Never Again & Post-War Gamification: How Exclusionary Politics Always Turns on Its Own Supporters

> “Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” > —Elie Wiesel, Holocaust survivor and Nobel Laureate In the aftermath of World War II, the global community rallied behind the words “Never Again,” vowing that the atrocities of the Holocaust would not recur. This phrase—part ethical imperative, part call to action—became a guiding principle, embedded in the foundational texts of modern international law. From the *Universal Declaration of Human Rights* in 1948 to the *Genocide Convention* that same year, and eventually to the establishment of the International Criminal Court in 2002, “Never Again” signaled a collective resolve to transcend humanity’s darker instincts. Yet the question remained: **How** to accomplish this? Seventy-plus years later, that question appears to have been answered in ways more subtle than many might suspect. This essay draws on historical evidence, psychological theory, and the concept of “gamification” to suggest that global powers have engineered a sophisticated strategy to contain and sublimate humanity’s tribal impulses—impulses that, if left unchecked, can lead to genocide or large-scale conflict. These strategies, once purely conceptual or hidden behind bureaucratic façades, are now transitioning into a tangible reality: a “great sorting” or “harvest” that is reshaping societies, deciding who thrives, and who is sidelined. Most critically, it hinges on a doctrine that might be called “full agency,” in which people’s own choices become the metrics of how they themselves will be treated. What follows is a deep exploration of these ideas. It aims not only to explain these complex dynamics, but also to highlight the profound implications for individuals. **Whether you realize it or not, you are already in the game.** --- #### WARNING: [The walls you want built are being built for you](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/05/be-careful-walls-you-want-are-being.html) --- ## A Legacy of “Never Again” Few historical events have shaped contemporary international systems more than World War II. The Holocaust, with its systematic extermination of six million Jews alongside millions of others deemed “undesirable” by the Nazi regime, scarred the global psyche. In the immediate aftermath, world leaders convened in unprecedented ways, forging charters, conventions, and tribunals. The **United Nations Charter (1945)** was signed with the explicit goal of preserving peace. The **Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)** followed, affirming baseline standards of dignity and freedom for all. In the same year, the **Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide**—often simply called the Genocide Convention—codified the international community’s vow that mass exterminations would not be tolerated. Yet, as Elie Wiesel warned, lofty declarations amount to little without constant vigilance. This is where the concept of “Never Again” became more than mere rhetoric. The *Nuremberg Trials (1945–1946)* had already established a paradigm where individuals, not just states, could be held accountable. Later, the creation of the **International Criminal Court (2002)** offered a permanent forum to try those charged with genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. These legal mechanisms symbolize the top-down enforcement of “Never Again.” But behind the scenes, governments, intelligence agencies, and think tanks recognized another, more visceral truth: humans possess deep-seated evolutionary instincts for tribal conflict. As the Cold War dawned, strategists realized that banning war outright was far less feasible than **redirecting** its impulses. ## Tribal Instincts and the Game of War ### The Evolutionary Blueprint For centuries, anthropologists have observed that tribalism runs deep in human psychology. **Konrad Lorenz**, in his seminal work *On Aggression*, discussed how territorial conflict stems from our species’ need to defend resources. Later, **Henri Tajfel** explored in-group/out-group biases—how humans effortlessly divide the world into “us” versus “them.” Whether in ancient clan rivalries or modern political factions, these biological tendencies persist, shaped by millennia of competition over territory and resources. In the 20th century, **Richard Dawkins** introduced the concept of “memes” in *The Selfish Gene*, using the metaphor of viral propagation to show how ideas can spread just as genes do. Nazism, in this sense, could be viewed as a “memetic pandemic”: an ideology that latched onto Germany’s post-World War I resentments, ultimately fueling catastrophic violence. The challenge became: **How do we prevent such memes from ever reaching pandemic levels again?** ### Sports, Media, and Political Theater One answer: **sports**. International sporting events—from the FIFA World Cup to the Olympics—can channel competition in a relatively controlled environment. Cheering for a national team is a form of tribal loyalty, but the battlefield is the stadium, not the streets. Another outlet: **media-driven political theater**. While daily political shouting matches can seem divisive, they may also serve as a kind of release valve. Individuals can root for political “teams,” fueled by sensationalist media, without resorting to physical warfare. It is no accident that modern democracies often feature elaborate forms of performative conflict—both among elected officials and in the partisan press. These conflicts may be real in substance, but they also function to distract, occupy, and sublimate deeper tribal instincts. ## The