My contextual comments further below. History is filled with surprising stories of how people and ideas are connected. One such story is that of the origins of the most popular board game in modern history. It's an American classic: each new generation of Monopoly players learns to love (harmlessly) indulging its cutthroat, ruthless, greedy impulses. Players begin the game as equals. Luck — and a bit of strategy — eventually enables one player to dominate all others. That player ends up amassing a huge fortune in cash and real estate. Most Monopoly players don't know (or care) that this game was originally the product of a passion for social and economic justice. In the late 1800s, a young woman named Elizabeth Magie was introduced to the writings of Henry George by her father. She eventually became one of many people who took on the task of trying to teach others what she had learned from studying Progress and Poverty and George's other works. Collaborating with friends in her Brentwood, Maryland community, Elizabeth Magie created The Landlord's Game. She applied for a patent, which was granted on January 5th, 1904 (No. 748,626). She explained that the game was to be a "practical demonstration of the present system of land-grabbing with all its usual outcomes and consequences." While still a young, single woman, Elizabeth -- or "Lizzie" as she came to be called -- became a regular visitor to the Single Tax enclave of Arden, Delaware. This was around 1903. Whether on her own or in conjunction with other Single Taxers in Arden, Lizzie continued to work on the design of The Landlord's Game as a way to explain how Henry George's system of political economy would work in real life. ... http://www.henrygeorge.org/dodson_on_monopoly.htm In researching Jerry's and my next post, a needed diversion from the OT analysis series, I ran across the above ironic history of the Monopoly board game. It seems that the game was designed to teach economic principles, demonstrating how unmitigated rational greed will necessarily lead to the desired traditionalist Christian outcome of disproportionate wealth. As Christ Titus (paraphrasing) mockingly said, 'the poor randy leeches will always be with us'. But the game was sucked up into the corporate system it was designed to shine light on, and the courts, the sole institutional cucksavior of cuckKochian Libertarianism decided in favor of the moneyed Monopoly interests, despite Objective evidence to the contrary. As such, the corporate Church (and its veiled sponsors), who in times past had no problem offing problematic individuals, for their own salvation no less, no longer has any need to fear atheists and such as Libertarian 'anarchists', especially if they are anarcho-capitalists. This is because the Hapsburgian Mont Pellerin meme has cleverly substituted (cucked) the elite's most important economic concept to be preserved in place of Jesus, their now worn out Caesarian facade. Here, the elite's, their interests in easy wealth streams contiguous for thousands of years, merely replaced one Fool's Game for another, each making the cuckholded 'freeman' believe that he his acting in his own 'perceived' (delusional) Rational Self Interest. In the Old School Christian system, heretics, of all sorts were merely burnt at the stake and such, while in the new school, the metaphorical cuckholds du jour are employed to hysterically attack anything deviating from their neo-Orthodoxy as tantamount to Communism. This last tactic, focuses on Marx, as already revealed as a cynical, and mostly successful elite gentil effort to subvert any effort to alter the elite's desired economic format, an extreme form of capitalism, to a more optimal and balanced approach (that includes appropriate forms of capitalism). It turns out that the original intent of the game was to teach the 19th century concepts advanced by Henry George centered around the problems of real estate, especially with rent. And as I have explained elsewhere, this issue originates from at least the time of the rise of civilization in Mesopotamia where the temple of the city-state religion held most of the arable land, and rent it out for income. This is literally where we ultimately get the term 'landlord' from. This is the underlying aspect the mother Church (aka Mystery Babylon) has tried to maintain control over for two thousand years under the obfuscation of countless lesser 'cultural' and such issues. The article author was compelled to correctly note that, at some point, promoters of an earlier version of Monopoly had gone off the rails and were hoping to destroy capitalism, which was not the original intent, but rather to mitigate certain negative aspects. Burton Wolfe also tells us that a young Rexford E. Tugwell was one of the players. One of Tugwell's own students, Priscilla Robertson -- long-time editor of The Humanist -- provided the following details on the early history of the game: "In those days those who wanted copies of the board for Monopoly took a piece of linen cloth and copied it in crayon. It was considered a point of honor not to sell it to a commercial manufacturer, since it had been worked out by a group of single taxers who were anxious to defeat the capitalist system." (I am obliged to note here the considerable misrepresentation of the objectives pursued by Single Taxers who shared Henry George's principles. Defeating monopoly in all its forms (but, particularly, monopoly of nature), not capitalism, was - and is - the cause embraced then and today.) The game, of course, is based upon buying properties and the paying of rent to the owner, which leads to an accumulation of wealth that can become disproportionate (for some) and especially so (in real life) in comparison to wage slavery (also negatively impacted by monetary inflation, the reverse true for such assets as real estate, especially when leveraged). So-called 'monopoly' is only the most extreme form of disproportionate accumulation idealized by the crypto-oligarch wannabees, some of which ironically frequent here.