101
The Scholar Who Predicted America's Breakdown Says It's Just Beginning
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2025
101 points (100.0% liked)
news
24519 readers
856 users here now
Welcome to c/news! We aim to foster a book-club type environment for discussion and critical analysis of the news. Our policy objectives are:
-
To learn about and discuss meaningful news, analysis and perspectives from around the world, with a focus on news outside the Anglosphere and beyond what is normally seen in corporate media (e.g. anti-imperialist, anti-Zionist, Marxist, Indigenous, LGBTQ, people of colour).
-
To encourage community members to contribute commentary and for others to thoughtfully engage with this material.
-
To support healthy and good faith discussion as comrades, sharpening our analytical skills and helping one another better understand geopolitics.
We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.
Newcomm and Newsmega Rules:
The Hexbear Code of Conduct and Terms of Service apply here.
-
Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.
-
Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.
-
Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.
-
Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.
-
Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.
-
Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.
-
American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.
-
Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.
-
AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
He uses Volterra predator prey models, he is literally modeling predation.
The model has no assumptions as to wether elites are necessary or not, the conflict is caused by resource competition.
Edit: the other user shared the original peer reviewed article in the post below. It's the last link.
equation 1 has a term for certain affecting wages
Eq 11 has a term were elite population increases as a function of imiseration
Eq 12 is about the sulprys available per elite.
The main difference with a lotta Volterra model is that predation reduces wages not overall prey population, and that Eq 9 asumes a constant rate of economic growth.
This poster is full of shit, I don't know why you are up outing him.
The predator prey models are not used in elite over reproduction work. They're used in his medieval geopolitical work.
Paper: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/82s3p5hj
Explainer: https://www.historica.org/blog/cliodynamics-and-mathematical-models-in-history-part-2
The elite overproduction paper does not use them: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6qp8x28p
You are correct, the new model is more complex, and is not exactly a lotta Volterra model however, equation eleven in the last paper does show elite growth rate to be proportional to prey population, and later we get the following explanation,
Elite competition is still dependent on the available surplus, the new equations differ from the medieval ones in that it is now rising, and not decreasing.
It's not Marxist but it's still a materialist argument.
It doesn't make the assumptions you made in your original comment, that elites are necessary or that they can be integrated by making society more complex without increasing the relative resources available for them
Elite positions are as necessary as the stability of the social systems under which they're necessitated. If your argument is that elites are unnecessary then you'd need to explain a viable socio-political model where they do not exist.
We can argue about the elite efficiency, e.g. minimizing to necessary elites. However even the USSR, China, Makhnovshchina, and ELZN have elites. So it's not like they're going to go away without a new radical socio-technology that does not exist.
As far as the complexity argument, that's literally the path that many societies had effectively chosen to stave off elite overproduction issues from coming to a boil. Tsarist Russia for example arguably ran a century and a half by doing makework bullshit for elites (see the linked blog). I never argued that it effectively solved the root causes of elite overproduction simply that it was a solution.
The arguments here can easily be applied to "Pol Pot", which again is also not something I am advocating, but something I am enumerating.
They are necessary for the model because the model, models class societies, there is no therm in the model were w, or N increase as a function of E. So no, the model does not model the elites as offering any benefit to either wages or the overall population of humans, their role is entirely parasitic, as in they extract value, and cause instability.
Ideologically I agree that we need to transcend social organizations that stratify power.
Practically speaking framing it around a parasitic lens is ideologically pointless because socialist societies also tend to have this problem.
Im talking entirely from a modeling perspective. The model does not make any assumptions on the usefulness of elites, but there is a term that is effectively a predators fictional response in eq 11. And a coefficient that serves to model an inverse effect in eq 1. In the modeling paradigm, the elite class is either parasitic or not useful depending of those terms, it is never implied they serve a function. Likewise their conflict has material origins se the explanation I quoted, there are no terms to model structure other than the initial class division.