No, society does not necessarily make large technical progress during overturnings or revolution. Rome is a case in point. Western society slid into nearly 1000 years of stagnation.
At any rate, culture is far more foundational than you suppose and it's very difficult to get right. And when a culture has become corrupt or toxic it is very difficult to get anything of value done at all.
This seems like a very, very sketchy definition of "progress." The later 1/3rd of Rome was not exactly full of memorable technological and intellectual progress, especially compared to its neighbors.
Roman's are sorta famous in history for their lack of interest in anything but making war. There's a reason we don't refer to many roman math treaties; they were often very dogmatic texts referring to greek works and heavily influenced by the lens of military problems; and often fantastically wrong.
Well maybe for intellectual works, you're right, but their civil engineering prowess was unmatched for 1000 years. But again, you're just underscoring my point... this "war making" culture prevented other types of intellectualism from flourishing. Culture matters. And cultural revolutions can just as easily wind up in hell as in heaven.
Isn't that my point? That we shouldn't be afraid of cultural change if it brings about more of the values we want and less of the values we don't?
"Cancel Culture" is much feared by many, as an example, but in practice it actually intensifies public debate among questionable issues while not wasting time allowing folks with classically racist views to muddy the more pressing issues, so while it can feel painful sometimes, it seems like a net good.
At any rate, culture is far more foundational than you suppose and it's very difficult to get right. And when a culture has become corrupt or toxic it is very difficult to get anything of value done at all.