Rise of Gamification ### From War Games to Full Simulation During the Cold War, the US government and others began conducting extensive “war games,” simulating nuclear conflicts to avoid catastrophic miscalculation. Institutions like the **RAND Corporation** produced entire libraries of scenarios that tested the boundaries of deterrence theory. The principle was simple: let conflict play out in **simulation** so it doesn’t spill into the real world. From these earliest war games evolved a broader framework. If competition and conflict are inherent to human nature, then the best way to stave off genocide is not always open warfare, but rather **turning conflict into a kind of game**—one with strict rules and boundaries. Over time, this approach expanded beyond the realm of nuclear deterrence. ### Distracting and Containing Extremists Governments also realized that certain factions—potential extremists—had to be carefully managed. The FBI’s **Countering Violent Extremism (CVE)** and the UK’s **Prevent Strategy** reflect strategies designed to intercept radical ideologies before they metastasize. Critically, these measures extended beyond watchlists and infiltration; they involved subtle manipulations of digital spaces, encouraging potential extremists to get lost in the labyrinth of conspiratorial chatter online rather than take real-world action. Whether in the shape of political feuds, clickbait controversies, or orchestrated “pseudo-conflicts,” these distractions can occupy extremist impulses. If a potential radical is busy flaming opponents on social media, they might never organize a real-world violent act. ## Shifting from Game to Reality: The Great Sorting ### The Cohort Principle In a world where data analytics track our every move, it is hardly surprising that many of us have been sorted into “cohorts.” As **Bill Bishop** notes in *The Big Sort*, Americans increasingly cluster into likeminded enclaves. The same holds worldwide, amplified by social media algorithms. With each click, share, or like, individuals self-sort into ideological micro-communities. This is part of the “gamification” system’s design: **everyone chooses sides**—sometimes unknowingly—by how they engage in politics, culture, and social issues. This phenomenon has been meticulously studied by marketing firms, tech companies, and intelligence agencies alike. The sorting yields a map of humankind’s ideological terrain, a map that—under normal circumstances—remains primarily a “game board.” ### When the Game Gets Real But what happens when the line between play and reality blurs? In the last decade, we have seen a sharp rise in real-world consequences for individuals whose views fall outside the mainstream or who align with extremist ideologies. People lose jobs, face public shaming campaigns, or find themselves financially sidelined. Corporate policies increasingly factor in “values” that—once simply rhetorical—now determine who gets hired, promoted, or quietly phased out. Simultaneously, movements aimed at correcting historical wrongs—whether through reparations, social justice initiatives, or broader equality programs—are accelerating. Where once talk of “reparation” was abstract and polarizing, now we see real attempts at institutional restitution, from academic institutions acknowledging ties to slavery to global proposals for climate reparations. As these changes gather momentum, they reshape entire social and economic ecosystems. In short, what was once a game is rapidly transforming into an **inescapable reality**. Those who believed they were simply “playing politics” might discover they have effectively declared their stance in a grand, planetary sorting experiment. ## Full Agency: You Decide Your Fate ### The Doctrine of “Do Unto Others…” Central to this new reality is the concept of “full agency.” The architects of the post-WWII gamification strategy recognized an inherent paradox: if governments or elites merely impose decisions on people, that robs them of agency—and fosters resentment that might ignite the same violent uprisings these systems aim to prevent. The solution? Let individuals decide their own positions—on immigration, diversity, equity, inclusion (DEI), and more—and then **apply those choices back upon them**. This approach echoes the golden rule: *Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.* If you advocate for the walls, you’d better be prepared to live behind them. If you favor cutting social programs, you must accept the same cuts for yourself. It’s a brilliant—and chilling—way to gauge sincerity. No one can cry foul when they experience the consequences they demanded for others. ### Self-Selection in a Darwinistic Sense This system blends moral philosophy with a Darwinistic principle of self-selection: your stances form the blueprint of how you, personally, will be treated. When you call for deporting undocumented immigrants, you’re effectively endorsing a world where your own freedom of movement might be restricted. When you support defunding public education, you signal that you’re comfortable with the risk of losing access to affordable schooling for yourself or your children. In practice, the mechanism may not be as direct as flipping a switch. But over time, as data accumulates about each individual’s expressed values, the system calibrates. It’s reminiscent of how social credit systems in certain countries rate and reward citizens—but on a far more intricate, global scale. This is “full agency” at work: decisions, once purely theoretical, boomerang back, forcing each person to confront the real implications of their stance. ## Be Careful—The Walls You Want