Politics and Games: Similarities and Differences

RUNNING HEAD: POLITICS
POLITICS
1

RUNNING HEAD: POLITICS
Introduction
Politics is framed from the Greek word ‘polis’, which provides the city-state or group of
citizens (Young, 2011). The term politics implied conducting public affairs of citizens living
together in a city. It provides general set of rules that people makes and might change in order to
live accordance to it. Some sociologists view politics as being an avenue for conflict resolution
or responding to a conflict. The theories are based on the thought that politics arises as there is
conflict amongst people hence it involves certain struggles with the opposing side. Though
politics initially was limited to country but has now been extended to include club politics, office
politics and so on (Buchanan, 2008). Politics currently views as exercising control or influence
over others. The scope of the current discussion includes discussing similarities and differences
between politics and playing of a game.
Analysis
Politics includes a state of conduct that is determined for people living in a place. Politics
has positive as well as negative image to itself. Game is described as an activity having network
of complicated similarities that are overlapping and criss-crossing with each other (Brams,
2011).
Similarities and differences between taking part in politics and playing a game
Andrew Heywood defined politics as being an activity which people undertakes
preserves and also changes rules with which they live. While the concept of politics and games is
distinct in characteristics however there are certain similarities as well. Games can include card
board games, card games, Olympic Games and ball games. In order to call an activity as game,
there must be something that lies in common. The similarities between politics and games is the
acceptance of constraints, the role of rules or conventions, conflict or struggle with winners and
losers, cooperation and a central place for rationality and strategy (Aalberg, Strömbäck & De
Vreese, 2012). It has been observed that participants in games as well as in politics remain
constrained as specific set of affairs through usage of rules. In both cases in breaking down of
constraints, there remains no regard for either games or politics. As in case of a war in case no
2

RUNNING HEAD: POLITICS
one attacks until both sides are ready for war, similarly in games there are constraints were both
sides’ starts only when they are ready.
Secondly, accepting constraints allows accommodation of rules. In order to play a game
riles has to be followed, in politics there are rules within a political constitution. There are rule
that govern political appointments too. A game needs to be learned along with its conventions or
rules similarly politics also has certain conventions that needs to be learned. Moreover, in
politics there is a certain way in which individual speaks or policies are adopted.
Conflict or struggle is present in politics and game both. In politics, participants often
struggle to reach their end goals within various constraints (Buchanan & Badham, 2008). Then
there emerge winners and losers. Similarly games also involve competitions where players
struggle to win. Within conflicts in game and politics, there is cooperation as well. As games are
often played in partnership and in politics too, participants work with one another to form
collation and parties. Another major similarity between games and politics is that games need
reasons for defeating of opponents. In politics one can be ahead of opponents by using of clever
and wittiness (Karp & Banducci, 2008). Outwitting is considered to be central in politics and can
lead to becoming a successful politician.
Differences amongst politics and games include seriousness and necessity and choice. A
serious distinction that exists between games and politics is seriousness. Whereas politics is a
more serious business, playing game is considered more general in nature. Politicians make
decisions pertaining to war, economic future, public services and many other aspects that
impacts lives of people directly (Evrenk, 2011). Whereas games has been seen to be associated
with leisure time activities. Secondly, considering the difference between playing game and
taking part in politics, it can be said that game playing is optional whereas politics cannot be
deemed as avoidable. In games obstacles faced is deemed to be voluntary and can easily be
overcome. Politics needs conflict resolution that is faced from struggles and cannot be avoided.
‘Primitive Politics’ participant’s strategies adopted. Strategy was followed by the player
who won in your game? Do you think that other players might have defeated someone
3