In a provocative July 21, 2025, article published by the Council of European Canadians, Ricardo Duchesne applies game theory to argue that in-group-oriented non-white immigrants will inevitably outcompete whites who adhere to universalist principles of fairness and trust. This dynamic, rooted in the West's commitment to liberal individualism, creates a "tragedy of the racial commons," where whites' refusal to protect their own group interests leads to their economic, political, and cultural displacement. This post defends Duchesne's position, framing it as a critique of liberalism's excesses, which, through unchecked immigration and naive universalism, erode the social cohesion and prosperity of white-majority societies. By examining historical, sociological, and game-theoretic evidence, I argue that the West's open-handed approach to diversity risks its own demise, akin to a commons overexploited by those who do not share its values.
Game theory, a mathematical framework for analysing strategic interactions, provides a lens to understand Duchesne's argument. In a multicultural society, two groups interact: whites, who adopt a universalist strategy (treating all individuals equally, regardless of race or religion), and non-white immigrants, who often maintain in-group preferences (favouring family, tribe, or ethnicity). In a simplified "prisoner's dilemma" model, universalists cooperate with everyone, assuming mutual fairness, while in-group strategists cooperate primarily within their own group, bending rules for insiders.
Duchesne argues that this creates an asymmetry. Whites, adhering to merit-based hiring, impartial legal systems, and trust in strangers, expect reciprocity. However, immigrants from cultures with strong kinship ties and collectivist values, common in many non-Western societies, choose their own group, leveraging ethnic networks, family businesses, and voting blocs to secure resources. Over time, game theory predicts that in-group strategists will outcompete universalists, as they exploit the trust and openness of the latter without reciprocating. This dynamic mirrors the "tragedy of the commons," where individuals overuse a shared resource, in this case, the social capital of white-majority societies, leading to its depletion.
The West's success, as Duchesne notes, stems from its unique development of high-trust societies. From the medieval period, European societies began breaking tribal ties, fostering civic institutions based on individual merit and impartiality. The Magna Carta (1215), the rise of parliamentary systems, and the Enlightenment's emphasis on universal rights laid the groundwork for legal and economic systems that transcended kinship. This enabled unprecedented cooperation, leading to the Industrial Revolution, global trade networks, and scientific advancements. A 2018 study by economist Joseph Henrich found that Western Europe's "WEIRD" (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic) societies, with their low in-group favouritism, fostered trust and innovation, outpacing collectivist cultures.
However, this universalism, while a strength, becomes a liability in diverse societies. Whites assume immigrants will assimilate into this high-trust model, but research suggests otherwise. A 2006 study by Robert Putnam found that ethnic diversity correlates with lower social trust and civic engagement, as communities become more insular. Non-white immigrants, often from cultures with strong kinship ties, such as South Asian, Middle Eastern, or African societies, retain in-group preferences, as evidenced by practices like nepotistic hiring or ethnic lobbying. For example, a 2023 Canadian report noted that South Asian communities in Toronto have leveraged ethnic voting blocs to influence municipal elections, securing group-specific benefits like cultural funding.
Liberalism's commitment to universalism, equal treatment, open borders, and diversity as a moral good, creates a one-sided dynamic where whites bear the costs of integration without reciprocal benefits. Duchesne highlights several mechanisms:
Economic Disadvantages: Immigrants' in-group strategies, such as family-run businesses or ethnic hiring networks, give them a competitive edge. A 2024 U.S. study found that minority-owned businesses often adopt hiring within their communities, while white-owned firms adhere to merit-based hiring, even when it disadvantages them. Affirmative action policies further tilt the scales, as non-whites gain preferential access to jobs and education, while whites are discouraged from explicit in-group advocacy.
Political Power Shifts: Ethnic voting blocs amplify immigrant influence. In Canada, the Liberal Party's 2021 election strategy targeted South Asian and Chinese communities, promising immigration reforms that favoured family reunification, strengthening these groups' political clout. Whites, lacking cohesive racial advocacy due to universalist norms, lose influence.
Resource Drain: Welfare systems, built on white taxpayers' contributions, are disproportionately used by non-white immigrants. A 2022 UK report found that certain immigrant groups, particularly from Africa, accounted for higher per-capita welfare costs than native-born citizens, straining public finances.
Cultural Erosion: Multicultural policies celebrate non-white identities while stigmatising white cultural pride. A 2025 X post noted that Canadian schools promote "cultural heritage" months for minority groups but label white identity as "supremacist," undermining social cohesion.
This creates a "tragedy of the racial commons," where the social capital of trust, fairness, and cooperation, built by whites over centuries, is exploited by in-group-oriented immigrants who do not share these values. Liberalism's refusal to acknowledge group differences or defend white interests accelerates this erosion, akin to a farmer allowing unrestricted grazing on his land until it's barren.
