A CIA task force analyzed 38 variables to predict political instability, including common assumptions like poverty and inequality. They found only two were highly predictive: 1) a country being a partial democracy, or “anocracy,” and 2) its political parties organizing around identity (race, religion) rather than ideology.
Related Insights
Political violence and extreme polarization are symptoms of deeper economic anxieties. When people feel economically insecure, they retreat into tribal identities and become susceptible to narratives of anger, which can escalate into violence.
Data reveals an "inverted U-shape" for political and economic stability. Both strong democracies and full autocracies are relatively stable. The most dangerous and volatile environment for business and society is the “anocracy” in the middle, which suffers from lower growth, lower investment, and higher rates of violence.
History shows a strong correlation between extreme national debt and societal breakdown. Countries that sustain a debt-to-GDP ratio over 130% for an extended period (e.g., 18 months) tend to tear themselves apart through civil war or revolution, not external attack.
Once a country falls into the unstable “anocracy” zone, its chances of recovery are slim, with only 20% returning to a full democracy. Data shows this reversal, or "U-turn," must happen quickly, typically within a single electoral cycle of five to eight years. The longer a nation lingers, the harder it is to escape.
The inability for young people to afford assets like housing creates massive inequality and fear. This economic desperation makes them susceptible to populist leaders who redirect their anger towards political opponents, ultimately sparking violence.
Historically, countries crossing a 130% debt-to-GDP ratio experience revolution or collapse. As the U.S. approaches this threshold (currently 122%), its massive debt forces zero-sum political fights over a shrinking pie, directly fueling the social unrest and polarization seen today.
In times of extreme polarization, the political middle is not a safe haven but a kill zone. Moderates are targeted by both sides because they have no tribe to defend them. The escalating cost of neutrality forces everyone to pick a side, eliminating compromise and accelerating conflict.
The root of rising civil unrest and anti-immigrant sentiment is often economic insecurity, not just a clash of cultures. People convert financial anxiety into anger, which is then easily directed at visible, culturally different groups, creating flashpoints that can escalate into violence.
Current instability is not unique to one country but part of a global pattern. This mirrors historical "crisis centuries" (like the 17th) where civil wars, plagues, and economic turmoil occurred simultaneously across different civilizations, driven by similar underlying variables.
Political violence and societal decay are not random events but predictable outcomes of economic desperation. By analyzing quantifiable data like debt-to-GDP ratios on a spreadsheet, one can forecast these outcomes with high accuracy. Because the problem is knowable and data-driven, it is also avoidable.
