The Game Theory of Brexit
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32810887
I’ve been following the news of Brexit since it became initially important in summer of 2016, where a majority of the UK voted to leave the EU. Even then, the entire thing gets so confusing to me that I have to read articles like the one above explaining the situation to people like me. More interesting though, is, I’d never considered it in the context of game theory before. Thinking more about it, it didn’t seem like either side right now really has an idea of either their strategies or their payoffs, so it’s no wonder that there’s no solid prediction of what’s going to happen from anyone. Just recently, the newest debacle is over a deadline to leave the EU without a deal. From what I can tell, it seems like there were originally three strategies: staying in the EU despite the vote, leaving with some deal with EU, and leaving with no deal with the EU. If every player were rational, then it seems like there should really only be two strategies, since leaving without any deal doesn’t seem to be a good payoff for anybody, but as of today, it’s seeming more and more like a possibility.
Looking at the entire situation through game theory shows even more oddities. If every player were rational, they would want their party to control Parliament and hold the position of prime minister. Yet, it seems like the position of prime minister has been thrown around not to the people who want it the most, but to those who don’t want it the least. Whatever the payoffs and strategies that the people in power are considering are a mystery to me, because analyzing the entire thing with basic game theory leads to questioning a lot of decisions since the whole mess began more than three years ago.