In learning of history, I have begun to see similarities between revolutions and underdamped controllers (as in the technical term). At some point, the oppression level (for the lack of a better word) becomes too high and the "revolution control" goes on. Then the curve swings in towards freedom and out the other side. If you're unlucky, it goes up to the same oppression level (but with the opposite sign) and you get a counter-revolution that swings the other way (or from chaos to order).
Consider, as an example, the French Revolution. The monarchical excess tripped the revolution (that's the high point on the positive side), after which the injustice falls towards the center, then it shoots off to the other side with the Reign of Terror (at the high point on the negative side). It trips again with the Thermidorian Reaction (which disposes of the leaders of the revolutionary excess) and then slightly less to the other side with the Directory and eventually, the empire.
In this case it's slightly damped so it eventually settles (the next revolution proper doesn't happen until 1860 or so, to my knowledge; the emperor was deposed because of conventional military defeat, i.e from without). But the image makes sense.
Does this show that although I'm not an engineer, I think in the ways of one?
In other news, I saw a movie about an indigenous revolt. It was very good; very good indeed. It made me think of all of the above, and also (indirectly) how lifeless a supremely technocratic society would appear.
(The ideal nation must be one where neither economics, social organization, or politics is subordinate to any of the others, nor where it reigns over any of the others. But to pull that off would be very hard.)