Political Equilibria can exist within the political field, within space and across time. These are relative moments of macro stability, and can be assessed absolutely.

Disequilibrating factors could be:

1. A “broadening” of horizontal capacity within the political field.
2. A “stretching” of campaign tensility.
3. A “deepening” of the potency of campaign efficacy
4. A “weakening” of internal structures of the political field by external (or internal) stressors – cavitation.

These act to corrode any substantial equilibria and make equilibria less likely.

To some extent, the appearance of political equilibria increases with distance through space and time. Differences and turbulence can appear small with recession from the field in question.

Nevertheless, in the relative terms of their own parameters, equilibria can be noticed:

1. Relative to circumstances within the same political field chronologically adjacent.
2. Relative to political fields in geographically contiguous or economically or socially similar fields.
3. Because operators within the field itself comment so.

But more generally, because a universal political field encompasses all human action across time and space, political equilibria may be denoted when:

1. There is little change in political leadership over time.
2. There is only small fundamental disagreement over the political operations within the field, perhaps excluding ‘constitutional’ questions or questions of ‘legitimacy’.
3. There is little political violence
4. There is little external influence in the field
5. Transitions of power within the political field are relatively gradual or predictable.
6. There is little general uncertainty in the capability of those in government.
7. Actors are able to cooperate despite relative disagreement on political issues.