History: Magnanimity after Wars and Choices for the Targeted Individual
In transformed games it is always advantageous to vote for cooperative game outcomes. Why, then, is the cooperative outcome not always selected?
I am posting this today not because I feel magnanimous due to victory of some conflict. On the contrary, I feel defeated. If history is the study of the past, then psychoanalysis may uncover the individual’s enigma and discover why some wars are complete losses. Both history and psychoanalysis identify the set of events that give rise to particular outcomes, which encompass unique childhood experiences and critical time period events like the Great Depression and death of a parent which are the underlying forces that produce, across cultures and time, the sea of social consciousness we know as society. Such are the rise and fall of empires as well as the rise and fall of individuals.
Pareto-inferior non-cooperative outcome
Democracy resolves conflict in difficult games like the Prisoners Dilemma and Chicken by stabilizing their cooperative outcomes. It does this by transforming them into games in which voters are presented with a dichotomous choice (two choices) between a cooperative game and a Pareto-inferior non-cooperative outcome. A Pareto-inferior non-cooperative outcome is a situation where no individual or preference criterion can be better off without making at least one individual worse off.
When I wake up in the morning I like to exercise to get my blood flowing and my joints lubricated. But every morning I’m greeted with electronic targeted physical assaults and intrusions into my personal space by some rogue operator. I’m worse off for it and it appears to me to be a Pareto-inferior non-cooperative outcome due to “voters choice”. This is the effect of Group (Gang) Stalking with electronic targeted assaults and psychotronic torture.
Then, What are my choices as a Targeted Individual? If every morning at 4:00 AM I awake to coffee and exercise and I am only greeted with relief from my torture if I return to a sitting position how can I be successful with a rogue operator in control of my environment and my body?
Game theorist ask questions like, “Why aren’t cooperative outcomes not always selected, given that voters have no incentive to be free riders in the transformed game?” The answer to that question is that the public good may not be viewed by enough voters to be worth the cost of providing it. Even though democrats insist “We save lives!” and say “We are for the people!”
The honest truth is this. Some people don’t believe some lives are worth saving. So, the sea of public opinion might be the thought
“Some people are NOT worth it" like immigrants, Jews, women, the disabled, and the mentally ill because of a “non valuable" label that gets placed on such groups. Such a label has been placed against me. Since the public good may not be viewed by enough voters to be worth the cost of providing it. This explanation for the failure of cooperation is that the majority see the public good as a public bad and that “free riders" undercut the provisions of public good in a democracy. Therefore, I am dispensable. A common object with no specialized skills and one wearing a “non valuable" label.
What’s the label?
What does that matter? Make one up; Jew, Immigrant Daughter, Female, Disabled, Gay, Transgender, Christian, Communist, Sucker. Aren’t they the stuff delusions are made from.
