Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 05:41 AM Sep 2013

In chess, if you have no good options, and still must move, it's called Zugzwang.

And it means you lose. And losing always "looks weak".

Sometimes doing "nothing" is the best thing you can do, it's like "waiting" a bit. In fact, in my experience, most of the time, it's not time yet, there are no useful things you can do yet, so you wait.

Not everything can be fixed, and of those things which can be fixed, often it's still the case that YOU can't fix them.

People who try to threaten you or anger you or disgust you to get you to do something when you don't want to are salesmen, merchants, and they are not your friends. The very fact they are so vehement to get you to do something, this person who does not know you from Adam, and willing to jerk your chain emotionally to get at you, tells you to ignore what they say, they have an agenda, and it's not your well-being and autonomy.

Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zugzwang

38 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
In chess, if you have no good options, and still must move, it's called Zugzwang. (Original Post) bemildred Sep 2013 OP
Great word! oberliner Sep 2013 #1
Once before I used it here, in 2004: bemildred Sep 2013 #3
And quite correctly oberliner Sep 2013 #4
It's so rare that I google myself. nt bemildred Sep 2013 #5
du rec. xchrom Sep 2013 #2
That is one I'll have to remember. David__77 Sep 2013 #6
Makes me think the best move might have been not to take a seat at the game in the 1st place. n/t jtuck004 Sep 2013 #7
If the game is rigged, for one instance. nt bemildred Sep 2013 #8
Exactly. n/t jtuck004 Sep 2013 #11
The option to stand up and walk away always exists. /nt TheMadMonk Sep 2013 #29
VERY pertinent, thanks for sharing! Turborama Sep 2013 #9
They would not be doing that. bemildred Sep 2013 #10
I'd think so, too Turborama Sep 2013 #12
Right: "The very fact they are so vehement to get you to do something, ..., tells you ..." bemildred Sep 2013 #13
Might be something to do with the format I'm reading it from Turborama Sep 2013 #15
Oh no. It's clear as a well-formed bell. delrem Sep 2013 #27
So right now we are seeing Zugzwang in four dimensions, right? Threedifferentones Sep 2013 #14
+1. It makes perfect sense to me, but I have had weasels come at me from GoneFishin Sep 2013 #16
Right, it's an attack, an attempt to subvert your self-possession. nt bemildred Sep 2013 #22
Brilliant. mac56 Sep 2013 #17
It's free, just don't try to sell it. nt bemildred Sep 2013 #23
No worries there! mac56 Sep 2013 #28
A totally brilliant post. delrem Sep 2013 #18
OK, in the journal. nt bemildred Sep 2013 #24
The only winning move for the US in Syria is not to play stevenleser Sep 2013 #19
Not to play at war, there are other things that we could do, "win-win" kind of things. bemildred Sep 2013 #25
I'm glad to see you've also come to that conclusion. leveymg Sep 2013 #35
N-th dimensional Zugzwang! I get it! oh, he's a clever one, that prez. KG Sep 2013 #20
I really did hope heaven05 Sep 2013 #26
yeah true heaven05 Sep 2013 #21
Setting a deadline is the worst thing you can do in a negotiation. FarCenter Sep 2013 #30
+1. It just gives them a weapon to use against you. bemildred Sep 2013 #32
The President has never lost a chess game. tridim Sep 2013 #31
By virtue of having never played one cthulu2016 Sep 2013 #36
This message was self-deleted by its author GoneFishin Sep 2013 #38
Recommended. hunter Sep 2013 #33
Thank you. nt bemildred Sep 2013 #34
DURec leftstreet Sep 2013 #37
 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
4. And quite correctly
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 05:51 AM
Sep 2013

Sadly, there were no good moves in Iraq at that time either. As is evidenced, in part, by the current situation.

Turborama

(22,109 posts)
9. VERY pertinent, thanks for sharing!
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 06:53 AM
Sep 2013

One thing I was a bit confused by, though. Why would they tell you to ignore what they say?

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
10. They would not be doing that.
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 07:01 AM
Sep 2013

They would be using various emotional levers to get you to agree with them and do what they want.

Rape, nuns, baby incubators, yellow cake, WMDs, religion, race, anything to make you stop thinking and get upset and irrational instead.

Turborama

(22,109 posts)
12. I'd think so, too
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 07:15 AM
Sep 2013

That's why I got confused by it being in here... (maybe I read the context wrong?)

"The very fact they are so vehement to get you to do something, this person who does not know you from Adam, and willing to jerk your chain emotionally to get at you, tells you to ignore what they say, they have an agenda, and it's not your well-being and autonomy."

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
13. Right: "The very fact they are so vehement to get you to do something, ..., tells you ..."
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 07:19 AM
Sep 2013

Perhaps I should restucture the sentence, it's a bad sentence really, I tend to be oblivious to such things as I read lots of academic prose.

Turborama

(22,109 posts)
15. Might be something to do with the format I'm reading it from
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 07:27 AM
Sep 2013

I'm scrolling down using a tiny BlackBerry screen, so it could could have something to do with that.

Thanks for the clarification.

GoneFishin

(5,217 posts)
16. +1. It makes perfect sense to me, but I have had weasels come at me from
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 07:50 AM
Sep 2013

many angles.

"The very fact they are so vehement to get you to do something ... " (or anything)

to me means you are in a strong position and they want to provoke you into second guessing yourself and changing your stance, literally or intellectually, to make you more vulnerable to their ploys.

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
25. Not to play at war, there are other things that we could do, "win-win" kind of things.
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 08:49 AM
Sep 2013

Like sending food and necessities and taking people in, you don't even have to take sides, if fact it's safer if you don't. Of course, we won't get much in return, but we'll feel better about ourselves, and that can be worth a lot.

 

heaven05

(18,124 posts)
26. I really did hope
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 08:51 AM
Sep 2013

nth dimensional chess was being played in our leader's first four years. Not so. The forces of our profit driven economy get to any president either easily as in the case of most RW rethug politicians or surreptitiously threaten a POTUS person who might have wanted to provide 'hope and change' into coming around to their point of view. Oswald was not 'the lone shooter'. I can't wait to see the change in Dr. Warren IF she makes to being POTUS. Just surmising, no concrete proof of any goddamn thing.

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
32. +1. It just gives them a weapon to use against you.
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 09:14 AM
Sep 2013

And that is why they like to hurry you along, so you don't think it over, and so they can get on to the next sucker.

Response to cthulu2016 (Reply #36)

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»In chess, if you have no ...