Terminal equilibrium or high-level equilibrium trap

I have been struggling for ages to firstly remember the term, “high-level equilibrium trap” (not my idea but a good one), and then to find a better term for it; “terminal equilibrium”.

The term high-level equilibrium trap was coined by Patee to describe China under the Imperial Dynasties; satisfactory, locked-in and unable to change. When confronted with Western contact in the mid-1850s, it collapsed, leaving a governance void for nearly a century, until the Communists re-united the country.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qing_Dynasty

To a point, the USA is suffering terminal equilibrium, holding onto an entrenched, out-dated system. The same thing probably happened to Britain after WW II.

In terms of my theory it is a long-established multi-level deep structure, built up over centuries and held in place by path dependency, (much more than Australia’s). The USA has some change at minor levels, but very difficult to change deeper levels of structure; gun laws, medicare etc. It is in danger of becoming more isolated as it moves toward self-sufficiency in energy via coal seam gas. It does not need to protect evil empires like Saudi Arabia if it doesn’t need their oil. They are moving toward terminal equilibrium and ill-prepared or incapable to face major threats or change.

Yes, a much better term, “terminal equilibrium”. High-level equilibrium trap is perhaps a more theoretical description, at least for me, but too hard to remember or too abstract. I could write a book on terminal equilibrium, but it is just a small part of my overall theory!

A quick Google on it shows some people have used the term, but not in the context I am suggesting, especially as part of my overall theory.

Endnote

This is part of identifying a social phenomena by naming it. The terms are not jargon, rather theoretical names.

Deep-level equilibrium trap?