So they realized it, yet didn't attempt to design for it.
His handwavey mechanism fails to the same complexity-induced irrelevance. People violently revolt only when they are hungry, not when they are merely unfree.
I believe that history provides many counter-examples to your claim. The American Revolution was not a peaceful coming of terms with Britain. The US Civil War was due to more than just the South being hangry.
You're right, and what comes to mind is that in both examples business interests stood to significantly benefit from each upheaval. Perhaps what makes USG so resistent against ideological competition is that it openly courts business competition - it took a pretty short time for "web" to get a seat at the table with finance and entertainment. Business revolutionaries are better off subscribing to the existing power structure rather than needing to foment revolution to thrive.