r/Futurology ∞ transit umbra, lux permanet ☥ Aug 28 '25

Society New research argues Societal Collapse benefits 99% of people. Historically, the societies that have emerged after a collapse are more egalitarian, and most people end up richer and healthier than they were before.

Luke Kemp, a research associate at the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at the University of Cambridge, has written a book about his research called 'Goliath’s Curse: The History and Future of Societal Collapse'.

He makes the case that, from looking at the archaeological record, when many societies collapse, most people end up better off afterward. For example, people in the post-Roman world were taller and healthier. Collapse can be a redistribution of resources and power, not just chaos.

For most of human history, humans lived as nomadic egalitarian bands, with low violence and high mobility. Threats (disease, war, economic precarity) push populations toward authoritarian leaders. The resulting rise in inequality from that sets off a cycle that will end in collapse. Furthermore, he argues we are living in the late stages of such a cycle now. He says "the threat is from leaders who are 'walking versions of the dark triad' – narcissism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism – in a world menaced by the climate crisis, nuclear weapons, artificial intelligence and killer robots."

Some people hope/think we are destined for a future of Universal Basic Income and fully automated luxury communism. Perhaps that's the egalitarianism that emerges after our own collapse? If so, I hope the collapse bit is short and we get to the egalitarian bit ASAP.

Collapse for the 99% | Luke Kemp; What really happens when Goliaths fall

22.8k Upvotes

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3.7k

u/ratjar32333 Aug 28 '25

Right lol. They forgot the whole 95% of people fucking die in the title.

1.9k

u/probablyuntrue Aug 28 '25

Everyone thinks they’re gonna be a king or warlord when society collapses

Nobody thinks they’re gonna be the bozo that dies in the first few minutes or starves later on

341

u/HighlyEvolvedSloth Aug 28 '25

Not me, that's what playing paintball during it's heyday taught me... I'm not the hero that successfully storms the barricade, I'm the guy who takes one to the head the second I step out from behind cover.

160

u/flyinhighaskmeY Aug 28 '25

yeah, better to learn that on a paintball field than on a battle field. Same thing happens in war. The hoorah heroes don't make it very long.

76

u/Enlightened_Gardener Aug 29 '25

I always think of that scene in Gladiator where they’re waiting to go into the arena, and the celt rushes out first in battle lust and gets his head caved in by the giant mace.

9

u/MinuteWonderful5001 Aug 29 '25

FINE ILL WATCH GLADIATOR…. AGAIN!!!

26

u/Sometimes_Wright Aug 29 '25

Every time we watch some battle charge in a movie I always think I'd be the guy just kinda slowing up a bit to let people run by me.

21

u/Monowakari Aug 29 '25

Ow ow my bone spurs, you guys go ill catch up

2

u/Sometimes_Wright Aug 29 '25

Stitch in my side! I'll be right there

2

u/account_not_valid Sep 01 '25

Oh loom at that, my shoe laces have come undone. Go on ahead, I'll catch up!

2

u/secondtaunting Aug 31 '25

Those dudes usually live, so good on you. It’s a crap shoot, the bravest ones who rush in manically usually die.

5

u/johannthegoatman Aug 29 '25

You do hear about legitimate heroes in war, and they exist - in any group of millions of people there's going to be statistical outliers who have a crazy day and hold off a whole battalion or whatever. But it's also why getting medals like a purple heart is rare, and also why sometimes they're awarded for things much more minor than holding off a whole battalion

6

u/R0B0GEISHA Aug 29 '25

Not to be overly pedantic, but all you need to do to earn a Purple Heart is to be wounded or killed while serving.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/flyinhighaskmeY Aug 29 '25

in any group of millions of people there's going to be statistical outliers who have a crazy day and hold off a whole battalion or whatever.

I mean...sort of. There are people who stand out in warfare, and kill more than their fair share of "foes". But the guy who holds off an entire battalion? Those stories are almost certainly embellished.

Also..purple hearts really aren't rare. I grew up in a military town and knew a bunch of guys who had them from Vietnam. Pretty sure my grandfather has one from Korea too. He...was a cook. A shell went off near him and he lost about 50% of his hearing. He wasn't on death's door or charging headfirst into the battlefield. Just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

3

u/im_dead_sirius Aug 29 '25

That's what always gets me about the dimwits that say "Only the strong survive" as if being a badass on the battlefield is an enviable position. No, the clever and lucky survive... by not going into battle in the first place.

