGS 09

Dec 2009

Nov 2009

Oct 2009

Sep 2009

Aug 2009

Jul 2009

Jun 2009

May 2009

Apr 2009

Mar 2009

Feb 2009

Jan 2009

BLOGS 08

Dec 2008

Nov 2008

Oct 2008

Sep 2008

Aug 2008

Jul 2008

Jun 2008

May 2008

Apr 2008

Mar 2008

Feb 2008

Jan 2008

BLOGS 07

Dec 2007

Nov 2007

Oct 2007

Sep 2007

Aug 2007

Jul 2007

Jun 2007

May 2007

Apr 2007

Mar 2007

Feb 2007

Jan 2007

BLOGS 06

Dec 2006

Nov 2006

Oct 2006

Sep 2006

Aug 2006

Jul 2006

Jun 2006

May 2006

Apr 2006

Mar 2006

Feb 2006

Jan 2006

BLOGS 05

Dec 2005

Nov 2005

Oct 2005

Sep 2005

Aug 2005

Jul 2005

Jun 2005

May 2005

Apr 2005

Mar 2005

Feb 2005

Jan 2005

BLOGS 04

Dec 2004

President Obama Will Never Have a Plan Liberals: The Necessary Delusion

print view

President Obama and the Prisoner's Dilemma

by Christopher Chantrill
January 08, 2013 at 12:00 am

|

THE WORD ABOUT negotiations is that Speaker Boehner has vowed not to negotiate one-on-one with President Obama any more. Not after being stiffed twice by the president: first in the 2011 debt ceiling negotiations, and second in the fiscal cliff deal.

In this the speaker is merely admitting to a little piece of settled science: the iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma.

The Prisoner’s Dilemma is an arcane piece of game theory, that takes forever to explain. But reduced to essentials, it tries to answer the question: should I trust the other guy?

If you answer: more research is needed, go straight to the head of the class.

But in the real world we want answers, and fortunately answers have emerged from a famous experiment in the iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma conducted by Robert Axelrod. He invited people to submit strategies for an iterated game of Prisoner’s Dilemma. The winner submitted a simple strategy, TIT-FOR-TAT, which copied the opponent’s every move.

It’s obvious, really. If you are in a short-term relationship with another person then you profit by cheating them. If you are in a long-term relationship then you should always copy the other person’s actions. In other words, you should trust people that demonstrate trustworthiness, and should not trust people that stiff you.

We can see that Speaker Boehner has been a little slow on the uptake. But now he’s learned his lesson, and he won’t be fooled by the president again. Fool me once...

It’s obvious where the president’s cheater tactics come from. They issue from his lefty culture and its formalization in Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. We could say that Rules is a primer on how to act with people that you are determined to mistrust. Heck, let’s expand the problem and say that the whole point of left-wing politics is to sow distrust. Don’t trust the banker; he’s greedy. Don’t trust the grocer; he’s a company store. Don’t trust your employer; he’s making a profit off your labor. Don’t trust Wall Street; it’s a casino. Don’t trust the family; it’s a patriarchy. Don’t trust the church; the priests are hitting on little boys. Don’t trust the community organizer.. No wait! The community organizer is the good guy!

The end result of all the mistrust is to cut your followers off from all relationships except their relationship to you, the community organizer. Then, of course, your followers are stuck. They have burned all their bridges and so they must follow you, even if you lean them to national ruin like Hugo Chávez in Venezuela or the Peronists in Argentina.

Ominously, the president’s tactics follow precisely the tactics of an enraged female cobra in Kipling’s Jungle Books. You’ll remember Nagaina telling the Brit colonial exploiters: “If you move I strike. And if you do not move I strike.” Hell hath no fury like a widowed snake. She was so angry you would think that she was upset about cuts to social programs, just as the president and his party are beside themselves about possible cuts to US social programs.

Conservatives just want to get on with the sensible middle-class job of cleaning up the national balance sheet, just as Rikki-Tikki-Tavi wanted to clear the garden of cobras. But instead it is probably best just to make life miserable for the president and the Democrats, because they still don’t get it.

