End Times: Elites, Counter-Elites, and the Path of Political Disintegration

by Peter Turchin

What can we learn from these two success stories? Despite obvious differences between Britain and Russia—one was a liberal empire, the other an autocratic one—they also shared certain similarities, which may help explain why they managed to navigate their mid-nineteenth-century crises without major revolutions, unlike the rest of the contemporary great (and not-so-great) powers. Possessing a growing empire was, undoubtedly, an important advantage, because each state could afford to export surplus population and elites to recently annexed territories. Additionally, building a large and durable empire is not simple. Success at this business suggests a certain competency of the ruling class and at least some degree of broadly based cooperation within society. This competency can be, and was, directed to the business of reforming the empire to face new challenges. At the same time, both empires were simply lucky in having leaders who were willing to sacrifice short-term selfish advantage for the sake of long-term collective good. Finally, both states faced stiff external competition, from each other and from other great powers.