Real World Monopoly 
How society works

Real World MONOPOLY®: A youth ministry activity for the exploration of economic values. (Note : MONOPOLY® is a registered trademark of the Parker Brothers Corporation. This activity is not intended to infringe upon or profit from their trademark.) By The Reverend William S. Wagnon truewill@earthlink.net, developed with the youth of St. John's Church, West Hartford, CT, USA

Introduction and purpose

Charles Darrow was an out-of-work heating engineer when he invented MONOPOLY®. Since its invention in 1933 during the Great Depression, MONOPOLY® has become one of the world's most popular board games. The game's appeal is the same now as then: it feeds the fantasy of wealth and power. By smart moves and with a little luck, one player can rise above the others to become the wealthiest in the game. It is even possible to "gain the whole world" by owning all the property on the game board. However, the play of the game is driven by an objective which many Christians find disturbing. As stated in the rules, the objective is "to become the wealthiest player." When young people in my church played the game, some went even further saying their objective was to drive other players to bankruptcy. Edward Parker, former president of Parker Brothers which makes MONOPOLY®, said the game's appeal is "clobbering your best friend without doing any damage." In the isolated context of the game this may be true, but the lessons we learn in our play as children are often the lessons we carry into real life where consequences are not so benign.

MONOPOLY® is also based on a simple premise which many observers of our society recognize to be untrue in real life. This faulty premise is the equality of opportunity. In the game, all players start with the same amount of money. They all start at the same place on the board. And they all have equal chances based on future rolls of the dice and how well they play the game. In real life, however, everyone does not start at the same place. Education, health, and wealth are not evenly distributed in society. Some are born into more advantageous situations than others. To help young people grow into caring and compassionate adults, youth ministry leaders need to encourage awareness and understanding of social inequalities. Once these inequalities are appreciated, ministers can begin to teach how the Christian faith compells us to act in light of them.

My purpose is not to criticize the game, or make too much of its influence in shaping our values. Still, the fantasy objective of the game is frighteningly close to the values which many people choose to live by. The relentless and single-minded accumulation of wealth can lead to an empty, wasted life. The assumption of equal starting places leads contribute to the myth that the poor choose to be poor.

I would say Christians pretty much agree that loving God and serving the world in God's name should at least temper the pursuit of wealth, if not totally subject it to these purposes.

MONOPOLY's simple premise and singular objective, of course, are part of the game's attraction. If all the complexities of life were built into the game, who would want to play it for fun? On the other hand, the lessons we learn in our play can influence the rules we live by. While the premise and objective of a simple board game may not matter so much on a lazy afternoon of child's play, the game is a product of our culture's attitudes about wealth and in turn contributes to the shaping of those same attitudes in the next generation.

One mission of youth ministry is to help shape the forming attitudes and values of young people. One way to do this is to encourage young people to think critically about the messages they are receiving from culture and to reflect on the values they want to live by. The following youth ministry activity has two purposes: 1) to help young people appreciate the difficulties that come from not having equal starting places, and 2) to encourage them to think about their own "objectives" -- how they want to play the game of life.

The modified game, Real World Monopoly, is designed to fit the context of a youth group meeting or retreat. After the initial explanation and discussion, the game itself should be fun and even a little rowdy. In my experience, the young people pick-up the modified rules very quickly because they are so familiar with game in its orginal format.

What you will need

A Parker Brothers MONOPOLY® game for each 5 to 8 players New Community Chest and Chance cards (see below) Time required for game and discussion: about 1 1/2 to 2 hours (as a time saver, leaders can count out money and select properties for player's in each "class" before the meeting)

Getting Started

Discussion of Objectives -- 10 minutes

Explain that the group will be doing a "simulation game" using MONOPOLY®. A simulation game is a structured activity that approximates, but does not exactly reproduce, situations in every day life.

Begin with a discussion about the objective of the game. Ask what the object of MONOPOLY® is in its orginal form. Explain that the game was invented by an unemployed man during the Great Depression and ask why such a game would have been popular in such a time, when as many as one-in-four people were out of work.

Ask the young people if the object of the game (as they said earlier) is also their objective in the game of life. Some may say yes, being wealthiest is important. Some may say no -- other things are more important.

Emphasize that each person has to decide for themselves what will be the objective of their life. The leader might encourage them to make their real life objective their objective for the simulation game..

Explaining the modified rules -- 5 minutes

Explain that this is modified MONOPOLY. Three rule changes have been made. Also, "the banker" has been renamed "the government" and has been given slightly different function.

The final rule change is that "the banker" becomes "the government" and is handled by a separate player who does not have a game piece. The government keeps track of the rule changes and handles the money and sale of properties. The government is also the arbiter of disputes among players and should explain the implications of the modified rules (i.e. encourage players to take advantage of power to change rules). The government can also initiate proposed rule changes, but the players should be the ones to decide. A bold government player might unilaterally impose a "regulation" which the players would then have to overturn, or not, with a rule change.

