A Zero-Sum Game is a situation in which one person or group can win something only by causing another person or group to lose it. It’s a central tenet of the left -wing Progressivist worldview. If someone gets richer, then, in their view, someone else must get poorer.
A recent issue of The Economist magazine shows Trump astride a wrecking ball with the accompanying article bemoaning the way Trump is “wrecking” the norms of world trade, and diplomacy. (Which, by the way, is exactly what he was elected to do.)
Then in articles and newscasts, Progressivist media outlets like The Economist, CNN and their ilk, confidently predicted that Trump, because of his propensity to ignore the norms of diplomacy, was going to lose at his summit with North Korean dictator, Kim Jong Un. And in their worldview, they were proven right. The headline in the following week’s Economist was a play on Kim Jong Un’s name: “KIM JONG WON.”
Well, yes he did. For a couple of days, one of the world’s worst characters was a leading figure on the world stage, and in the world’s media. He met face-to-face with the most powerful man in the world; the President of the United States. They stood side by side. Kim even won the concession that military exercises by the South Koreans and the United States would be suspended.
And in the Progressivist mind, since Kim won those victories, Trump must have lost. Because in the Progressivist mind, life is a zero-sum game.
Progressivists won’t acknowledge that in exchange for Trump suspending military exercises, Kim agreed to de-nuclearize the Korean Peninsula, and that if he fails to do that, the Americans and South Korean can simply resume military exercises and ratchet up the economic sanctions.
Progressivists like to point out that Trump has a big ego. Yes, and so does Kim Jong-Un. Incidentally, so does Barack Obama; otherwise how do you explain a singularly unaccomplished individual accepting a Nobel Peace Prize before he’d done anything? An even moderately humble individual would’ve said: “How about we wait until after my first term and see how things have gone?” (But then, someone who began his run for the presidency by saying that he was going to end sea level rise would certainly not foresee any problem with bringing peace to the world, would he? How has that worked out?)
Anyway, Trump has a big ego. But as a New York real estate tycoon it’s inevitable that he’s had to deal with lots of other big egos, and he understands that it’s inevitable that sometimes two big egos will meet. So they got along and Trump massaged Kim’s ego, (and he massaged his own), and in so doing, he moved the world an important first step away from nuclear war.
I’d call that a win-win-win. The South Koreans seem to think so and they certainly have more skin in the game than anyone else. But Progressivists, especially those afflicted with advanced Trump Derangement Syndrome have no concept of what win-win even means. Or else their animus towards Trump is so pathological that they’d rather leave South Korea under nuclear threat than see the US President have a win. That’s rather sick.
Isn’t it a fact that achieving a win-win is what the Art of the Deal is really all about?
I’m Dave Reesor