Here’s an example. It is Joan Walsh at Salon burbling on about “Obama’s Great Society” and indulging in a little rational factual socialist argument while rearranging the administrative deck chairs on the unsinkable entitlement programs. You see, we need “universal programs for more than just the elderly – universal preschool and higher education, to cite two pressing priorities.” Too late, Joanie. We already spent all the money on the elderly.

Anyway, President Obama has made his choice. He believes in mistrust and division. Without trust there can be no deal on anything, let alone a grand bargain to reform the Democrats’ beloved entitlements. But that is all right. We are never going to do anything about entitlements anyway until the inevitable sovereign debt crisis arrives. Maybe, when it does, we’ll do what the Liberal Canadian Finance Minister Paul Martin did in the mid 1990s: Cut Programs.

When we racists, bigots and homophobes actually do get our teeth in the neck of the administrative welfare snake it better be with the grudging consent of the Democrats. Otherwise they’ll be sending their thugs out into the street to start a national conversation.

Until then, conservatives and Republicans should remember the rules of the iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma. When your opponent shows by his actions that he can’t be trusted, it means you shouldn’t trust him. Ever.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com.  His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

 

 TAGS


What Liberals Think About Conservatives

[W]hen I asked a liberal longtime editor I know with a mainstream [publishing] house for a candid, shorthand version of the assumptions she and her colleagues make about conservatives, she didn't hesitate. “Racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-choice fascists,” she offered, smiling but meaning it.
Harry Stein, I Can't Believe I'm Sitting Next to a Republican


US Life in 1842

Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism


Taking Responsibility

[To make] of each individual member of the army a soldier who, in character, capability, and knowledge, is self-reliant, self-confident, dedicated, and joyful in taking responsibility [verantwortungsfreudig] as a man and a soldier.
Gen. Hans von Seeckt, quoted in MacGregor Knox, Williamson Murray, ed., The dynamics of military revolution, 1300-2050.


Society and State

For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008


Socialism equals Animism

Imagining that all order is the result of design, socialists conclude that order must be improvable by better design of some superior mind.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit


Sacrifice

[Every] sacrifice is an act of impurity that pays for a prior act of greater impurity... without its participants having to suffer the full consequences incurred by its predecessor. The punishment is commuted in a process that strangely combines and finesses the deep contradiction between justice and mercy.
Frederick Turner, Beauty: The Value of Values


Responsible Self

[The Axial Age] highlights the conception of a responsible self... [that] promise[s] man for the first time that he can understand the fundamental structure of reality and through salvation participate actively in it.
Robert N Bellah, "Religious Evolution", American Sociological Review, Vol. 29, No. 3.


Religion, Property, and Family

But the only religions that have survived are those which support property and the family. Thus the outlook for communism, which is both anti-property and anti-family, (and also anti-religion), is not promising.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit


Racial Discrimination

[T]he way “to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis,” Brown II, 349 U. S., at 300–301, is to stop assigning students on a racial basis. The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.
Roberts, C.J., Parents Involved in Community Schools vs. Seattle School District


Postmodernism

A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ’merely relative’, is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy


Physics, Religion, and Psychology

Paul Dirac: “When I was talking with Lemaître about [the expanding universe] and feeling stimulated by the grandeur of the picture that he has given us, I told him that I thought cosmology was the branch of science that lies closest to religion. However [Georges] Lemaître [Catholic priest, physicist, and inventor of the Big Bang Theory] did not agree with me. After thinking it over he suggested psychology as lying closest to religion.”
John Farrell, “The Creation Myth”


Pentecostalism

Within Pentecostalism the injurious hierarchies of the wider world are abrogated and replaced by a single hierarchy of faith, grace, and the empowerments of the spirit... where groups gather on rafts to take them through the turbulence of the great journey from extensive rural networks to the mega-city and the nuclear family...
David Martin, On Secularization


mysql close

 

©2012 Christopher Chantrill