11 Oct: EoP Re: CChung: Curse of Game Theory Art of War

* Cynthia Chung, Rising Tide Foundation
* 11 Oct: EoP Re: CChung: Curse of Game Theory Art of War.
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub  / EoP NWO SCO: EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP  Academia, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity, EoP v WiP Peacenik / EoP v WiP Neg.

From: EoP MILED Clerk [mailto:eop.miled.clerk@tygae.org.za]
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2020 12:10 AM
To: ‘Rising Tide Foundation: Cynthia Chung’
Subject: EoP Re: CChung: Curse of Game Theory Art of War

TO: Rising Tide Foundation: Cynthia Chung
Re: Rising Tide Foundation: The Art of War in the 21st Century; FtRuss: The Curse Of Game Theory: Why It’s In Your Self-Interest To Break The Rules Of The Game.

Ms Chung:

EoP Re: CChung: Curse of Game Theory Art of War.

Cynthia Chung: Game theory, the mathematical theory of games of strategy, was developed by John von Neumann in several successive stages in 1928 and 1940-41, according to his book “Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour” which he co-authored with Oskar Morgenstern. The crux of the theory is that an individuals’ behaviour will always be motivated towards achieving an optimal outcome, which is determined by self-interest. An assumption made is that the players in such a game are rational, which translates to, “will strive to maximize their payoffs in the game”. In other words, it is assumed they are motivated by selfish self-interests. Over the years, other contributors such as John Nash (Nash equilibrium) and John Maynard Smith (evolutionary stable strategy) have added to the theory and we are now at a point where it is considered by many to be an essential tool when modelling economic, political, sociological or military behaviours and outcomes, and is taught as such in many prestigious universities as something pretty much set in stone. But what if we have made a terrible mistake? After all, it is acknowledged by the theorists themselves that the entire functioning of their model relies upon the assumption that we are governed by rational selfish behaviour, and that they feel confident about this assumption since reality has apparently confirmed this fact to them. But what if this game is not objectively mirroring a truthful depiction of us? What if this game has rather, been used as a conditioning tool, a self-fulfilling prophecy, a positive feedback loop? How can we know what is true? How can we know what kind of a person we truly are and not what we have been conditioned to think of ourselves as?  ……..  According to von Neumann, the Robinson Crusoe example was used by the Austrian economic school to model an individual’s behaviour towards maximizing pay-off in an environment (in this case an island) where the resources available to you are set and limited. There are many problems with this, but the most unforgivable one is the assumption of a set, limited and unchanging reserve of resources available to the individual. In other words, the Austrian school of economy and von Neumann with them, consider Crusoe’s deserted island as the perfect case study for a limited resource, zero-sum game scenario. … In von Neumann’s book he refers to “the greatest good for the greatest possible number” as a contradiction, because according to von Neumann you cannot maximize two or more functions at once, that in a social economy, all maxima are desired at once by various players. That is, there is no concept that it is possible to cooperate and share an optimal outcome, without it coming out of “your” share so to speak, that comes at a cost of having less instead of more. This is a very basic understanding of economy, and again does not account for how cooperation and creative potential can work to transform the “goods” of an outcome. For instance, country A is militarily stronger than country B, which is rich in many raw resources. Country A is also stronger politically than country B in that, there are no other countries that will likely intervene against country A’s actions if it chooses to invade country B. What course of action will yield the greatest return to country A? Well, there is a very obvious answer to that question; however, contrary to popular thought it will not yield the greatest optimal outcome. The greatest optimal outcome is rather to cooperate. [FtRuss: The Curse Of Game Theory: Why It’s In Your Self-Interest To Break The Rules Of The Game]

Cynthia Chung: Sun Tzu’s The Art of War is one of the most influential books written on military strategy and philosophy. This is not confined to just Asians but Europeans and Americans alike have attempted to study The Art of War hoping its wisdom would be revealed to them. However, it is clear with how the western intergovernmental military alliance, known as NATO, has chosen to conduct itself since its inception in 1949, that western understanding of long-term military strategy has left much to be desired. The largest folly they continue to commit is that they think that it is through stubborn force and intimidation that one gets their way. True one may be successful to a certain extent using mainly force, one may achieve that assassination of a key figure, one may convince the people that their ally is their foe, and one may get that regime-change they were hoping for, but these have all proven themselves temporary orientations in the long-term scheme of things. One reason for this is that the truth almost always eventually comes out It is a very tiring strategy one has to admit, to be always using stubborn force, and despite all this force that one is constantly applying to the subject they wish to bend it never quite behaves as one commands it to, at least not for very long. Despite this strategy being the most inefficient and energy intensive, that has not deterred imperialists from mulishly using it over and over again. The world has been an unbending subject to such a strategy since Churchill’s announcement of the Iron Curtain in 1946. That is, the world has been subject to an ongoing cold war for 74 years. … Though we still use much of the same old strategies today, war is ever more located on the plane of ideas, and along with this the ever increasing focus on the manipulation of information and the populace’s perspective of who is good and who is bad. The war that needs to be fought against the present tyranny is thus increasingly a mental war.  The solutions to our problems such as the oncoming economic collapse (in case you haven’t noticed we are doing everything the same as pre-2008), have their solutions in what Russia and China are presenting. The initiation of war has almost always been presented as a false ‘necessity’, that is in response to the dominating geopolitical ‘balance’, which is basically meant to service the present system of empire, and the erroneous belief in zero sum game. The higher battle ground is being fought on the plane of ideas and which proposed ‘new system’ will replace the current collapsing one we are presently in. .. So who is the ‘enemy’? The enemy is our lesser selves. Our most base fears, desires and obsessions. The voice that whispers in our ears telling us not to believe in anything genuine or honest, that the world we live in will ultimately destroy itself and thus it is all about looking out for number one. That it is our fate to be the play things of higher powers. There is a way out of all of this, but you will have to become an optimist in order to see the solution. President Putin has used The Art of War most skillfully and has shown that he not only knows himself but knows the said ‘enemy’. That it is not by force that one will win this drawn out war but by the ability to predict your opponents actions and circumvent them with something…positive. And therefore, President Putin understands the most important lesson of all in this philosophy, that The Art of War is in fact The Art of Peace: Sun Tzu: The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. [Rising Tide Foundation: The Art of War in the 21st Century]

EoP law culture advocates on behalf of EoP Axis Alliance cooperation to implement – via EoP UN Resolution [lj-v-ls: PDF pp.25-66/70| ir-v-us: PDF: pp.59-100/143] – Ecology of Peace Scientific and Cultural law as international law.

