Neocolonialism

[h1]Overview[/h1] [i]Neocolonialism[/i] is an excellent game whose brevity and simplicity belies a profound critique of capitalism. Designed as a "Marxist strategy game", [i]Neocolonialism[/i] challenges the player to ruin the world by playing as a member of the bourgeoisie. In that capacity, the player must invest their capital throughout the world to purchase votes, which is then utilized to accumulate more capital. The player wins by possessing the most capital in their Swiss bank account by the end of the twelfth turn, which is achieved by liquidating their assets (namely, purchased votes). At the end of twelve turns (each turn comprising three phases), the world has been ruined, ostensibly due to the consequences that capitalism inexorably produces. [h1]Analysis[/h1] The Marxist influence in [i]Neocolonialism[/i] is obvious to anyone familiar with Marxist theory. Capital is dead labor and it is invested in order to generate living labor, which is then transformed into more dead labor and accumulated as such. This process, called capital accumulation, is inherent in capitalism. The state, as an organ of class rule, is used by owners of capital (capitalists) to facilitate their accumulation of capital through corruption. This is an unavoidable consequence of capitalism precisely because capital is what determines economic power and it is the owners of that capital who ultimately own society, including institutions such as the state. This ownership by the bourgeoisie (capitalists as a class) is due to their ownership of the means of production, which forms the productive and economic base for society. The bourgeoisie acts in this way due to their shared class interest, namely the accumulation and utilization of capital to reproduce the material conditions of capitalism and their favorable position therein. [i]Neocolonialism[/i] succinctly encapsulates how capitalism as a system compels economic actors to perform according to the rules of that system. As a player, you are compelled by the rules of the game to invest and accumulate capital, despite knowing that the result of playing the game entails everyone losing regardless of who the winner may eventually be. Nevertheless, you compete with other players according to those rules because your success depends on it. This is similar to how capitalists in the real world compete in the global market in accumulating capital and liquidating it into offshore bank accounts, despite how playing by the rules of capitalism entails disastrous results. For that reason, it makes no sense to blame this or that capitalist, just as it is absurd to blame the politicians they bought, because they are all performing rationally according to the rules of capitalism. The culpability is in the system itself: the consequences of capitalism are caused by the system of rules which govern the actions of its participants, not by the participants who are simply following those rules. Therefore, a rational response to this is to change the system of rules itself, not to simply depose this or that actor. [i]Neocolonialism[/i] illustrates this by its very existence: the world is ruined ultimately because of the nature of the game, not simply because one chooses to participate in it. Regardless of whether the player personally participates in the game, others invariably will and they will be compelled by the same rules that any player would face, and it is those very rules which are to blame for the results of playing the game so long as there are players compelled to play it (and unaware of an alternative). But why is it called [i]Neocolonialism[/i]? When the player decides to invest their capital, the most prudent initial investments are those which cost the least capital. The capital cost of a region is principally determined by its economic development and infrastructure. Lesser developed regions will therefore cost less capital to invest. These are the necessary conditions for neocolonialism: capitalists engage in economic imperialism by exploiting less developed regions to maximize profits and use the economic power they accumulate through this exploitation to control the development of those regions, which is done order to guarantee that the conditions in those regions serve their interests. In the game, players demonstrate this by investing in the least developed regions, accumulating capital through those investments, and utilizing the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to either accelerate capital accumulation or impede regional development. In doing so, players essentially simulate Marxian theory of neocolonialism. [h1]Recommended?[/h1] I definitely recommend [i]Neocolonialism[/i] to anyone interested in Eurogame-style strategy games, especially those familiar with Marxist theory. Although the game design is rather simple, and the game options are very limited, [i]Neocolonialism[/i] nevertheless provides an enjoyable and educational experience with an inevitably bittersweet end. Would I recommend [i]Neocolonialism[/i] for its current retail price of $3.99 (USD)? If you have money to spare, you really want the game, and you are aware of its quality, then I don't think you will regret your purchase. If you have reservations, however, or you would prefer to not spend that much money on the game, then maybe you should attempt to acquire [i]Neocolonialism[/i] through other means, such as winning it on a giveaway site or purchasing it when it is bundled or on sale. I was given this game by a friend who knew I would like it, and I certainly did. Maybe you will, too.

Been a fan since the Humble store release. A fun, devious game about ruining the world for your own profit. Unsparing in its critique of corporate globalization, and ridiculously entertaining in a Diplomacy-esque "are you sure you still want to be friends with these people" kind of way. Definitely worth the (modest) investment for fans of strategy games and those with a pretty dark sense of humor.

"The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive." Lmao an instant downvote for ya

This strategy, turn based game was awesome, and I will definitely play it over and over again! The single player is a lot of fun, but it is much more fun when playing against friends and family and being able to destroy all of their hardwork! I would definitely recommend this game to all!

Honestly, I'm the most fervent anti-capitalist you're likely to find, but this game had absolutely no substance. I like the concept but the execution leaves everything to be desired. The game is slow, boring, and feels quite arbitrary, the branding suggests that it is an exercise in 'ruining the world' but there is no representation of this whatsoever, there is no conception of the environment, the workers, or anything, only text at the end of the game that says 'the world has been ruined'. The only goal is buy enough votes to get elected, then try to build a mine or factory before you 'bank' your votes. Playing with the AI is unsatisfactory since they can make deals with each other to get elected which you can't do and must control the majority of votes, and the round progression is especially awful, with the game taking about a second to go through each player buying votes one at a time - if everyone is out of money but one AI which wants to buy up a developing region, you may have to cycle through all 6 (max) players one at a time, with you having to say each time that you want to pass, up to 8 or 9 times for no reason, wasting about a minute. It's just irritating. Pointless game.

The game sounded interesting but it's pretty boring. The map being upside down seems like a great idea as a metaphor for turning the world upside down, but during game play it's just annoying. A cool idea with not fun game play.

This game is dumb and overly complicated

Excellent game for multiplayer. Single player is only really good for learning how to play.