- This is not enough people
to really fight up
against powerful people.
This is like something that
would happen in a movie.
(upbeat music)
- My name is Christian Grose
and I'm a Professor of political science
and public policy at the
University of Southern California.
And I'm also the
Academic Director of the USC
Schwarzenegger Institute.
The USC Schwarzenegger
Institute was founded
by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
when he stepped down
as Governor of California to
focus on environmental policy,
political and election reform
and afterschool education.
A political science professor is really,
you do research and you
write and then you teach.
You come up with new ideas.
You analyze the world.
I write books, I write articles,
and basically trying to understand
why people do what they do.
When I was really young I
was interested in politics.
I had some really amazing
political science professors.
I was really interested in
studying racial redistricting.
Ended up as a Professor by the age of 27.
I play video games a little bit.
I do like classic video games.
The style of play in this particular game
looks appealing to me
because I like this sort of
throwback style to older video games.
The year is 20XX,
the world is in the throes
of global capitalism.
Workers everywhere toil
daily for a pittance.
Many work multiple jobs
just to make ends meet.
But no matter how hard they work,
it'll never be enough to be free.
For those who do not own
the means of production,
will never know real freedom.
The media is owned by the rich.
The political system is owned by the rich.
All capital is owned by the rich.
People peacefully protested,
but were met with violence.
Those who own for a living rule
those who work for a living.
But all of that is about to change.
Tonight we riot.
The beginning is interesting I think
it's a little bit of a caricature.
Definitely wealthy people have
greater power and interest
in the political system.
But there is a decent
amount of what we might call
pluralism, where different
groups of interest
have different powers.
So, a lot of times there's
people who are wealthy
don't agree with one another,
and those people fight it out a little bit
in the world of politics
and the world of economics.
"Factory Town Herald"
says tear gas is deployed.
"Riot cops, workers clash."
So it's a relatively small group.
There's only one way
through... Direct Action.
Press right trigger to use weapon.
One thing is this is not
enough people to really
fight up against powerful
(chuckles) people.
This like something that
would happen in the movies,
there would be one or two people
fighting against a large group of people.
Collective action,
however it's engaged in,
you're gonna need to
have a lot more people
as part of your collective.
Workers of the world unite.
Let's liberate this building.
So it looks like there's more workers.
You've got just a few people,
only gonna get so far,
but if you've got a large group.
Same thing if you try to engage in
any kind of Direct Action
against government,
or the state.
The more people you have,
the more likely that you'll
get the outcome that you want.
Maybe this is the
corporation's security team
that you're fighting against.
I'm not sure.
This looks very dystopian.
It's dystopian, but with kind of a,
old school classic vibe to it.
Yeah, collective action
is really hard to do.
Oh, area liberated.
Looks like there are 8 workers saved.
That seemed relatively easy.
What I was saying, is
that in political science,
the collective action
is really hard to do.
It's always difficult to get
people to form groups together.
Some call it the "Free Rider" problem.
It's easy to free ride and
let other people do it.
If you're in any group,
and you wanna organize with somebody else,
it's easier to let other people do it.
In this case, like, you know,
getting shot at by a
tank in the video game.
And you kinda hang back,
and bear all the fruits of
the work of the other people.
"Whipple Company board
promises end to protests."
"Giant Flying Laser Fist stock surges."
I could imagine that stock
price is probably gonna go up
if there's sort of, less revolution.
Nine or ten workers here now?
Little bit larger group.
The board has decided
you'd be more valuable
to the shareholders if you were dead.
That seems a little extreme,
but it's pretty fun for a game.
These hands are the
invisible hand of the market.
Or these hands are like
the fists of solidarity
for workers, I'm not sure.
I guess the hands are bad.
Area liberated, workers saved.
The group of the workers together
is keeping you alive in the game.
And that's cool for the group collective
outcomes to try to win the game,
but in real life,
when you are the individual
who is getting killed,
you might just want to protect
your own self, individually.
And that's one of the reasons it's so hard
to engage in any kind
of collective action.
Here's a huge squid.
Which is more fun,
I don't know if squids
are representative of the
corporate or government power structures.
The fight was hard,
but the Dockyards had been salvaged
from the dangers of Whipple Company,
and their toxic chemical storage.
The windblown snow now
signaled the winds of change
as the workers' revolution
took control of the ports.
Take my sludge, you filth!
You deserve it!
You haven't seen the last of me!
And you'll never get past
the gates of our estates! Ha!
Area liberated, workers saved.
There's one worker and
there's six flat workers.
Pretty depressing, perhaps more accurate.
It is really hard for groups to engage
in any kind of Direct Action.
'Cause this is what happens, right?
It's not just about a protest.
There are harms that could
potentially come to people
who are engaging in protest.
From the civil rights
movement in the 1960's,
to, you know, going back to the
sudden rise of labor unions
in the late 1800's and early 1900's,
I think this game
targeting back to that era
of early labor unrest and
violence that would engage.
One thing that's not in
the game is the public
who's neither a worker,
nor owns the company,
or, is maybe a government official.
The public and their views
on these things matter a lot.
Monster squids would
be okay, but, you know,
workers killing people would
cause the public to be, actually,
less inclined to the workers.
Companies killing people
and killing the workers
would also make the public less inclined.
And this might seem unrealistic,
but back in the 1800's
there was labor unrest
that would lead to
people's lives being lost.
Okay, there's the bad guy.
I guess, the corporation owner.
Face me without all your weapons,
and I'll teach you to stay in one place.
All right, so it looks like
you can get him really easy,
he's just sitting there.
Maybe that's the point.
Finally, at the very end of it all,
if it's just one person versus one person,
it's not so difficult.
Oh, and that's it.
The riches of Bowling Green Estates
seemed otherworldly to the workers as they
fought amid the mansions of the wealthy.
Yachts sailed away in the distance
as the rich fled in panic.
They had gotten fat off the hard work of
those who labored for years,
and now those workers had
come to share in their spoils.
As the years went by, the new
ways took root and thrived.
Shop democracy replaced the
old hierarchies in the factory.
Goods were produced for use
and need instead of profit,
and the people enjoyed a plentiful life.
Without a fear of what
the future may hold,
and liberated from the cruel hands
of their capitalist masters,
the workers and their children
lived a happy, healthy life,
free from want and worry.
But would the rest of the
world allow this to continue?
Area liberated, workers saved.
Just there, that last
worker. And that's it.
I think this is a fun game.
The end of it feels hard to
imagine happening in real life,
and then if it did,
I don't think it would
be all fun and games.
The game sort of takes an assumption that
you are engaging in Direct Action.
That's realistic if we think historically
in the 1800's and the 1900's,
the Political Action,
and the Direct Action.
In this game, it's all
about the Direct Action.
If they want to do another
version of this game,
it might be interesting to incorporate
the Political Action
and the Direct Action.
The Direct Action, sometimes by itself,
serves as a threat to move
people in the political role.
And if, in the absence of Direct Action,
the political world might not move.
They just need to be concerned
about collective action,
sometimes, to get people
in politics to move.
- Hey everybody, thanks for watching.
And if you liked this video,
then make sure you subscribe.
And you know what, check the playlist out,
there's plenty more.
Go on, have fun.
Keep watching.
I'll just be here.
