Chess in all of its perceived complexities is in essence a primitive game of cynicism and war translation, relative to the technology age’s potential of integration and exponential growth. The idea of participant [human, pawn, etc.] sacrifice in order to win at the war game of chess as an analogy for real world quarrel lacks innovation and real world or rather new world strategy. In an age where resource abundance is a buy product technological abundance, I have become infinitely board with the war game of win-lose economics as it translates with Chess.
I’m a believer that, in the 21st century political, economic, socio-cultural, and especially technological advancements can revitalize our collective value for human kind. A sort of networked individualism. How do you think that we can leverage technology to curb our collective losses and increase our win-wins?
Why pick on chess? Aren’t most, if not all games, metaphors for war? “The Battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton.” It’s not the games that constitute the problem; its the goals.
Currently, the world’s priorities that are those of multi-national corporations. These amoral golems are given all the rights of human beings and none of the responsibilities. They are allowed to grow to super-human size and wreak havoc in the name of “share holder equity” and “free markets”, while they actively work to undermine both. Until we clarify what it is we are “playing” for, the game is pretty much irrelevant.