Are Being Built Around You > “The walls you build always expand. The restrictions you enforce always tighten. The policies you cheer for today will be used against you tomorrow.” Society has reached an inflection point where the new rules are becoming tangible. If you push for severe immigration controls, you may find your own passport’s utility diminished, your ability to travel or relocate curtailed. If you clamor to cut social programs, the cushion of public support disappears—even for you—when you fall on hard times. Historically, this principle is well documented. Authoritarian regimes often turn on their own supporters once they’ve served their immediate purpose. It’s not so different from Frankenstein’s monster: once unleashed, the mechanism of control gains a life of its own. ### Historical Echoes - **Post-Nazi Germany**: The architects of the Third Reich instituted exclusionary policies targeting Jews, Roma, LGBTQ+ individuals, and political dissidents. Over time, the categories of “enemies” expanded, ensnaring many of the regime’s early supporters. After the war, the “denazification” process systematically rooted out not only top officials but also rank-and-file enablers. - **Soviet Purges**: Stalin’s purges did not stop with clear ideological opponents. Countless loyal communists found themselves branded “enemies of the people,” their own system turning violently on them. Today, many watch populist waves of nationalism and isolationism with a sense of déjà vu. The same fences that keep “undesirables” out can entrap you within. The same rhetorical barbs hurled at so-called “freeloaders” eventually come for your own benefits in times of need. ## Natural Regions and Other Realms of Imagination One dimension of the “great sorting” is the notion of **bio-regions**. Ecological and sociological schools of thought propose reorganizing civilization around natural boundaries—watersheds, eco-zones, landforms—rather than artificial political lines. It is a romantic and in some cases pragmatic vision of how humans might adapt to climate challenges. Yet, as any anthropologist will attest, the imagination is as potent as geographic reality. There are “places” we may inhabit cognitively—futuristic enclaves, digital realms—just as real as physical space. In a gamified world, some may opt for high-tech city-regions that emphasize cybernetic enhancements, others for pastoral enclaves focusing on local farming and environmental synergy. Some will remain in the old superstructures of big nation-states, clinging to legacy power centers. ### The Unlocking of the Mind To see these possibilities, people must *first* unlock their minds. In many ways, the game’s architects count on this not happening widely—on the mass population remaining complacent, enthralled by media spectacle, or burdened by everyday survival. But pockets of individuals and communities have already begun to experiment with self-sustaining eco-villages, crypto-based micro-economies, or entirely new forms of educational praxis. Whether these experiments flourish or succumb to groupthink remains an open question. ## The Agency Trap: The Policies You Support Will Turn Against You A core warning resonates throughout history: **exclusionary policies eventually exclude their own creators**. This is the final piece in the puzzle of “full agency.” Once you support a policy that restricts someone else—be it immigration bans, cuts to social programs, or muzzle laws on technology—those same policies strengthen an apparatus that inevitably eyes you next. 1. **Cutting Social Programs?** You might do so under the banner of fiscal responsibility, yet when you or your loved ones need affordable education or healthcare, you’ll find those doors closed. The infrastructure of mutual care—once strong—is eroded for *everyone*. 2. **Locking Down Borders?** Today, it might seem like a fortress keeping outsiders out. Tomorrow, it becomes a prison, confining you and restricting your own freedom of movement. Isolationism in an interconnected world can lead to economic stagnation, cultural atrophy, and the slow decay of innovation. 3. **Restricting Others’ Rights?** Historically, once a government acquires the tools to restrict or revoke rights, it rarely stops at the initial target. The net expands: eventually, dissenters, critics, and inconvenient allies get swept in. This cyclical phenomenon underscores that total power is never benign. 4. **Removing Immigrants from Jobs?** Labor markets are seldom a zero-sum game. Immigrants often fill critical shortages or innovate new economic niches. Oust them, and entire sectors collapse—agriculture, tech start-ups, service industries—leading to layoffs for everyone, including those who once cheered on the purge. 5. **Rejecting Science and Technology?** Suppose you take a stand against artificial intelligence or advanced medical research. Those fields will progress elsewhere—just without your input. Eventually, your local ecosystem becomes obsolete, lacking the innovations that sustain modern societies. 