The entropy of victory

Why empires crumble, why revolutions eat their own children, and why there will always be conflicts in office politics

The history podcaster

Mike Duncan

created a brilliant series of podcasts on the Roman Empire and another one on political revolutions. Along the way, he coined the term entropy of victory.

It has happened in every Revolution, to every class of revolutionary and every class of Revolution the entropy of Victory when Unity of shared purpose turns almost immediately into the chaos of factional conflict. - Mike Duncan (Revolutions - Appendix 7)

Duncan’s point is that, paradoxically, success can breed internal divisions. This, I believe, is a crucial insight. It highlights the importance of intra-coalitional conflicts, which are often neglected when groups are treated as unified actors. In this post, I discuss how the reality of this “entropy of victory” helps us explain phenomena as different as the fall of empires, the violent infighting between revolutionaries, and the endless conflicts in office politics.¹

Why empires stop expanding and often crumble

The Roman state, from its origin around 500 BC to its final days in 1453, incredibly survived for around 2000 years.² It has left an impressive mark on world culture, from the names of our days and months to the nature of the laws in many countries around the world (foundations of civil law).

Ancient Rome initially grew from humble territorial holdings in Italy to dominate a territory stretching from Northern England to modern Iraq. Its military strength and administrative organisation seemed to allow for continued conquests against enemies such as the Germanic tribes in Europe and the Sassanid Empire in Persia, which, though consequential, were substantially smaller. Yet instead, it eventually faded through internal crises and external pressure.

Why do empires stall and often crumble? Why doesn’t power snowball into global dominance? In the strategy games we play nowadays, like Civilisation or Risk, the first steps towards global hegemony are the hardest ones. Once you get stronger, it becomes easier to grow even stronger. Why is this not the case for real-world empires?