The Prisoner’s Dilemma and the Cardinal Sin of Conformity
In their book The Rebel Sell authors Joseph Heath and Andrew Potter make a bold and compelling argument that most countercultural movements aren’t really countercultural at all and the ones that actually seek to upend or obliterate the ‘system’ at best are missing the point and at worst are dangerous and detrimental to the very causes they are trying to further.
The authors make some points more persuasively than others, although one of their strongest arguments: that it is much more likely that society might revert to an increasingly Hobbesian state of nature (due to market liberalization, global trade, etc) than it is that one of the world’s modern liberal democracies would morph into a fascist dictatorship….. yet our collective concern – shaped profoundly, the authors argue, by the rise of Nazism in Germany – tilted significantly towards the later. It would be interesting to hear the author’s thoughts on the current state of American politics specifically and world politics generally…. as the leap to fascism is one that seems much more plausible (to many at least) today than it did even just a year ago…..but I digress.
Keeping in line with the political theme, one of the aspects of this book that I found most compelling was the chapter on Being Normal. This chapter begins with this statement (emphasis mine):
At worst, countercultural rebellion actively promotes unhappiness, by undermining or discrediting social norms and institutions that actually serve a valuable function. In particular, the idea of counterculture has produced a level of contempt for democratic politics that has consigned most of the progressive left to the political wilderness for over three decades. (Heath, 65)
While the origin of the issue is debatable, the diagnosis is not. In this country, there maybe nothing worse than being part of the political establishment. For at least the last 25 years the Republican party in the United States has campaigned on one consistent theme above all other: Government doesn’t work. Their main organizing principle is that, whatever the situation the answer is less government [two quick caveats: 1 – yes, abortion & LBGTQ rights are a major point in contrast to this, but they are the exception; 2 – putting aside a judgement on the merits of conservative/GOP policy here, the major problem with this position is that it actually incentivizes inaction if elected]
In the Democratic party, as we saw this past election cycle, the issues tend to present themselves differently, but really they are two sides of the same coin. There we saw the ‘establishment’ candidate, Hillary Clinton, attacked not simply from the ‘right, as would be expected. But also from the left. After a bitter primary fight, Bernie Sanders rallied to support Clinton, but he was unable to excite his followers to do the same. Clinton, for all the attacks lobbed at her from Trump, surely suffered just as much – if not more – from the vitriol that came from her left, those that supported Sanders and Green party candidate Jill Stein that believed Clinton didn’t go far enough to ‘overturn’ the unjust system.
I want this t-shirt
There are many reasons why the Presidential election went the way it did, but the numerical facts are this: if all of the Stein voters in MI, PA and WI voted for Clinton, she would be President. That is in some ways is a wonderful example of a real world, political prisoners dilemma mixed with the omnipresent concern for non-conformity.
The prisoner’s dilemma highlights how often we make choices that lead to bad consequences, even when acting ‘rationally’….. From a Stein voters perspective it is hard to imagine that there was a worse outcome that a Trump presidency…. but yet many made that exact choice. The prisoner’s dilemma is one of those concepts that becomes a lens through which you can see and interpret many things and it is particularly helpful when trying to understand why we act in ways that seem irrational.
The allure of the nonconformist is important here as well. If becoming part of the establishment or the institution is seen as selling out or losing what is ‘real’ than nothing short of total upheaval of the social order is required.
Heath and Potter say that this is the basic error of countercultural thinking:
Countercultural rebels take the fact that social norms are enforced and interpret this as a sign that social order as a whole is a system of repression. They interpret the punitive response elicited by the violations of these norms as confirmation of the theory. The result, too often, is simply a glamorization of anti-social behavior ……politically this mode of thinking can be disastrous. It leads countercultural activists to reject not just existing social institutions but any proposed alternative as well…….Countercultural activists and thinkers consistently reject perfectly good solutions to concrete social problems, in the name of ‘deeper’, ‘more radical’ alternatives that can never be effectively implemented. (Heath, 96-97)
This is, in essence a more nuanced expression of what they described as they talked about the dating book ‘The rules’: bad rules are better than no rules and it is towards reforming the system and better structures and ‘rules’ that our efforts should be directed.
These are important issues that we need to continue to think about and wrestle with, I believe strongly that one of the most important universal calls of our faith is the ‘continue to work out our salvation [with fear and trembling!] (Philippians 2:12). However, I am reminded that sometimes the answer isn’t nearly as hard as we make it out to be.
In their conclusion Heath and Potter state that ‘In the end, civilization is built upon our willingness to accept rules and to curtail the pursuit of our individual interest out of deference to the needs and interests of others’ (Heath, 335). As Christians, our call is similar, but it is not simply out of deference to the needs of others, but in faithful response to God’s love for us and as a witness to God’s love for the world.
For as Christians, the Prisoner’s dilemma is not our own – we are called and compelled by the love that we have first received from Jesus Christ to respond by picking up our cross and daily putting other’s interests before our own. We are called to be clothed in Christ or as Paul put it in his letter to the Colossians: ‘And regardless of what else you put on, wear love. It’s your basic, all-purpose garment. Never be without it’ (Colossians 3:14 Message Translation) Sometimes the Sunday school answer really is where it’s at. We are called to rise above the Prisoner’s Dilemma, the culture, and even the counterculture to put God first in our lives, and in service to God, serve others before ourselves.
Don’t overthink it – Put on love!
