The Grand Monopoly Token Swap

Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
15,602
So, read about this on Slate today, turns out the "fine" makers of the "excellent" board game Monopoly are going to eliminate a classic token and replace it with a brand new one. The method used to select the (un-)lucky tokens for the switch-up? Facebook pollz! But that's not the core of Slate's criticism, oh no. I'll just let you read the headline yourself:

New Monopoly Token Will Ruin Game, Possibly America

The board game Monopoly will soon lose a classic token and gain a new one, by way of a public vote on Facebook. It may sound like harmless fun, but is in fact a travesty, though not for the sake of nostalgia or preservational instinct. Notice the four tokens currently winning the vote, and thus most likely to stay “safe” from elimination. They are, as of this writing, the Scottie dog, the race car, the battleship, and the top hat. What do they have in common? Accoutrements of the 1 percent. A Scottish terrier champion-line puppy may cost $1,500. A roadster, $50,000. A battleship, $100 million in mid-century dollars. The top hat is as much a sign of the filthy rich as the monocle.

And here are the four losers: the humble thimble, the laceless workboot, the iron (no electric model, this one you had to heat in a stovepipe oven), and the current bottom-feeder, the wheelbarrow. What do they have in common? Labor. Penury. Born, most of them, with the first 1935 edition, when the Great Depression was not an instructive economic case study, but outside your window. The full weight of society was in motion to fix it, and its legacy was a healthy wariness of a superrich class run amok. When the Scottie and wheelbarrow, the latecomers, were introduced in 1952—balanced, notice, between one rich token and one poor!—the top marginal income tax rate was 92 percent.

The proposed replacement tokens? An anthropomorphic robot, a diamond ring, a guitar, a cat with sizeable bling on its collar, and a bleeping helicopter. Not a one of them symbolic of the laboring class.

Monopoly is a ruthless teacher. To win, you must not merely accumulate wealth; you must bankrupt your opponent, watch as he or she, friend or family member, makes a steady march toward dissolution. Only a roll of the dice determines whether you pass Go or end up in jail, or whether it will be you bankrupted tomorrow. Its zero-sum lesson is, strangely enough, a fair one, in that it is equally unfair. But now that balance is soon to be disrupted in one important way, and yet another bulwark against the dominating perception that the rich life is the only admirable one will be dismantled. I feel sorry for us all. What child now would ever want to set foot on Park Place in hobo footwear? What child would be expected to, as a reminder that society is built on the low ground as much as the high?

As a boy I favored the car. I made zoom-zoom noises and took the turns hard, with a controlled fishtailing of the back wheels. I had not yet seen the actual Atlantic City, N.J. and experienced the cognitive dissonance of strolling past the street names that matched the hotly desired properties of my favorite board game, only to walk farther away from Boardwalk and glimpse the city’s widespread poverty.

I usually played against my father, who used the iron, the token I now favor for its simple form and function. “What do I need a race car for?” my father said. And he proceeded to trounce me.

Link to article here.

So, what is it? Drastic hyperbole by a Slate columnist? The breakdown of the true "message" of the game? Or is the poor being crushed by the playthings of the rich the very message Monopoly was trying to send in the first place?
 
I feel like peeling an Onion.

Perhaps we should have a thread in which CFC members can report instances of being hired by poor people?

Rather than, for example, being hired by indebted taxpayers.
 
Doctors in NHS hospitals are frequently hired by poor people. Probably less frequently by rich people.

Notice too that very rich people seldom pay taxes at all. Unless you include purchase tax or VAT, I suppose. Or the income tax that their employees can hardly escape.
 
Well, you haven't really got the hang of the role of Banker then have you? ;)
 
I'm saying nothing. I couldn't possibly comment on the truth value, or otherwise, of your question.
 
Is there such a game?

I found this.

I am imagining a game that would illustrate the type of competition envisioned by Adam Smith and practiced by Nature, a bounded competition that fosters not annihilation — but innovation, adaptation and diversification.


It is a game that would also illustrate the social and economic benefits of employee ownership, of small, nimble and locally-rooted enterprises, of long-term resource stewardship and conservation.


I can envision tournaments, where groups of players wheeling and dealing among themselves seek to produce the greatest cumulative wealth for their team. That is the sort of game we might want our national economies to model.
 
I think every article title should end with "and possibly America" from now on.
 
Keep in mind that it is a game. Its longevity has given it more cultural value than it probably deserves. And, a player can choose anything as a token for play if it will fit on the squares nicely: chess pieces, a real thimble, wedding ring, or silver dollar, depending upon they story one wants to tell.
 
Keep in mind that it is a game.
And here I thought the main point of games was to raise class consciousness.

All these courses in Marxism-Leninism are gone to waste :(
 
And here I thought the main point of games was to raise class consciousness.

All these courses in Marxism-Leninism are gone to waste :(

No, their purpose is to make socialization fun and instill the developers values. :)
 
The article's author thinks the game is entirely about chance? Not at all. No wonder he always got beat. There is a ton of strategy that should go into the game. Sure, a bad roll can hurt you, but there's alot more to the game than that.
 
Monopoly is pretty much entirely chance based.

And most of the rest is getting some gullible fool at the table who will actually trade stuff.

As to the pieces, weren't they just extras from other games that were lying around in the Parker Brothers warehouse when the first boards were produced?
 
Monopoly is a terrible game, unfortunately.
 
Bare in mind that we are talking about a game where one hard working, selfless individual nominates himself as "the banker" for no reward other than to serve the community.

And they reward themselves with some extra cash when no one else is looking. So just like real life.
 
Top Bottom