Prisoner's Dilemma

Throughout politics, a need for everyone to work together towards a common goal arises. Without this cooperation of multiple parties, nothing is accomplished. Collective action, the efforts of a group to reach and implement agreements, takes place not only in everyday life, but also within politics. People utilize collective action by observing the variables in place and making a plan as how to effectively achieve the purpose. Although collective action appears to be an easy decision to make, there are many obstacles in the way of achieving the agreed plan. For example, the prisoner’s dilemma limits the ways to reach collective action. The participants have the opportunity to either cooperate or defect. Cooperating appears as the smart and morally right choice, leaving defecting as the selfish choice. The prisoner’s dilemma causes much strife between the parties and creates …show more content…
Every action involving politics “must tacitly solve the prisoner’s dilemma.” Each side wants to serve their own interests, but for the better of their relations with other groups or even nations, they must cooperate. A very recent circumstance involving the prisoner’s dilemma is the refugee crisis. Many different countries have struggled with the decision of letting in the refugees or leaving them for others to take care of. Specifically in the United States, letting them in (cooperation) could mean that there would be violence and crimes committed by the refugees. But the refugees would have a safe place to live and the US could gain a good public image among the world. By defecting (not letting them in), the President would be “keeping America safe and securing our liberty.” President Trump decided to place a travel ban on many Muslim nations which restricts the immigration of refugees as well as visitors from coming. He chose to defect and believed that he should choose the side that benefited himself rather than benefitting