The basic theory of “good times create weak men” seems plausible, and Ibn Khaldun was talking about this back in the 14th century when he observed that nomadic empires had a particular lifecycle. The first generation of nomads were disciplined and unified, but their grandsons inevitably became decadent and soft when raised in a sedentary civilization, and the empire would fall apart.
It’s harder to apply this theory today, since military power is based more on technology and industrial capacity than on the bravery of individual soldiers. The theory might still apply, just on a longer timeline (centuries instead of decades). Of course, the main problem with meme theories like this one is that they are essentially un-falsifiable. You can always move goalposts or modify definitions in response to criticism.
It would indeed be implausible to argue against entropy! All societies eventually fall or undergo significant decline; while some may experience periods of resurgence, no civilization has remained completely stable and flourishing indefinitely, with factors like environmental degradation/natural catastrophe, internal conflicts, and external pressures often contributing to their downfall. Certainly there is a plausible thesis that good times create a new problem which might weaken an otherwise successful group: corruption and complacency only really becomes a viable threat at a certain level of prosperity; while still at a sustenance level the impact of grift is de facto limited and it's not until you have a period of economic success that you're likely to see any faction tolerated enough to implement an economically parasitic/rent-seeking strategy or other self-aggrandizing solution that persists long enough to weaken the society overall.
But one should note that a great number of otherwise relatively viable societies fell not due to internal rot and decadence, but instead due to external threats; equally importantly, many civilizations over the years have grown to "good times" and those good times have persisted for quite a while because economic success and good governance are often relatively self-sustaining inasmuch as many people are motivated to keep the good times going. Still, one can only expect so much precision from a meme!
The basic theory of “good times create weak men” seems plausible, and Ibn Khaldun was talking about this back in the 14th century when he observed that nomadic empires had a particular lifecycle. The first generation of nomads were disciplined and unified, but their grandsons inevitably became decadent and soft when raised in a sedentary civilization, and the empire would fall apart.
It’s harder to apply this theory today, since military power is based more on technology and industrial capacity than on the bravery of individual soldiers. The theory might still apply, just on a longer timeline (centuries instead of decades). Of course, the main problem with meme theories like this one is that they are essentially un-falsifiable. You can always move goalposts or modify definitions in response to criticism.
It would indeed be implausible to argue against entropy! All societies eventually fall or undergo significant decline; while some may experience periods of resurgence, no civilization has remained completely stable and flourishing indefinitely, with factors like environmental degradation/natural catastrophe, internal conflicts, and external pressures often contributing to their downfall. Certainly there is a plausible thesis that good times create a new problem which might weaken an otherwise successful group: corruption and complacency only really becomes a viable threat at a certain level of prosperity; while still at a sustenance level the impact of grift is de facto limited and it's not until you have a period of economic success that you're likely to see any faction tolerated enough to implement an economically parasitic/rent-seeking strategy or other self-aggrandizing solution that persists long enough to weaken the society overall.
But one should note that a great number of otherwise relatively viable societies fell not due to internal rot and decadence, but instead due to external threats; equally importantly, many civilizations over the years have grown to "good times" and those good times have persisted for quite a while because economic success and good governance are often relatively self-sustaining inasmuch as many people are motivated to keep the good times going. Still, one can only expect so much precision from a meme!