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) by sjames on Thursday May 15 2014, @09:48AM
That is only true so long as the people believe there is a significant difference between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. As soon as the populace becomes convinced it doesn't matter which one they vote for, the democracy advantage goes away.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday May 15 2014, @06:07PM
Or third parties appear.
Its happened already in Europe, and its slowly happening in the US. Not yet successful in getting a lot of people elected, but already forcing the dialog to change.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.