Games People Play I - False Choices

In this series, we’ll look at a variety of games played in the Muddle and how we can model them in Scrumble. As we learned previously, we often don’t understand our own problem space, solution space or even what game we’re playing when we’re in the Muddle.  The first, and perhaps most important, of the games we might encounter in the Muddle is the problem of the False Choice.

The False Choice

“You’re either with us or against us” – George W. Bush, 6 November 2001

A or B? We are often given a choice between only two alternatives when our solution space ought to be bigger (we are, after all, in the Muddle and we know there ought to be many paths out).  Sometimes this is naivete – people are trying to simplify a problem, perhaps they even think they’re helping. Sometimes it is laziness. Sometimes a false choice is a result of a poorly designed system (in my opinion, the two party system in the US does more harm than good).

Other times, a false choice is a rhetorical move specifically designed to close the negotiation, problem and solution space.  A move like this, preemptively cornering others in having to choose between two bad choices, is intentionally antagonistic toward cooperative and collaborative solutions.  Such a move is designed to get to a specific solution, usually one of the two offered options, rather than open the space for dialogue.  False choices can also be frustrating if members of a group would rather have “neither” or “both” or “a little of both” than “either/or”. 

Prosperity or Chaos?

As noted in the white paper on Scrumble, voting mechanisms are particularly vulnerable to the abuse of the false choice.  While voting has merits (simple, egalitarian and efficient), leaders can abuse their power and create the illusion of democracy by giving voters a false choice. Take the simple false choice on the whiteboard at the right, surely, you’d rather have prosperity than chaos, wouldn’t you? 

But if the choice is so easy, why is decision-making in the Muddle so hard?

How can Scrumble help us break out of False Choices?

Scrumble allows us to play the hidden features of a false choice. Rather than a one-off “all or nothing” vote where we ignore those hidden features, a Scrumble gives players a turn or two to explore the solution space. How much is everyone truly committed to Option A? Are they just opposed to Option B? Scrumble effectively adds a third option to any vote by giving voice to those who would abstain in a false choice. You could accomplish this by requiring a quorum, but a quorum is a passive veto. Group decision-making (if we want the group to own their decision) needs to be full contact, participatory and active – Scrumble requires players to push for “not A or B” if that is what they want. As a result, participants can literally see support for a third way with their own eyes.

Explore the Third Way

With Scrumble, a facilitator doesn’t have to know the solution – we rarely do! This process could be as simple as listening to a group identify two options and then regularly adding a third outcome (as above, ?) to a Scrumble when only two options are given, just to see if those are real choices or if a false choice is in play.

The relative position of the ? can be further used to identify support for or against other options, which facilitators know is rather more of an art than a science – reading a room and knowing who is engaged and not with each outcome requires keen empathy.

Unlocking Other Solutions

The ? can be used as a touchstone for further discussion, as an “unlock” for another outcome, perhaps.  In the example, above, maybe people want to unpack the outcome of “Prosperity” – whose prosperity exactly?   This could result in two different outcomes, “prosperity for some” and “basic needs for all”. 

Maybe this is worth a quick Scrumble?

Summary on False Choices

In an increasingly polarized world, we must be wary of actors resorting to false choices. This might be intentional or accidental, but it can result in bad outcomes if unchecked. Some actors benefit from polarization and thereby benefit from creating false choices. Voting systems are particularly susceptible to oversimplification through false choices. Democracy is not just voting, though, it also includes deliberation over what is being voted upon. Scrumble gives a way for a group to collectively consider multiple outcomes simultaneously, can easily avoid false choices by offering third ways and can be used to open the space for considering new solutions. 

Next: Games People Play II, The Prisoner’s Dilemma in Scrumble