27
Jul

By David P. Barash

Despite all the bluster about an impending default on the government’s debt, most observers in Washington and on Wall Street still believe the two parties will reach a crisis-averting agreement.

That’s because the practice of American politics assumes that all players will negotiate according to predictable patterns — that they will realize they can get more from compromise than by demanding everything and winning nothing.

Under that assumption, President Obama is right to keep pressing for a compromise, because eventually the Republicans will fall in line. But as two wildly different fields — game theory and the study of elephant mating patterns — show, there are limits to the usual assumptions: sometimes players simply refuse to play the game, and when that happens, the best advice for their opponents is to do the same.

One of the classic games studied in game theory is chicken: two players rush toward each other, each wanting the other to swerve. The one who does, loses. The trick to winning is for one player to convince the other that under no circumstance will he or she veer off course.

For instance, you could insist you’re not really concerned about a crash, or that you might even welcome a collision. Convinced the other driver really feels that way, any rational actor would have to swerve.

President Richard M. Nixon attempted to use this tactic during the Vietnam War. Through various back channels and planted news leaks, he gave the impression that he was not only out of patience but also literally out of his mind, such that, even though it would be totally irrational, he just might use a nuclear weapon on Hanoi if Ho Chi Minh, the North Vietnamese leader, didn’t accede to his demands. (It didn’t work.)

Another tactic, favored by the strategist Herman Kahn, is to “throw out the steering wheel,” to demonstrate that you are locked into a certain path and can’t swerve. Politicians sometimes adopt this approach, insisting that their constituents refuse to accept a compromise and have thus tied their hands. Read more…

David P. Barash is a professor of psychology at the University of Washington and the co-author of “Payback: Why We Retaliate, Redirect Aggression and Seek Revenge.”

As published in www.nytimes.com on July 26, 2011 (a version of this op-ed appeared in print on July 27, 2011, on page A23 of the New York edition with the headline: Washington’s Rogue Elephants).

Comments

hadassah May 29, 2014 - 10:51 am

Why go to a bank, when we shop around with several banks and other institutional lenders to get you the Best Rates and Best Terms of mortgage?? FIRST TIME HOME BUYER BUYING FROM BUILDER SELF EMPLOYED NEW-COMERS TO NEW ZEALAND RE-FINANCE, RENEWAL CONSOLIDATE YOUR BILLS (CREDIT CARDS, PERSONAL LOAN OR ANY OTHER DEBT) Good, Bad or No Credit First Mortgages/Second Mortgages Competitive bank rates Secure Visa Cards starting at 5.99% !!! We work with over 50 – BANKS, Institutional Lenders and Manymore.Apply now and we’ll show you how we can help
emails below only.majidvijahlending@gmail.com

https://answers.yahoo.com March 19, 2015 - 3:07 pm

After looking into a handful of the blog posts on your website, I seriously appreciate
your technique of writing a blog. I bookmarked it to my bookmark webpage list and will be checking back soon. Please
visit my web site too and let me know how you feel.

Leave a Comment

*

We use both our own and third-party cookies to enhance our services and to offer you the content that most suits your preferences by analysing your browsing habits. Your continued use of the site means that you accept these cookies. You may change your settings and obtain more information here. Accept