The different EoP Abel Steppe Aryan v WiP Kane Babylonian socio-cultural societal outcomes between EoP v WiP law [eop-v-wip-law] investment [eop-v-wip-investing]

McVeigh 2020 [mcveigh2020]: A handshake is a very low cost way of making contracts, but is worthless in a community with lotsa liars. Gimbutas noted the stable – no population & economic consumption growth – Steppe Aryan population: that a low tech agrarian village founded in 8000 BC was still a low tech agrarian village in 4000BC. This also allowed them to sustainably farm the land, and live in peace. There are no steppe Aryan palaces, no prisons, no mental institutions, no homeless, no landless and no unemployed. No harems; they didnt even have marriage, just as the Musou still today. Among whom, rape & murder are so rare they dont have words for it. [SQSwans: Day Brown: Proto Indo-European: 23 January 2017; SQ-DS: The Mosou Matriarchy: Men Live Better where Women are in Charge.]

EoP Law Enemy Definition:

Cassie Jaye: ..ground zero of war on women …….. I saw the immense value in listening to them and trying to see the world through their eyes. I thought if I could get my audience to also listen to them, it could serve on the rung of the ladder for bringing us all up to a higher consciousness about gender equality …. and thats when I realized how engaged the media is in group think around gender politics, and I learned a difficult lesson. When you start to humanize your enemy; you in turn may be dehumanized by your community; and thats what happened to me. ….. I was told they were my enemy. … The greatest challenge I faced was peeling the layers of my own bias. It turns out that I did meet my enemy. It was my ego saying that I was right, and they were sub-human. …. Its no secret now that I no longer call myself a feminist. .. However I still support womens rights and I now support mens rights as well. If we want to honestly discuss gender equality we need to invite all voices to the table.   … If I could give advice, we have to stop being offended, and we have to start sincerely listening. [TedX: Cassie Jaye: Meeting the Enemy: A feminist comes to terms with the Men’s Rights movement]
» EoP Leg Sub: 27 Sep: McV20: EoP Re Meeting the Red Pill Hail-Ego Judge Enemy.

EoP MILED Clerk: Generally speaking if your individual identity is that of conscious or unconscious Babylonian, then your enemy is probably a Babylonian Jew or Babylonian Kike or Babylonian sand nigger, or Babylonian cracker, or Babylonian communist, or Babylonian capitalist, etc, depending on your conscious or unconscious preferred racial / religious / ideological bias. If you are an EoPeacenik [eop-axis-oath]; then your enemy is (a) the Babylonian War is Peace clauses of international law; that allow individuals who call themselves citizens to procreate and consume above ecological carrying capacity limits, resulting in resource depletion, and consequent racial, religious, class, national, gender and inter-generational resource conflict; (b) the individuals of any race, religion, class or gender who consicously and intentionally obstruct the abolition of Babylonian War is Peace clauses of international law; and its replacement with Ecology of Peace clauses of international law; requiring all citizens of all races, religions, nations, classes and genders to procreate and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits, and relate in terms of fully informed consenting agreements. [Summary EoP v WiP Law: eop-v-wip-law: PDF] …….. So the focus of EoP MILED Clerk on behalf of EoP Applicants [eop-applicants] is (a) finding out whether there are sufficient numbers of the 02% elite [15 Mar: Milgram Two, Eight, Thirty Five & Ninety-Eight % Decision-Makers] who have no objections to the EoP Scientific and Cultural law single standard of scientific procreation, consumption and cultural honesty relating standard laws; and do not object to them being submitted to UN General Assembly for voting into international law; (b) if any 2% elite have objections: whether those objections are scientific or cultural; and whether the parties filing the objections are interested in truthseeking evidentiary enquiry to ascertain the in/accuracy of their scientific and/or cultural objections. If any 2% elite’s scientific or cultural law objections to EoP SciCult law are accurate, then EoP SciCult law can be amended to remove such errors.
» EoP Leg Sub: 13 Jan: EoP Re: John Kaminski: Who exactly is the enemy here?; 22 Jan: EoP Apps: Draft: Withdrawal Notice Re: Duty to Warn Psych v Donald Trump; 20 Jun: LJ Re IJR-SH Re 1063-20: LJ v TRC: LJ v LS Settlement Agreement Options: Defining Enemy.

EoP – OKC TRC – Axis Alliance [31 Mar: EoP Upd: Sergey Lavrov: Re: EoP Axis Alliance negotiations] Honest Lives Matter [29 Jun: EoP Axis Alliance is an Honest Lives Matter culture] Negotiations correspondence is published at EoP Leg Sub [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za]

Respectfully,

Lara Johnson,
EoP MILED Clerk [EoP Oath PDF]
16 Taaibos Ave, Heatherpark, George, 6529

Sent per electronic notice to:

Rising Tide Foundation: Cynthia Chung:
Rising Tide Foundation: Cynthia Chung (cynthiachung@tutanota.com)

.

Leave a Comment