6. **Voting for Exclusion** Democracy or not, a system built on exclusion has no loyalty. The moment you no longer align with power, you are fair game. No one is immune. ## The Time to Reconsider: Why Full Agency Demands Constant Re-Evaluation With the game turning real, every opinion you hold—on immigration, on DEI, on technology, on universal basic income—echoes back upon you. The “full agency” model ensures that if you have spent decades endorsing policies that undermine certain communities, there is a data trail. And as **neuroplasticity** wanes with age and personal biases harden, your record becomes difficult to overwrite. ### Too Late for Some, Not for Others It might be *too late* for those who have spent decades championing exclusionary or harmful stances. Their positions are documented across social media, public statements, voting records, and personal interactions. When the system toggles from “simulation” to “enforcement,” many will face the harsh reality that they have effectively chosen their own consequences. Yet, **fairness** is built into the system—there is still time, for some. Younger generations, or those open-minded enough to revise their beliefs, can pivot. They can see that the fortress they once cheered for is an incipient prison, that the cuts they demanded might soon affect them. This process involves the painstaking task of stepping outside the echo chamber of groupthink, reevaluating each position, and calculating its real impact under a mirror rule: *If I do this to others, do I accept it done to me?* Resilience demands such introspection. The post-WWII vow to prevent atrocity was never about freezing the world in stasis; it was about evolving better systems. Today’s “gamified” environment is the outcome of that vow, a vast architecture designed to quell large-scale violence by localizing or submerging conflict. But now that it is turning real, the onus is on each individual to ensure they are not hoisted by their own petard. ## Placing Trust in Inclusion Over Control History is replete with accounts of societies that chose the path of exclusion and ended up cannibalizing themselves. Conversely, those that expanded rights, embraced diversity, and fostered open exchange thrived more often than not. If the watchword of the mid-20th century was “Never Again,” the 21st century might adopt the motto “Inclusion Is Security.” ### Building Bridges, Not Walls If you truly want a stable, prosperous future for your community, *pushing others out* is antithetical. Economic and intellectual vibrancy often arises from cross-pollination of ideas. Geopolitical alliances, trade networks, and educational exchanges all serve to strengthen societies collectively. ### Embracing Progress Calls to muzzle scientific research or freeze technological development usually end in stagnation. The countries or communities that adapt and innovate remain relevant; those that recoil from progress risk decline. “Never Again” might also mean never again letting ignorance or fear hamper the quest for solutions to global challenges—climate change, pandemics, resource scarcity. ### The Shared Future The rational alternative to exclusion is an emphasis on mutual interdependence. COVID-19 taught the world that a virus pays no heed to borders. The same logic applies to climate catastrophes or economic collapses. Global crises necessitate coordinated solutions, which in turn require trust, empathy, and broad-based inclusion. ## A New Lens on “Never Again” Throughout the post-WWII era, “Never Again” largely manifested as legal frameworks, treaties, and tribunals. But behind those formalities lay a cunning social experiment to direct humanity’s competitive energies into harmless or less-harmful channels: games, sports, rhetorical conflicts, or digital illusions. The price of failing at that experiment would be a repeat of mid-century horrors on an even greater scale, given the destructive technologies now at humanity’s disposal. Yet no system can remain a simulation forever. The seeds planted decades ago are bearing fruit, or turning to rot, depending on one’s perspective. As individuals are sorted based on their ideological positions, as job markets and social standing reflect the ideas people once carelessly endorsed online, the game emerges as an **inescapable reality**—the “great sorting” or “harvest.” At this juncture, it is imperative to recall that the entire enterprise was built to spare the world from future atrocities. Yes, the system can appear draconian; yes, it can feel manipulative. But in the eyes of its architects, it is preferable to letting “memetic pandemics” like Nazism spread unimpeded. Or so the logic goes. ## Your Move If you take nothing else from this analysis, remember that **the power is in your hands**—whether you acknowledge it or not. The principle of “full agency” is ruthless, but it is also a form of cosmic justice: you will experience the direct consequences of the policies you support. Decades of entrenched behavior might be on your public record, but there remains an opening for those willing to change course. Modern civilization is not static; nor is the system. If enough people pivot toward inclusive, empathetic, forward-thinking stances, the apparatus will adapt. In moral and practical terms, we are living out a giant iteration of the golden rule: *Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.* For many, it is already too late to undo a lifetime of harmful endorsements. But for those who can muster the clarity and courage to break free from groupthink, the future remains open, at least partially. Call it destiny or call it a rigged game; either way, it demands sober reflection. So, as you click, post, vote, or advocate, realize that the line between “us” and “them” is vanishing. Realize that the walls you desire might one day close in on you. Realize that the job you hope to protect by pushing out newcomers might disappear when the system no longer needs you. Realize that the reality you think you are shaping for others is a reality you are also shaping for yourself. ## Conclusion: A Time for Careful Thought In the end, “Never Again” was never just about punishing war criminals or enshrining human rights in international law. It was about orchestrating a grand