About the Author
Chip Stapleton
Follower of Jesus Christ. Husband to Traci. Dad to Charlie, Jack, Ian and Henry. Preacher of Sermons, eater of ice cream, supporter of Arsenal. I love to talk about what God is doing in the world & in and through us & create space and opportunity for others to use their gifts to serve God and God's people.14 responses to “The Prisoner’s Dilemma and the Cardinal Sin of Conformity”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Chip, great application from economics to the presidential election. I think that there are two types of voters. The first type are true believers and will not vote for ANYONE except their number one choice. The others are the practical voters who look at the odds and will vote for the closest “winnable” candidate. Stein voters were not the only ones affected. I know of several Evangelical, Conservative, and Libertarian voters who chose to “write in” an unwinnable presidential candidate (or leave the top line blank) out of an inability to vote for either top candidate. Yes, the Prisoner’s dilemma related to politics nicely.
I recently had a conversation with a college student who said he doesn’t vote because he thinks the system is too flawed. My response– yes, it’s flawed, and you have the opportunity to do something about it; vote, change the system, run for office yourself. But by not even voting, you’re an accomplice to the system perpetuating itself.
We have an interesting situation in the UK at the moment, with Jeremy Corbyn, the activist, left-wing, unilateral disarmament supporting Labour leader trailing massively in the polls behind the Conservatives and a vicar’s daughter – Theresa May. The radical left-wing Momentum movement has hijacked the Labour Party and is driving it over the edge of a political cliff. They want to overthrow the system and reject the political status quo – but don’t seem to mind that it is driving them into the political wilderness…
Don’t you think Heath and Potter, would likely say that part of the issue is that the very idea of ‘moderation’ and compromise – working within the structures of the system – isn’t ‘cool’ or countercultural enough, right?
Thank you, Chip. ” As Christians, our call is similar, but it is not simply out of deference to the needs of others, but in faithful response to God’s love for us and as a witness to God’s love for the world.”
I thought that the book was insightful and found myself thinking if only Christians would take a good look at how they are maybe being led around by the media. Going back to Bebbington, I think that some Christians equate evangelicalism with Republicanism. Where in the world did they go wrong and what can we do about it?
I am really curious – do you preach ‘politics’ at your church or at least somehow encourage your congregation to view things from a more Christian perspective before they go out to vote?
Mary – I definitely don’t preach ‘partisan’ politics and before this election, I doubt most in my congregation would have known my political leanings at all.
At the same time, I have always tried to follow Barth’s ideal of preaching with the ‘Bible in one hand and the newspaper in the other’…. so I think I have often tried to invite the congregation to view current events, political and otherwise, through a Christocentric lens. If that makes sense.
Your statement “For as Christians, the Prisoner’s dilemma is not our own – we are called and compelled by the love that we have first received from Jesus Christ to respond by picking up our cross and daily putting other’s interests before our own. We are called to be clothed in Christ or as Paul put it in his letter to the Colossians: ‘And regardless of what else you put on, wear love. It’s your basic, all-purpose garment. Never be without it’ (Colossians 3:14 Message Translation) ”
This is a great word. Many Christians believed they are. It’s all in the interpretation.
Loved the cartoon at the end! Made me smile. Good summary- it does feel like we are overthinking it and we aren’t keeping it simple. Be about love. In what we do, say, and think, be loving, and we get help in doing this. Great reminder Chip.
Jennifer– the cartoon also reminded me of your post. Great minds??
“Sometimes the Sunday school answer really is where it’s at. We are called to rise above the Prisoner’s Dilemma, the culture, and even the counterculture to put God first in our lives, and in service to God, serve others before ourselves.”
Yes our rise above is not ignoring the issues of our culture but it is about getting the the trenches alongside others. In doing so, I believe, we put our love into action. Even if it means that our service to others may make us uncomfortable.
I’ll wear that t-shirt if you do!
I, too, love Philippians 2. “continue to work out your salvation” is predicated on the song before it. “Therefore….” Because Christ poured himself out, humbled himself, became obedient to death, THEREFORE, continue to work out your salvation w/ fear & trembling. We can do that, can put on our love t-shirt, BECAUSE Jesus gave himself. Because He gave himself, we his followers give ourselves.
That, it seems to me, is a much more viable response to the way things are than Heath & Potter’s “accept rules and to curtail the pursuit of our individual interest” because we have an intrinsic motivation– obedience and love for Christ who modeled this for us first.
YES! YES to all of this!
“It would be interesting to hear the author’s thoughts on the current state of American politics specifically and world politics generally…. as the leap to fascism is one that seems much more plausible (to many at least) today than it did even just a year ago…”
This was one thing that jumped out to me, as well.
I wonder, do you think Heath and Potter take into account the struggle of African Americans, Native Americans and immigrants when they say that bad rules are better than no rules because they can be reformed (my paraphrase)? When I look at a police system that is based on a system of slave hunters, I wonder if maybe some “rules” need to be thrown out so we can start over.
Kristen,
I think it’s a good question – and I would really like to see them engage with the African American experience in the US, etc.
I suspect they would still argue yes – because, I think, they would argue against our ability or ‘counterculture’s’ ability to really fully ‘restart’ the system.
And, for me at least, the part of their theory that is so interesting/challenging/compelling for me is that we – those looking for reform and change – so often pass up real and meaningful improvement because it is incremental…….