Rethink... winners and losers

Do you agree with either of these statements?

Illegal migrants come here and are a burden on services and the taxpayer. OR The only way to reduce inequality is to tax billionaires and giant companies who avoid tax.

They may seem on opposite poles of the political spectrum, but both anti-migrant campaigners and anti-capitalists share an identical mindset. Both are demonstrating zero-sum thinking; the belief that if one group wins, another has to lose.

In itself, zero-sum thinking isn't moral or immoral, right or wrong. But Economists claim it leads to poor economic policy, and they say evidence shows it is possible to create win-win situations for everyone.

But many of the main parties at Westminster also use zero-sum thinking in their political rhetoric - from Reform and the Greens, to the Conservatives and Labour. Also, the first past the post electoral system is literally a zero-sum process. So is this kind of thinking baked-into UK politics?

So are there particular groups of people that are more prone to zero-sum beliefs? Where did this mindset come from? What economic conditions encourage zero-sum thinking, and how deeply are these beliefs held?

Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Richard Vadon

Contributors: Stefanie Stantcheva, Nathaniel Ropes Professor of Political Economy at Harvard and founder and director of the Social Economics Lab. Dr Patricia Andrews Fearon, behavioural science researcher at social impact accelerator The Agency Fund, and Stanford University. Her research on zero-sum mindsets began during her doctoral studies at Cambridge, where she was a Gates Scholar. Dr Parth Patel, Associate director for democracy & politics at the Institute of Public Policy and Research Iain Mansfield, Director of Research and Head of Education and Science at Policy Exchange Cleo Watson, Former Downing Street strategist, adviser to Theresa May and Boris Johnson, author, and presenter of Radio 4's "How to win a campaign"