“Not rational” is not “irrational” except when thought of rationally

“Chinese President Xi Jinping has been universally praised for his strategic acumen, but this all looks too clumsy.

Something is wrong with analysis: for it is designed to work afterwards.. What I mean iz – it is all analyzed against the backdrop of the zero-sum game. Or well, it looks this way. ’tis all framed as a Great Game that may be played with depth and cunning – but ’tis a game like chess. A Game possibly with more than one adversary, but still linear.

The Anglosaxon way. Because ’tis a game playing unfairly is permitted. Right? A powerful tackle that sends off the best and brightest may not be true sportsmanship but ’tis all in the game. I find this interesting. U – I would expect that the metaphor of the game would lead one to look at the world in a soft a playful light, but on the contrary the Anglo-american version of “sportsmanship” seems to lead one to look at everything as if it is a game, think of things in terms of winning and losing and think of rewriting the rules of the game (for instance the tax code) simply as smart (or rather cunning).

Such loss!

† Bruno Maçães – https://www.politico.eu/article/how-china-bungled-its-coming-out-party/ 29 december 17