Opinion Monopoly turns 90

Long before WhatsApp groups, social-media algorithms and the general atmosphere of polarisation in the digital age, the most analogue of pastimes has led to roaring arguments and even lasting rifts within families and among friends. Monopoly, the board game in which players compete to become real estate barons and push their fellows into bankruptcy, turned 90 earlier this week. The Royal Mint in the UK, to celebrate the occasion, has issued a commemorative 50 pence coin which, somewhat fittingly, will cost anywhere from 15 to 1,500 pounds. The game of Monopoly, now forgotten, was meant to be a parable on the dangers of monopolies.

In 1903, Lizzie Magie, an anti-monopolist and feminist, devised The Landlord’s Game to advance the principles of Georgism. The latter was a single tax movement that proposed that people should own what they produce and rent derived from land, natural resources, and commons, which should be collectively owned by society. From the cautionary tale that was The Landlord’s Game emerged Monopoly. It was meant, in essence, to highlight the dangers of the concentration of public resources in one or a few hands. But, as with the economy itself, the game evolved its own logic.

Advertisement

Any regular player of Monopoly will attest to the fact that the game is not fair. In fact, the rules are so skeletal that they allow side deals and collusion. Then there’s always that one player who skims a little of the top from the bank when no one’s looking. Clearly, without meaning to, a board game began to mimic the economies it wanted to criticise. And for all the acrimony, Monopoly (and its various unlicensed knock-offs) continues to be popular. Few now look at the game as a critique of capitalism. In that, perhaps, there’s a truth. For all its faults, accumulation – and money as a form of keeping score – is fun. For those who find that problematic, it might be time to figure out a different game, just as engaging.