The government player should establish an attitude or policy before play begins, but this does not need to be announced. Just as different governments set different policies, this player should decide whether to support policies of fairness or favor one group of players and whether to be an activist or minimalist force in the game. The way the government plays will have a huge impact on the game. The role should be played with creativity by a person who understands the teaching function of the game.

The government player should also act as an observer, making notes of players actions and reactions which can be offered during the later discussion.

Dividing the Money and Property -- 5 minutes

By roll of the dice, assign starting amounts of money and property. If there are five players divide the group into one who is wealthiest, three who are a middle class and one who is poorest. For six players, I suggest a 1-3-2 split; for seven, 1-4-2; for eight, 1-4-3.

The player with the highest roll will get $3,771 and three properties from the richest side of the game board. The player or players with the lowest roll will get no property and $565. Other players will get $1,500 (as the orginial rules suggest) and two properties from the same side of the game board, but not the same color group.

A further option is to vary the amounts each player receives as he or she passes GO. Using the same percentages as the initial division of money, the wealthiest player would get $503 for passing GO; the middle players $200, and the poorest player $75. If this is too complicated in the course of play it may be omitted.

Play the Game -- 45 minutes to 1 hour

The wealthiest player always rolls first. The game as it unfolds may be fun or filled with tension. Whichever way it happens, the observant leader will have plenty of material to help the players reflect during the final discussion.

As the game goes on, the government or observing group leaders may have to encourage the poorest player to not give up. In one game I ran, the poorest players felt utterly powerless and wanted to walk out of the meeting. The government has discretion to make loans or give financial aid. Wealthier players also may help out poorer ones, and the government may to choose to encourage this.

The players also may need some encouragement to think creatively about their power to change the rules. They may automatically play by the rules of the original game, which they are free to do. On the other hand, as they become adults these young people will have more and more control over their lives. Once they realize their power in the game and in their lives, they can begin to direct their future. During one game I lead, the poorer players pooled their resources but kept their seperate turns at play. They also used a numerical majority, acheived by a mutually profitable alliance with the middle class, to pass rules that greatly benefitted them. Another player who was uncomfortable with the great wealth she received at the beginning gave away money whenever other players were in need and she still finished the game with far more than anyone else.

Closing discussion -- 20 minutes

Begin the discussion by asking for general impressions. Then ask individual players to share their experiences and high points or low points of the play. If players express frustration, push them to think about why it was frustrating. If they had fun, ask what was fun about it. If they have trouble talking about it, the leader should remind the players of things she or he noticed.

Ask the players to think back to the objectives that guided their play. Did they have opportunities to realize their objectives. Were there times for making money? Were there times for helping others? Was there a certain amount of luck or random fortune in the game? While the players all had the same number of turns and the same chances at each roll of the dice, do they think there was really equality of opportunity? Encourage players to make connections between how they played the game and how they would act in real life.

In closing, the group leader could lead a Biblical reflection using one or more of these passages from Scripture:

Isaiah 10:1-4
Zechariah 7:9-12
Matthew 25:14-30
Mark 10:17-27 (similar to Luke 18:18-30)
Luke 20:46-21:4
Romans 15:25-27
1 Timothy6:9-12
James 1:9-11 and 2:1-8


*Explanation for the division of wealth: Statistics on the distribution of wealth is fertile ground for eisigesis, so a confession about method is warranted. In the 1995 Statistical Abstract of the United States (page 475, chart 733) I found a table dividing the total number U.S. families into quintiles (20% segments) by income. The upper limit of income in each quintile for 1993 is as follows: the lowest 20%, $19,952; the second lowest, $30,000; the third lowest, $45,020; the fourth lowest, $66,794; and the lower limit of the top 5% is $113,182. For this simulation, I took the upper limit of the lowest and third lowest quintiles and the lower limit of the top 5% . I keyed MONOPOLY's® suggested amount ($1,500 to start the game and $200 for passing GO) to the middle quintile and set the upper and lower amounts by relative percentage..


**Sample Community Chest and Chance cards for the modified game which can be produced on constuction paper.

Community Chest Cards (yellow)

Chance Cards (orange)






Space for your simulation game here



Return to Simulation Games Main Index Page

If you would like to add your comments to this simulation game, or submit one of your own, send a submission to info@youth.co.za.



Fair Use Notice: This document may contain copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is believed that this not-for-profit use on the Internet constitutes a "fair use" of copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. Requests by any author to remove their document from this web page will be honoured.

 

 

Back to The EDGE Main page



Go back to youth.co.za


All rights reserved
Copyright © 2001 Graeme Codrington, The EDGE Consulting