One of the most interesting aspects in Turchin's hypothesis is the notion of counter-elites: those who are groomed for power and then excluded from it, who wreak their vengeance by turning against the existing hierarchy. The Atlantic article cites Trump as one example, which is plausible.
The tech industry is a better example. Tech cultivates counter-elites who essentially reframe many of the structures of society. This goes back to a point made by Peter Thiel (classic counter elite Stanford-trained lawyer cum entrepreneur), who advocates abandoning the tournament in which there can be only one winner (traditional hierarchies), and embarking on greenfield projects. HN readers will be aware of Thiel's many other counter-elite activities, which range from taking down Gawker to challenging traditional academia to backing seasteading.
One might argue that tech absorbs the counter-elite in ways that are initially useful to the powers that be, but ultimately fatal to them. We started with the Internet, and ended with the destruction of traditional media. We started with "digital cash" and ended with the erosion of the Fed.
Another book that speaks to this is Martin Gurri's "The revolt of the public" (from Stripe Press!), which argues that gradual breakdown of liberal democracies, and other forms of revolt like the Arab Spring, result from a new "information sphere" created by social media and the Internet. The public is rejecting the control and authority of the existing elites, now that other narratives are available and can spread easily.
Gurri does not cite Turchin, but he mentions similar historical trends, including the privileged children of the middle class confronted with high unemployment, who lead movements like Spain's indignados and Occupy Wall Street.
Many revolutions are revolutions of the upper-middle class disappointed with its own prospects. I would count the American and French revolutions among those.
"the notion of counter-elites: those who are groomed for power and then excluded from it ... The tech industry is a better example ... Peter Thiel (classic counter elite Stanford-trained lawyer cum entrepreneur)"
Is what sense was Peter Thiel ever "excluded from power"? That's not my understanding of his career (but maybe my understanding is faulty).
More generally, is "wreak[ing] their vengeance by turning against the existing hierarchy" really a sensible way of thinking about the tech industry? Yes, the tech industry has certainly disrupted existing hierarchies in very significant ways, but it seems to me that the motivation there is not vengeance but rather profit.
Maybe I'm focusing too much on the word "vengeance". Is your claim more that there was significant "elite overproduction" in the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's, and that absent this elite overproduction we wouldn't have the tech industry at all, or that the tech industry would be much smaller?
Thiel appears powerful now, but there were years when he wasn't. But he gave up attempting to climb to the summit of the traditional hierarchy when he abandoned his career as an attorney to become an entrepreneur. This notion of counter-elites is about their position in traditional hierarchies. Do traditional institutions of power have room for them? Thiel decided too many people were competing for too few positions, and left to found PayPal. One thing to note about counter-elites is that they are partial elites. They have some of the degrees and trappings. Thiel has a Stanford degree. But But founding a no-name startup is not a high-status job.
You're right, vengeance is too limiting a word, although I do sense some of that in the crypto community vis a vis the Fed, and also in the current discourse within tech about traditional media.
The tech industry is a better example. Tech cultivates counter-elites who essentially reframe many of the structures of society. This goes back to a point made by Peter Thiel (classic counter elite Stanford-trained lawyer cum entrepreneur), who advocates abandoning the tournament in which there can be only one winner (traditional hierarchies), and embarking on greenfield projects. HN readers will be aware of Thiel's many other counter-elite activities, which range from taking down Gawker to challenging traditional academia to backing seasteading.
One might argue that tech absorbs the counter-elite in ways that are initially useful to the powers that be, but ultimately fatal to them. We started with the Internet, and ended with the destruction of traditional media. We started with "digital cash" and ended with the erosion of the Fed.
Another book that speaks to this is Martin Gurri's "The revolt of the public" (from Stripe Press!), which argues that gradual breakdown of liberal democracies, and other forms of revolt like the Arab Spring, result from a new "information sphere" created by social media and the Internet. The public is rejecting the control and authority of the existing elites, now that other narratives are available and can spread easily.
https://www.amazon.com/Revolt-Public-Crisis-Authority-Millen...
Gurri does not cite Turchin, but he mentions similar historical trends, including the privileged children of the middle class confronted with high unemployment, who lead movements like Spain's indignados and Occupy Wall Street.
Many revolutions are revolutions of the upper-middle class disappointed with its own prospects. I would count the American and French revolutions among those.