No. Because anyone who has greater than 33% of the hashrate must employ the Selfish Mining as their optimum strategy and everyone else must mine on the visible longest chains as theirs.
You say that "white" is "black". It doesn't make sense to continue after this point.
PS: Those who are interested in the subject can check
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium#Informal_definition ("Informally, a set of strategies is a Nash equilibrium if no player can do better by unilaterally changing their strategy."),
https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~ie53/publications/btcProcFC.pdf ("We presented Selfish-Mine, a mining strategy that enables pools of colluding miners that adopt it to earn revenues in excess of their mining power.")
and
https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf ("Nodes always consider the longest chain to be the correct one and will keep working on extending it.")
which clearly show that Bitcoin doesn't operate in a Nash equilibrium and still achieves consensus thus making TPTB's claim ("Thus there is no Nash equilibrium.") look out of place, because it shows/proves nothing.
Your IQ is apparently insufficient to understand what I wrote. Your rebuttal is not a rebuttal but you don't understand why.
This folks is the difference between a genius level IQ and not. I'll leave it as a homework problem for CfB or anyone else who wants to demonstrate they have genius level understanding of the Nash equilibrium w.r.t. block chain consensus algorithms.