stj, the key phrase in your post is "I think". It is all well and good that you have your personal opinions about the human condition, but it is conjecture. Revolution is speculative fiction, and as such its premise is just as valid as any other story in the genre.
The writers could just as easily have written the same plot and then set the characters in a Little Town on the Prairie or Gunsmoke setting, but then it would have been a different story.
You cannot just say a fantasy/sf story or novel is no good because you don't agree with a premise that can neither be proven or dis-proven.
I think the point of citing Katrina was to provide evidence that Revolution's negative view of humanity was acceptably plausible. A plausible conjecture in SF is always better writing than an implausible. I must repeat that Katrina in reality is evidence that this negative view of humanity is a politically correct assertion made in defiance of facts, as an avowal of a particular worldview. Therefore the shenanigans on Revolution are forced, artificial but artless, meaningless, boring
. Obviously, this is my judgment. But it is directly related to judgments about humanity and
art. You may disagree with these particular views, but both kinds of judgment are relevant. The success (or lack of it) in any kind of art is not separable from larger considerations about society, history, humanity.