deterrence of humanity’s darkest impulses. Through subtler means—gamification, cohort sorting, digital illusions—the world’s powers have created an environment where conflict, prejudice, and extremism are increasingly relegated to managed “games.” Yet we are now witnessing the pivot point where the game, once mostly theater, becomes real, exacting tangible penalties. To remain free in this labyrinthine system, you must recognize the fundamental rule: your actions define your fate. The policies, ideologies, and leaders you endorse are bricks in the walls that may one day confine you. The illusions of “us versus them” can unravel swiftly once “them” becomes you. A better path lies in acknowledging our shared fate. Inclusion, empathy, and open-minded inquiry remain the best safeguards against the horrors that spawned “Never Again.” We are no longer dealing with abstractions; we are dealing with the structure of our everyday lives—where we can live, how we can travel, what rights we retain, and what futures we can imagine. Those who refuse to adapt risk sealing themselves in their own ideological tombs. As you finish reading, reflect on your positions. Ask: *If my stance were applied to me, could I live with it?* This simple question captures the heart of “full agency.” And in a world engineered to run on that principle, the consequences of your answer may be more far-reaching than you ever imagined. --- #### [Never Again & Post-War Gamification: How Exclusionary Politics Always Turns on Its Own Supporters](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2025/02/never-again-post-war-gamification-how.html) * [The Hidden Battle of Minds: Understanding Memetic Diseases and the Power of Memetic Medicine](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/11/the-hidden-battle-of-minds.html) * [Preventing the Next Memetic Pandemic: A Global Alliance of Science Eliminating Global Atrocities](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/12/preventing-next-memetic-pandemic-global.html) * [Harnessing Predictive and Intervening Technology for Social and Biological Transformation](https://xentities.blogspot.com/2025/02/harnessing-predictive-and-intervening.html) * [Trump’s Guantánamo 2.0: Putting Hate on “ICE” with a Quiet Purge of Domestic Extremists](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2025/02/trumps-guantanamo-20-quiet-purge-of.html) * [Society’s Immune System: Evaluating Extremist Emboldenment by High-Profile Figures](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2025/01/evaluating-hypothesis-of-deliberate.html) * [Data Trafficking, “Trafficking”, Data Flow Regulations, Genomics, and AI in Global Governance](https://xentities.blogspot.com/2025/01/data-trafficking-trafficking-data-flow.html) * [2024 Presidential Medals: A Convergence of Global Health, Cultural Influence and Unified Leadership](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2025/01/2024-presidential-medals-convergence-of.html) * [Rehabilitation Through Neural Immersion: A “New” Approach to Justice and Healing](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2025/02/rehabilitation-through-neural-immersion.html) * [Facing the Future: Navigating Technological Change Without Losing Ourselves](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/12/facing-future-navigating-technological.html) #### [Beyond Equality: Embracing Equity in the Age of AI and Human Rights](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2025/02/beyond-equality-embracing-equity-in-age.html) * [The Lingering War: How Slavery’s Legacy, Epigenetics, and Cultural Memory Shape America’s 50/50 Divide](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2025/02/the-lingering-war-how-slaverys-legacy.html) * [DEI: Better Than Sliced White-Bread! Get Jiggy Wit It… Or Stay in the Sunken Place](https://xentities.blogspot.com/2025/02/dei-better-than-sliced-white-bread-get.html) * [We Thought Y’all Loved the Constitution?](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2025/01/we-thought-yall-loved-constitution.html) * [Crawling Through the Sewage Pipe of Nationalism: America’s Shawshank Redemption Toward a New Global Order](https://xentities.blogspot.com/2025/01/the-duality-of-rhetoric-and-action-in.html) * [Be careful. The walls you want built are being built for you...](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/05/be-careful-walls-you-want-are-being.html) #### Climate? Ecology is Science [You’re Arguing About Climate Change, But You Don’t Even Know What Climate Science Is...](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2025/02/beyond-forecast-how-meteorology.html) * [Climate Change Decoded: The Ecological Crisis and the Dawn of a New Resilient Humanity](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/10/the-ecological-crisis-and-dawn-of-new.html) * [Climate Justice as a Form of Reparative Equity](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/11/climate-justice-as-form-of-reparative.html) * [Global Reparative Justice: Addressing colonialism, and systemic inequities on a planetary scale](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/11/global-reparative-justice-system.html) * [2020 Vision: Climate Justice and Reparative Equity for Historical and Ecological Injustice](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2020/11/radical-hope-2020-vision-for-climate.html) * [References, Reading, and Research Notes for McGill's Climate Justice as a Form of Reparative Equity](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/11/references-reading-and-research-notes.html) * [Evolving Governance: Planetary Leadership Beyond Elections and Toward Human Resilience](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/11/evolving-governance-planetary.html) * [John Nash’s Unparalleled Legacy in the Changing Climate of Societal Transformation](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2025/01/john-nash-more-than-beautiful-mind.html) * [Extinction: A Basic Working Vocabulary for Studying, Preventing, and Mitigating Extinction Risks](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2024/11/extinction-basic-working-vocabulary-for.html) * [Cheers to resilience...](https://bryantmcgill.blogspot.com/2020/12/cheers-to-resilience.html) ---

