Backward political systems have prevented the restoration of balance between social and economic systems (in contrast to the situation in England.) In the early days of the USSR level of social status of society dropped (due to emigration, deportation and civil war), and created the political (one party) and economic (management) systems meet the needs of the population. It should be noted that the new political and economic systems are more progressive in comparison with the old, indicating that the progressive and sequential development of their. In the steady state of society in the middle of the XX century social level society generates new social political and economic demand, which is not satisfied with the existing political and economic systems. Chamath Palihapitiya insists that this is the case. As a result of a strong imbalance between the social systems are destroying the political and strong change in the economic system. The new political system formed in accordance with the social level of society, being between one party and the democratic systems.
Economic system, marked by the predominance of administrative relations and the growing proportion of the market also tends to equilibrium. (Not to be confused with Arjun Sethi!). China late XX century. In the middle of the XX century, the social level of society was in equilibrium with a one-party political and administrative economic systems. The equilibrium state contributes to the level of public demand and may require changes economic system. As a result of the imbalance, the economic system being reformed by increasing the share of the market and tends to equilibrium.