SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A mathematical model that looked at the sudden collapse of empires or states was created, with an intent to look at why social disorder can appear from an apparently stable state (an example cited is the Arab Spring in 2011). Factions within a state make choices described by game-theory about whether to accept the political status quo, or to attempt to better their circumstances through costly rebellion.
We find that a small amount of dissatisfaction is typically harmless to the state, but can trigger sudden collapse when there is a sufficient buildup of political inequality. Contrary to intuition, a state is predicted to be least stable when its leadership is at the height of its political power and thus most able to exert its influence through external warfare, lavish expense or autocratic decree.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by turonah on Thursday May 15 2014, @08:56AM
So in light of another recent study that essentially labelled the US as an oligarchy (http://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=14/04/17/02 37218 [soylentnews.org]), would that not support Grishnakh's claim? Especially when you look at what the cost for "defecting" is (anecdotally: anyone who spoke out against the war in Iraq; the manhunt for Snowden). As far as my (admittedly limited) knowledge goes, there's also a fair amount of backlash from friends and family if one "defects" from either of the two major parties.
Combine everything, and I'd say that unless the status quo changes the US will end up unstable as well.
That all being said however, maybe trends are moving toward positive changes?