[kriops]

Nothing is more permanent in politics than temporary solution. As a Norwegian, for example, I am still paying a temporary 25% on all spending that was enacted as a "temporary" measure over 100 years ago.

Control Theory does not work (in the general) for politics for the simple reason that incentives are misaligned. That is to say that control theory itself obviosuly works, but for it to be a good solution in some political context you must additionally prove the existance of some Nash equilibrium where it is being correctly applied.

Edit: See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs (CGP Grey - Why Do All Governments Work the Same Way?)

[throw9018]

As a counterpoint to the selectorate theory, see Thorsen's PhD dissertation, "Only In It for Power and Wealth?", https://politica.dk/fileadmin/politica/Dokumenter/Afhandling...

The thesis argues that dictators regularly both harm groups clearly inside the winning coalition, and please groups clearly outside of it. A common, but not the only reason, is ideology.

One has to be careful when using game-theory models on messy human entities. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and it's hard to determine just at what point the model breaks down. At least without empirical research.

(Another example is that actual negotiation outcomes rarely end up at the minimax or Nash product equilibria that game theory sequential negotiation concepts would suggest.)