When I was in corporate life, I tried hard NOT to think that my work involved zero-sum thinking. This kind of thinking means that when I win, you lose. It means that when you win, I necessarily lose. Sometimes this is the case, of course, but it was never my stated objective. I would always strive for win-win scenarios instead. When negotiating with a client, there was usually a means to that end. More for me is less for you? Or we can compromise or get creative so that we both win.
I don’t see why this thinking cannot be equally as valuable in global political negotiations…if not more so. President Trump seems to think that every “deal” (are they really deals?) he works on is a win-lose, zero sum game. He thinks that other countries have been taking advantage of USA (rather than that USA has been helping people all over the world). Now is the time to teach them a lesson and get back what’s rightfully ours?
Gee I don’t see it that way. We may be spending more than most nations…because we are a wealthy nation. Is it our obligation to help others? You can argue both sides of that, but it’s a big world and when we help others, I tend to think we are paying it forward and we get back a return on that investment, not just in goodwill, but in strong alliances.
Zero Sum thinking is stupid.
mikesteinharter.com 