## Outline of Arguments **A Compelling Argument for the Post-World War II “Never Again” Imperative and the Gamification of Conflict** Below is a comprehensive, multi-layered argument incorporating historical precedents, psychological underpinnings, sociopolitical strategies, and contemporary real-world examples. It weaves together how global powers—determined to prevent atrocities like the Holocaust—may have developed “gamified” outlets for humanity’s lingering tribal impulses and how this system is evolving into something real and consequential today. ## 1. **Historical Context and the “Never Again” Imperative** 1. **Aftermath of World War II** - The phrase “Never Again” was popularly invoked following the Holocaust, capturing the collective resolve that genocide, ethnic cleansings, and large-scale atrocities would not be permitted to recur. This ethos is reflected in key historical milestones such as: - The **United Nations Charter (1945)**: Established to maintain international peace and security, indicating the global community’s attempt to unify nations under a single framework. - The **Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948)**: A direct response to the atrocities of WWII, defining human rights standards for all nations. - The **Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948)**: Often referred to as the “Genocide Convention,” making it an international crime to engage in genocidal acts. - Quotes: - “Never again” was succinctly articulated by survivors of the Holocaust and has appeared as a moral rallying cry in numerous international instruments. - **Elie Wiesel**, Holocaust survivor and Nobel Laureate, famously insisted that neutrality in the face of oppression helps the oppressor, coalescing public conscience around prevention of future atrocities. 2. **Pivotal Global Commitments** - **Nuremberg Trials (1945-1946)** established the principle that individuals (and not just states) could be held accountable for war crimes and crimes against humanity, thus laying the groundwork for a permanent system of oversight. - Later, the creation of the **International Criminal Court (ICC, 2002)** built on these post-war principles, theoretically deterring future despots through the threat of legal action. ## 2. **Evolutionary Underpinnings: Tribalism and the Biology of Conflict** 1. **Biological Legacies of Warfare** - **Tribal Instincts**: Anthropological and evolutionary psychology research (e.g., **Konrad Lorenz’s _On Aggression_**) posits that humans have deeply ingrained territorial and competitive impulses shaped by millennia of inter-tribal conflict. - **Social Identity Theory**: Proposed by **Henri Tajfel**, underscores how in-group/out-group biases are natural to human cognition. Warfare in ancient societies often revolved around resource competition and identity defense. 2. **Memetic Propagation of Extremism** - **Richard Dawkins** introduced the concept of “memes” in _The Selfish Gene_ (1976), describing how ideas propagate like viruses. Nazism in WWII can be viewed as a “memetic pandemic,” which rapidly spread vitriol and supremacist ideology. - Modern extremist movements often rely on mass media and social platforms for what some social scientists call “digital epidemiology” of ideologies—contagious beliefs that can lead to radicalization. 3. **Sublimation Through Games and Sports** - As post-WWII societies sought to reroute aggression, **organized sports** and **competitive games** took on a quasi-ritual role for channeling conflict. For instance, the rise of global sporting events (e.g., the World Cup, the Olympics) can be partly interpreted as providing a socially acceptable outlet for competitive energies that might otherwise manifest in violence. ## 3. **The Notion of “Gamification” as a Conflict-Containment Strategy** 1. **Conceptual Underpinnings** - **War Games and Simulations**: From the Cold War onward, governments have routinely conducted “war games” to model and deter nuclear escalation (e.g., the United States’ **RAND Corporation** has produced extensive simulations). The idea is to simulate conflict as a safe stand-in for actual warfare. - **Media and Political Theater**: In democracies, rhetorical clashes among political parties and media “spin” can serve as an outlet for tribalistic fervor. Citizens become invested in the drama of political conflict, while in reality, an underlying bureaucratic continuity might remain unaffected. 2. **Distractive and Containment Mechanisms** - **Managing Potential Extremists**: Certain covert or semi-covert **government programs**, intelligence agencies, and international think tanks strategize to keep extremist elements occupied with “pseudo-conflicts” or localized political spats. - **Surveillance and Preemptive Measures**: “Never Again” also materializes in extensive surveillance regimes and extremism-monitoring platforms—particularly after 9/11. Programs like the **FBI’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE)** or the UK’s **Prevent Strategy** explicitly aim to identify and contain radical ideologies before they metastasize. ## 4. **From Game to Reality: The Great Sorting or “Harvest”** 1. **Cohort Segmentation** - As these containment strategies evolved, individuals and groups displaying certain ideological leanings were sorted—online filter bubbles, targeted political advertising, and specialized watchlists are real-world manifestations of such segmentation. - **Bill Bishop’s _The Big Sort_ (2008)** highlights how Americans have been gravitating into communities of shared ideology, both online and offline, reinforcing polarization. 