'Take It All': a Mandelian Display of the Machiavellian

I've long suspected that Howie Mandel is a social provocateur, a rascal sage that tries to show us us. If you've seen the last (second) episode of "Take It All" then you know what I am talking about.
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

I've long suspected that Howie Mandel is a social provocateur, a rascal sage that tries to show us us. If you've seen the last (second) episode of "Take It All" then you know what I am talking about. The lessons are simple: when you try to screw others there is a good chance you are the one who is going to be screwed. Two contestants -- now infamous for lying -- looked each other in the eye and promised to share the wealth of the moment. And then they tried to screw each other by "taking it all." The result is a cliche: when you try to take it all, there is a good chance you'll be left with nothing.

Of course, it's not always like that: in the first episode of the show, in a pairing of two career teachers, there was a brief talk about the "god-given" blessing of the moment... and then one teacher got over on another, taking home $420,000 (and the notoriety of being a first-class liar). "Ends justify the means," "gotta do what you gotta do," right? It's comical to see contestants marshal rationalizations for their ruthlessness -- "buying books for the class," "sister with cancer," -- all kinds of reasons are introduced into the contestants' profiles as if to build up the moral justification for the zero-sum immorality that follows. What a Mandelian display of the Machiavellian in us!

Thank you, Howie, for edutainment!

Popular in the Community

Close

What's Hot