I’m talking in the context of the “capitalist rules”. If you say the aforementioned sentence, you remove the responsibility of the player by dismissing the fact that the winner makes the rules.

PS: Doesn’t work for every context: if the player aims to change the rules because he doesn’t like them, he might see winning as a way to change them. “You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain” I guess…

  • zeppo@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    7 months ago

    That’s the entire point of the phrase, as far as how I’ve always interpreted it: don’t blame people for doing what’s best for them within a system they don’t control.

  • Jaysyn@kbin.social
    0·
    7 months ago

    Yes.

    Just like “it is what it is”, that statement is a “thought terminating cliche” and that is what it’s doing.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      0·
      7 months ago

      Well I’d say it’s a hate-terminating cliche. As in, “Hey let’s stop thinking about how much we hate that guy, when he’s trying to feed his family”.

  • L0rdMathias@sh.itjust.works
    0·
    7 months ago

    The player’s job is to play optimally; the rules dictate what is and isn’t optimal play. Not just limited to capitalism, this concept is a big part of game theory.

  • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
    0·
    7 months ago

    My first thought after hearing that saying 20-something years ago was “the player perpetuates the game.”

    If people refuse to play, there is no game to hate.

  • IuseArchbtw@feddit.de
    0·
    7 months ago

    Yes, but the game is the problem. That’s why the ecological footprint is problematic, it pushes the responsibility towards individuals rather than changing laws.

  • metaStatic@kbin.social
    0·
    7 months ago

    We are all playing by being here.

    I think we should flip the board but I’m not going to die holding my breath.