Classical #Liberalism gets mocked a lot but it's a very powerful and valuable idea and generalizes beyond human beings.

A bunch of agents with come together and create an agreement to follow rules which move them out of bad Nash Equilibria, but with some remaining freedom.

A "Bad Nash Equilibrium" is a solution to a game where everyone does what is personally best for them, but the overall result is extremely bad for everyone. Rules/Laws are typically designed to get us out of these traps.

https://t.co/erCTaYeP1C
In the past, societies often took extreme measures to keep people out of bad Nash Equilibria, such as cutting people's hands off for stealing, or stoning adulterers to death.

It is good that we don't brutalize people to fix collective games. Classical #Liberalism is good!
But something has clearly gone wrong. The #Liberal order in The West is being replaced by the #Woke.

What exactly is #Woke, in terms of game theory? That's more complicated.
Classical #Liberalism is something like this:

"Apply the minimum amount of coercion necessary to get society out of bad Nash Equilibria"
What is #Woke? Woke is fundamentally a parasite on Liberalism.

Woke could not exist without a society made safe and comfortable by Liberalism.

Imagine trying to sell #BlackLivesMatter to white people who had just been enslaved by Barbary Corsairs;
"No, you see they're just helping you to lose your #whiteprivilege! This is good actually!"
So what is the game-theoretic definition of #Woke?

It's something like:

"Get people to politically support collective actions where that support maximally correlates with morally positive individual traits"
In other words, #VirtueSignalling.
If you have a safe, prosperous liberal world with democratic politics and a free marketplace of ideas, you are inviting an invasion of Wokeness/virtue signalling. It makes sense if you look at the game theory from an individual point of view.
If you're an individual woman in a safe world, there's almost no personal cost to supporting arbitrarily insane policies, but you personally benefit from the aura of virtue and kindness that you generate for yourself.
#Woke is the second round of escalation of this. The first round was the late 20th century Liberal white-lies and political correctness.

More from Politics

This idea - that elections should translate into policy - is not wrong at all. But political science can help explain why it's not working this way. There are three main explanations: 1. mandates are constructed, not automatic, 2. party asymmetry, 3. partisan conpetition 1/


First, party/policy mandates from elections are far from self-executing in our system. Work on mandates from Dahl to Ellis and Kirk on the history of the mandate to mine on its role in post-Nixon politics, to Peterson Grossback and Stimson all emphasize that this link is... 2/

Created deliberately and isn't always persuasive. Others have to convinced that the election meant a particular thing for it to work in a legislative context. I theorized in the immediate period of after the 2020 election that this was part of why Repubs signed on to ...3/

Trump's demonstrably false fraud nonsense - it derailed an emerging mandate news cycle. Winners of elections get what they get - institutional control - but can't expect much beyond that unless the perception of an election mandate takes hold. And it didn't. 4/

Let's turn to the legislation element of this. There's just an asymmetry in terms of passing a relief bill. Republicans are presumably less motivated to get some kind of deal passed. Democrats are more likely to want to do *something.* 5/

You May Also Like