2. **Transition from Playful Simulation to Tangible Consequence** - The argument suggests that we are moving into a phase where ideological alignment has consequences beyond the superficial. People find themselves losing employment or social standing as older frameworks yield to new, emergent socio-political models. - The impetus for “**correcting historical wrongs**”—be it through reparations, social justice movements, or targeted legislation—coincides with the dissolution of purely theatrical conflict. Real power structures respond to extremist ideologies by systematically disempowering them. 3. **Implications of Bio-Regional Migrations** - **Bio-regional thinking**: Ecological and sociological concepts propose reorganizing human populations around natural regions (watersheds, ecozones) rather than arbitrary political boundaries. - Over the long term, as the argument posits, if specific cohorts remain ideologically rigid, they may be incentivized—or compelled—to relocate to enclaves better aligned with their worldview. This is a possible future scenario, reminiscent of utopian/dystopian speculation in academic fields like **climate migration studies**. ## 5. **Lessons, Warnings, and the “Never Again” Mandate** 1. **Do Not Over-Invest in Political Theater** - A key takeaway is that much political conflict, especially in media-saturated contexts, may be orchestrated. Citizens should remain cognizant that spectacle can be a deliberate distraction from more fundamental structural changes happening behind the scenes. 2. **Vigilance Against the Resurgence of Extremism** - “**Never Again**” is not just moralistic but also strategic: governments devote significant resources to preventing any re-emergence of genocidal fervor. - At the same time, calls from populist movements or radical groups for “freedom” and “change” can be sincere. The challenge is discerning legitimate reformist aims from recidivist, violent ideologies. 3. **The Risk of Actual Conflict** - The “gamification” strategy carries the risk that once the façade of the “game” slips, genuine economic, political, and social sanctions can—and do—descend on those deemed dangerous or disruptive. Historically, we see parallels in how **postwar Germany** was reorganized and “de-Nazified,” or how post-apartheid **South Africa** underwent major structural transformations. 4. **Global Energy Investment** - Underlying all these processes is an immense investment in intelligence, data analysis, psychological research, and sociopolitical engineering by global powers—NATO, the G7, BRICS, and beyond. This interconnected system aims to preempt large-scale violence by breaking the chain of memetic contagion. 5. **Maintaining Hope and Constructive Engagement** - While the shift from a controlled game to reality may seem foreboding, it can also be viewed positively as an evolutionary leap in social organization—one that fosters accountability and justice. - The “great sorting” could, in an optimistic sense, create new socio-political ecosystems where people of diverse views experiment with governance at smaller scales, hopefully avoiding a catastrophic global conflict. ## 6. **Select References & Further Reading** 1. **Historical & Legal Frameworks** - United Nations. (1945). *Charter of the United Nations*. - United Nations. (1948). *Universal Declaration of Human Rights*. - United Nations. (1948). *Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide*. 2. **Philosophical & Psychological Works** - Dawkins, R. (1976). *The Selfish Gene*. Oxford University Press. - Lorenz, K. (1966). *On Aggression*. - Tajfel, H. & Turner, J.C. (1979). “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict.” *The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations*. 3. **Studies on Extremism and Surveillance** - Sunstein, C. R. (2009). “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures.” *Journal of Political Philosophy*. - UK Government. (2011). *Prevent Strategy*. - FBI. (2014). *Countering Violent Extremism (CVE)*. 4. **Sociological / Political Perspectives** - Bishop, B. (2008). *The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart*. - Rand Corporation. (Numerous publications on war-gaming and conflict simulations). 5. **On the Dangers of Totalitarian Ideologies** - Wiesel, E. (1972). *One Generation After*. - Arendt, H. (1963). *Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil*. ## 7. **Conclusion: A Call to Discernment and Responsible Action** In sum, **the “Never Again” vow forged in the aftermath of WWII** has manifested in far-reaching social, legal, and technological frameworks intended to diffuse humanity’s latent capacities for large-scale violence. From war-game simulations and media theatrics to sports and political showmanship, these mechanisms serve to channel, contain, and monitor extremism. Yet, as societal fault lines deepen and real-world repercussions unfold, the boundary between symbolic conflict and tangible oppression grows thin. The **“great sorting”** or “harvest” unfolding today challenges us to recognize that ideological and cultural alignments have real consequences. Jobs, social status, credit systems, and potential future “bio-regional” migrations may no longer be mere speculation. The cautionary wisdom is twofold: 1. **Remain alert to manipulative gamification**—not all conflict is authentic, and not every rallying cry leads where it claims. 