Depends. Do you actually live in a zero-sum world, or not?
If you live in a zero-sum world, that's an interesting tactic. It might be effective. If you don't, though, then you opened your opponent up to a better way of doing things, while you're still stuck in a less optimal way. That's a losing move.
Is there in fact a limited supply of energy and physical materials?
If so, the universe is finite and thus zero-sum as bounded by the efficiency of use.
Do humans asses things more through impartial objectivity or via relativistic comparison?
If yes to finite resources and relative assesment, we live in a zero-sum world.
If no to either, we do not (ie, if we have functionally unlimited resource abundance, or if we don't care about how we are situated relative to our neighbors).
It's also worth remembering that in democracy, the demographics of voting blocs necessarily creates a zero-sum distribution of power.