Chess is not and never was a game for the masses. Chess was, from the beginning, an intellectual exercise of the powerful for conflict management. These conflicts, like all conflicts of present and past societies, are not least internal conflicts: Which way of dealing with one’s own population is beneficial? What hierarchies must be observed? Who is important for a positive outcome? Who can the community do without?
When you begin to deal with the internals of this conflict simulation, you will find that the conflict becomes a challenge not because of the influence of the opponent, over whom you have limited leadership influence anyway, but because of how you deal with your own human resources.
They will quickly discover that grace is not a sharp tool. That consideration for the weak will harm you. That violence may well be a solution. And among the things you definitely need to learn is clearly one: there are important and unimportant members of your team. And the unimportant ones serve you best with their death, by dragging others into ruin, sacrificing themselves or simply making room for the really important members in their team at the right moment. There are useful members of your team that your attention must serve. And those who are not in position to deliver results are sent on suicide missions.
Does this sound like a role model for raising adolescents?
Well, little Jenny, now you go to the neighbor’s child and explain to little Bobby that he is an unimportant member of the kindergarten group and will be sacrificed on the see-saw during the next sandbox visit so that the other children can get more chocolate pudding. And after that, please jump off the cliff for your little sister, dad doesn’t deserve more and at least one of you should still become something.
A chess player
Chess is a sandbox for sociopaths. It teaches elitist thinking, emotional coldness and mercilessness.
Please help us abolish chess and report chess players to your local thought police.