2. **Embrace responsibility** in our discourse, choices, and alliances, remembering that the entire post-war international system was designed—with colossal investment of effort and resources—to ensure humanity never again succumbed to the horrors of genocide or total war. To preserve peace, it is imperative to understand the scale of these efforts, respect the seriousness behind “Never Again,” and avoid radicalization—whether from populist or extremist ideologies. Doing so honors the memory of past atrocities and ensures we collectively direct our formidable human energies toward progressive innovation, equity, and responsible global stewardship. --- ## REFERENCES This comprehensive list bridges historical, psychological, sociopolitical, and contemporary domains, providing robust support for the article’s thesis. Each reference reinforces the interplay between post-WWII institutional frameworks, evolutionary tribalism, and modern conflict management strategies. ### **1. Historical Context and the “Never Again” Imperative** - **Key Documents**: - United Nations. (1945). [UN Charter](https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter). - United Nations. (1948). [Universal Declaration of Human Rights](https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights). - United Nations. (1948). [Genocide Convention](https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide-convention.shtml). - **Scholarly Analysis**: - Power, S. (2002). *"A Problem from Hell": America and the Age of Genocide*. Analyzes post-WWII failures and successes in atrocity prevention. - Bass, G. J. (2000). *Stay the Hand of Vengeance: The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals*. Discusses Nuremberg’s legacy. - **Institutions**: - [International Criminal Court (ICC)](https://www.icc-cpi.int/): Legal framework for prosecuting genocide. - **Quotes**: - Elie Wiesel: “Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim” (Nobel Peace Prize speech, 1986). ### **2. Evolutionary Underpinnings: Tribalism and Conflict** - **Theories/Studies**: - Lorenz, K. (1966). *On Aggression*. Discusses biological roots of aggression. - Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). “Social Identity Theory” in *The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations*. - Dawkins, R. (1976). *The Selfish Gene*. Introduces memetics. - **Sports as Conflict Sublimation**: - Guttmann, A. (1994). *Games and Empires: Modern Sports and Cultural Imperialism*. Links sports to colonial/postwar diplomacy. - International Olympic Committee (IOC). (2023). [Olympic Truce](https://olympics.com/ioc/olympic-truce). ### **3. Gamification as Conflict-Containment** - **War Games & Simulations**: - RAND Corporation. (1950s–present). Reports on Cold War simulations (e.g., *The RAND Paper Series on Nuclear Deterrence*). - Halperin, M. (1974). *Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy*. Discusses game theory in policymaking. - **Government Programs**: - FBI. (2014). [Countering Violent Extremism (CVE)](https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism). - UK Home Office. (2011). [Prevent Strategy](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prevent-strategy-2011). - **Media & Political Theater**: - Edelman, M. (1988). *Constructing the Political Spectacle*. Analyzes media’s role in shaping political conflict. ### **4. The “Great Sorting” and Bio-Regionalism** - **Polarization Studies**: - Bishop, B. (2008). *The Big Sort*. Examines U.S. ideological clustering. - Pariser, E. (2011). *The Filter Bubble*. Discusses algorithmic polarization. - **Bio-Regionalism**: - Sale, K. (1985). *Dwellers in the Land: The Bioregional Vision*. Advocates for eco-regional governance. - IPCC. (2022). [Climate Migration Reports](https://www.ipcc.ch/). Links climate change to displacement. ### **5. Lessons, Warnings, and Modern Implications** - **Denazification & Transitional Justice**: - Frei, N. (2002). *Adenauer’s Germany and the Nazi Past*. Postwar Germany’s reckoning. - Truth and Reconciliation Commission (South Africa). (1998). [Final Report](https://www.justice.gov.za/trc/). - **Surveillance Ethics**: - Zuboff, S. (2019). *The Age of Surveillance Capitalism*. Critiques modern monitoring. - **NGOs/Platforms**: - [International Crisis Group](https://www.crisisgroup.org/): Conflict prevention analyses. - [Amnesty International](https://www.amnesty.org/): Reports on human rights and extremism. ### **6. Additional References** - **Legislation/Policies**: - EU’s [General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)](https://gdpr-info.eu/): Balances surveillance and privacy. - US [Global Magnitsky Act](https://www.state.gov/global-magnitsky-act/): Sanctions for human rights abuses. - **Digital Extremism**: - Berger, J. M. (2018). *Extremism*. Explores online radicalization. - Twitter/Facebook Transparency Reports: Data on hate speech removals. ### **Conclusion: Interdisciplinary Synthesis** - **Key Journals**: - *Journal of Genocide Research*: Post-WWII prevention scholarship. - *Games and Culture*: Gamification studies. - **Think Tanks**: - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: [Counter-Extremism Programs](https://carnegieendowment.org/). - Brookings Institution: [Polarization in Democracies](https://www.brookings.edu/).

Bryant McGill · Never Again: Exclusionary Politics and Post-War Gamification Strategies