Board games are a fond pastime for many families. Whether parents are teaching their children about the ins-and-outs of society with Life or schooling them in the finer nuances of world domination with Axis and Allies, there’s a lot of great fun to be had, great memories to be made, and great lessons to be learned.

Of course, the pedagogical (that’s “teaching” for those of you with a mere high school vocabulary) aspects of some games are more positive-and more well-publicized-than others. Everyone is aware of the benefits Risk provides in developing lateral thinking skills, diplomacy and conflict management, and an understanding of basic probability. Many studies reported in the popular media have demonstrated the benefits that Risk-playing children receive later in life.

But there is one board game that does not receive very much coverage of this sort in the media, because the outcomes of playing it are not nearly so positive. In fact, the studies that have been done on this game have consistently arrived at condemnatory conclusions, but those verdicts have been stifled by the game’s publisher, Hasbro, a company that has spent hundreds of millions of dollars disguising its shady ulterior motives.

The game I’m referring is, of course, Monopoly. It is the penultimate economic board game, a staple of family entertainment, as much an icon of home life as a white picket face or two-and-a-half children. (This latter phrase, by the way, is not etymologically rooted in statistics, as you may have been led to believe-but that is a post for another time.)

Monopoly was originally created by two students at the University of Bonn in 1837. These students, whose names have been lost to the annals of time, were classmates of a 19-year-old Karl Marx. Marx’s ideas on society and economics intrigued the game’s creators, and they set about to support socialism by creating what they called an “interactive satire” that demonstrated the follies of capitalism. In a paper published shortly after the first edition of Monopoly reached stores in 1838, the game’s creators suggested that their primary goal was to simulate the conflict and dissension that arose when an economic system was based on competition rather than cooperation. While play-testing the game with other students, it was inevitable, they said, that “the player who was most successful at exploiting his opponents for profit became the object of his fellow players’ resentment.” This resentment, they found, frequently carried beyond the game, leading to strained relationships, grudge-holding, and occasionally even physical aggression, particularly when the game was followed by sporting activities.

Of course, Monopoly did not hold to this purpose over time. Capitalism continued to gain influence as the dominant global economic system, and Monopoly captured the public imagination as an enjoyable diversion during the Great Depression and World War One.

Since then, Monopoly has been used by some for the opposite of its original purpose: such modern-day icons of wealth as Microsoft’s Bill Gates gained their desire for riches from childhood Monopoly marathons. And while some would argue that producing Bill Gates is hardly a negative outcome, there has been a wider effect from its use as a straightforward teaching tool rather than a subversive “interactive satire.”

As children, Bill Gates and others were successful Monopoly players-they internalized the process behind winning the game and used that to exploit their real-life “opponents” and gain the upper-hand in the capitalist economy. However, the side-effects of their youthful victories led to a build-up of the resentment that the original creators of the game observed, as mentioned above. The outcome of the build-up of resentment was the creation of the “geeks” and “nerds” stereotypes that are so prevalent today. An entire subclass was created and has become an accepted component of modern society. The culture of bullying and ridicule that surrounds these stereotypes is closely tied to the resentment that became a side-effect of “success” due to Monopoly and its imitators and offshoots, and that is a sad thing.

As with so many things, there is much more behind the game of Monopoly than an excuse for families and friends to sit around a table, roll dice, and engage in cutthroat negotiations for valueless pieces of paper and plastic. Monopoly is the root of an entire culture of suffering and is an often overlooked commentary on and foundation of today’s failing economy of exploitation.

Similar Posts:

1. Happy Birthday, Barbie!
2. Back From PAX
3. PAX - Day Zero