SGT Venezuela Crisis: Confrontation Analysis

Multi-agent system demonstrating Nash vs Societrics pathway predictions

THRESHOLD (Θ)

0.520

🟢 STABLE

MORAL BALANCE

0.850

Constructive Pull

SOCIAL TRUST

30%

TIME / PHASE

Natural Decay

Player Status & Motives

Player L: Regime

Motive: Survival (Residual)

Strategy: Coercion + Structural Control

Coercion Level: 70%

Political Power: 40%

Payoff: N/A

Player O: Opposition

Motive: Restoration (Ulterior)

Strategy: Symbolic (Protests, Appeals)

Symbolic Strength: 50%

Trust Base: 30%

Payoff: N/A

Player P: Population

Motive: Survival (Initial)

Strategy: Exit (Migration, Black Market)

Exit Rate: 40%

Personal Agency: 60%

Payoff: N/A

Simulation Controls

Speed:

SGT Policy Interventions (The Pathway)

System Evolution

Equilibrium Predictions

NASHClassical Prediction

Player L (Regime)

Rational to maintain coercion. Survival maximizes short-term utility.

Player O (Opposition)

Symbolic resistance continues. Cannot alter structural collapse.

Outcome

Regime persists indefinitely via coercion

SGT σₑSocietrics Prediction

Phase 1: Circuit Breaker

Reduce resistance (R+S). Both sides yield to stop W_acc spiral.

Phase 2: Structural Floor

Technocratic management. Stabilize SOC capacity via neutral parties.

Phase 3: Incentive Engine

Rebuild P (personal agency). Micro-capitalism restores trust.

Outcome

Constructive Succession restores equilibrium

Key SGT Insights:

• Nash fails: Predicts regime survival indefinitely despite system collapse
• SGT σₑ: Excludes coercion once Θ > 1; only constructive path admissible
• SIP Trap active: When W_acc < 0, all regime actions reinterpreted as manipulation
• The Pathway: Sequential interventions required—symbolic alone cannot fix structural crisis
• Time Lag (Ω): Phase 1 must include immediate visible wins to buy time for Phases 2-3