Game theory supports Duchesne's prediction. In a 2019 study, evolutionary biologist David Sloan Wilson modelled intergroup competition, finding that groups with strong in-group cooperation outcompete those with universalist strategies in diverse settings. This aligns with historical examples: collectivist societies like the Ottoman Empire's millet system thrived by adopting group loyalty, while universalist societies struggle to maintain cohesion under diversity.
Real-world trends confirm this. In the U.S., white populations are projected to become a minority by 2045, per 2024 Census data, driven by immigration and differential birth rates. Non-white groups, leveraging in-group networks, have gained disproportionate influence in politics and business. For instance, Indian-American communities in Silicon Valley have built tight-knit professional networks, securing leadership roles in tech firms at rates exceeding their 1.5% population share. Meanwhile, whites, constrained by universalist norms, face declining representation in elite institutions, as seen in a 2023 Harvard admissions report showing preferences for non-white applicants.
Critics of Duchesne's position argue that diversity strengthens societies by fostering innovation and cultural exchange. A 2020 McKinsey report claimed that diverse companies outperform less diverse ones, citing varied perspectives. However, this ignores that diversity's benefits often rely on shared norms, which erode when in-group preferences dominate. Putnam's research shows that diverse communities have lower social capital, undermining the "strength in diversity" narrative.
Another counterargument is that assimilation will eventually align immigrants with Western universalism. Yet, a 2024 Pew study found that second-generation immigrants often retain strong ethnic identities, particularly in multicultural policies that incentivise group loyalty over integration. This suggests that the universalist assumption of assimilation is overly optimistic.
To avert this tragedy, whites must balance universalism with pragmatic self-interest. This does not mean abandoning fairness but recognising that reciprocity is not guaranteed in diverse societies. Policy suggestions include:
Immigration Reform: Accept immigrants who share high-trust values,reducing cultural friction.
Cultural Confidence: Promote white cultural heritage without apology, countering the stigmatisation of white identity.
Economic Protections: Reform affirmative action to focus on economic disadvantage, not race, ensuring fairness without penalising whites.
Civic Education: Teach the limitations of universalist principles while acknowledging group differences, fostering realistic integration.
Conclusion: Liberalism's Self-Destruction
The tragedy of the racial commons, as Duchesne articulates, is a consequence of liberalism's excesses, its blind faith in universalism and refusal to defend the group that built its foundations. Game theory predicts that in-group-oriented immigrants will outcompete whites who treat all equally, draining the social, economic, and political capital of white-majority societies. Historical evidence, from Europe's high-trust institutions to current demographic shifts, supports this. To preserve the West's achievements, whites must limit universalism with strategic self-advocacy, ensuring that the commons of trust and prosperity is not depleted by those who exploit it. Without this shift, liberalism's suicide will leave the West a decaying shell, and whites, extinct, victims of their own delusions.
"Game Theory Predicts that Ingroup Immigrants will Outcompete Outgroup Whites
July 21, 2025
According to the logic of game theory, in-group oriented nonwhites and immigrants are bound to outcompete whites who extend trust and fairness to everyone irrespective of race and religion.
White universalists emphasize equal rules, contracts based on individual self interest, and impartial legal and educational standards that apply equally.
Immigrants, however, prioritize ethnic and religious contexts, kinship relationships, and loyalty to in-groups (family, tribe, or ethnicity). Immigrants are willing to bend rules for insiders.
Whites developed the most successful nation-states by breaking tribal ties and developing high interpersonal trust beyond ethnic groups.
This enabled the rise of civic institutions based on individual merit rather than kinship preference. It enabled economic cooperation across localities, making extended market networks possible, impartial legal and scientific thinking.
This is why whites created the modern world while nonwhites remained in a state of stagnation and intellectual stupor.
Non-Western immigrants come from cultures which have retained, despite diffusion of white technology to their nations, stronger in-group preferences, kinship favoritism in hiring and insularity.
Whites assume that everyone will assimilate to Western concepts of mutual fairness, trust of strangers. But research shows that ethnic diversity correlates with lower trust, reduced civic engagement, and increasing nepotism among nonwhites.
In this environment, where immigrants retain their in-group prejudices, while whites treat everyone alike, game theory predicts that whites will lose out to nonwhites in the course of time.
Immigrants have already gained multiple advantages by way of stronger family businesses, ethnic voting blocs, and cultural networks that prioritize their own (hiring relatives, affirmative action, lobbying for group-specific benefits).
They will outcompete white universalists who hire based on merit alone and prohibit themselves from explicit in-group advocacy.
Whites will indeed bear the costs of integration, corruption, and ethnic conflicts, by way of higher taxes for welfare used disproportionately by nonwhite out-groups.
This will create a one-sided dynamic where resources (welfare, jobs, political power) will flow outward from whites without return.