TLDR: "The concept of “elite overproduction” has attracted a lot of attention in the past several years, and it’s not hard to see why. Most associated with Peter Turchin, a researcher who has attempted to develop models that describe and predict the flow of history, elite overproduction refers to periods during which societies generate more members of elite classes than the society can grant elite privileges. Turchin argues that these periods often produce social unrest, as the resentful elites jostle for the advantages to which they believe they’re entitled."
"Can grant privileges" should be "will grant privileges" or "do grant privileges". I think this is a critical distinction. Part of the phenomenon, I think, is that there are more qualified individuals than positions or roles, which lays bare the lack of justification for the elite status of those positions to begin with. The unrest is due to a sense that the restriction is artificial — you could turn it on its head and say the unrest is as much about the old elites having a sense of entitlement to their positions even when they're no longer elite, as it is about the new elites believing they should have the same benefits.
IMO I think an example of this is all the hardcore activists you see coming out of liberal universities.
People who are always talking about being oppressed, despite being in the top 10% socioeconomically on effectively any metric you can find.
These people are smart, hard working, qualified... But not enough to get the kind of $$ and respect in society they believe they deserve, so they begin to act like the game is rigged and try to break the game so it can be restarted from zero.