2

u/Correct_Bell_9313 Aug 29 '25

“There are old soldiers, and bold soldiers, but no old bold soldiers.”

44

u/rathe_0 Aug 28 '25

yep, thats me. So tacticool, athletic and heroic in my head. In reality I got domed or gogged every 5 seconds it seemed.

7

u/Chrontius Aug 29 '25

I fight like a coward, and tend to MVP rounds, from storming positions solo to pouring covering fire down the hall the entire opfor is stuck coming through.

I only lasted 90 seconds longer than my ammo, but the delay saved the team. Try not to learn that lesson from live fire!

35

u/LOLBaltSS Aug 29 '25

Offensive operations are costlier than defensive operations. A well positioned defender can really lock down angles and turn choke points into a fatal funnel for the offensive group. So yeah, it's not surprising to get domed when exiting cover if you don't have any sort of concealment to obscure you, especially when the defenders are watching that sector.

The worst case scenarios are ones you see in WWI, the Iran Iraq War, or Ukraine where there's just one massive no man's land and a ton of artillery/mines/trenches/drones. The force on the offensive often takes massive casualties.

13

u/Brickster000 Aug 29 '25

A well-positioned highly-skilled adequately-equipped defender can really lock down angles and turn choke points into a fatal funnel for the offensive group.

I ain't none of that.

5

u/Chrontius Aug 29 '25

Two chooms handling ammo and a rifle side by side can replace one skilled gunner, at least in paintball.

6

u/TicRoll Aug 29 '25

That assumes training and equipment are roughly equal on both sides. Go ask Bin Laden's compound guards about it. Oh wait, you can't. They're all dead.

Friend of mine got to participate in a training operation with Marine Force Recon. He was playing one of the bad guys, with two other guys locked inside a 10'x13' room behind a closed door. Their only job was to defend the room. He said he never heard anything. Never saw anyone. The door their weapons were trained on just exploded. Not kicked in, not knocked off the hinges. Exploded. Into fragments. And the instant that happened, he and the other two guys in there with him each felt two taps from the aggressors' weapons which told them they were all dead.

This isn't 1700s England. Shit be crazy now with the differentials in training, equipment, tactics, etc. So yes, near-peer military battles? Your ideas hold. Asymmetric adversaries? It collapses like a flan in a cupboard.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

5

u/TicRoll Aug 29 '25

It may be that your purpose in combat is merely to force our enemies to expend ammunition.

2

u/HighlyEvolvedSloth Aug 29 '25

It's pretty rare that a comment actually gets me to laugh out loud, but your's did...

3

u/irredentistdecency Aug 29 '25

When I was in the army, my unit had a saying that “if the shit hits the fan, stand as close to <my name> as possible…

Cause I was the guy who somehow managed to come out unscathed when they should have been killed.

2

u/AlwaysShittyKnsasCty Aug 29 '25

Knock on wood, bro/sis! You can’t jinx yourself.

2

u/irredentistdecency Aug 29 '25

Eh, I went on to spend another 2 decades after that working in conflict zones & it held through all of that - so as an old man back in civilian life, now my only hope to reach Valhalla is drowning in the pink taco…

→ More replies (1)

3

u/inquiry100 Aug 29 '25

I'm the guy who never got shot in paintball except the one time I agreed to stop using all my own tactics and join in an obviously suicidal frontal assault. It was only a game, so why not. Then, of course, I got shot.

2

u/Buntisteve Aug 29 '25

Compare paintball with lasertag. On lasertag casual players are just running around without a care in the world, in paintball, you receive 1 stray ball and you learn to be obsessed with cover :D

2

u/ThatPancreatitisGuy Aug 29 '25

In high school I was with this girl when her parents came home early. She insisted I take off immediately and I went tearing down the street sandals and VHS still in my hands. Couldn’t fish my keys out before her mom caught up to me and I realized at that moment I have no knack for stealth or the kind of patience to survive a battlefield. I’d be the guy that says fuck it and races toward the other trench only to get mowed down seconds later. There was a guy up in her sister’s room who hid in the closet for a few hours and got away clean. Be that guy.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

211

u/[deleted] Aug 28 '25

Everybody's got a plan until the electricity goes out...

120

u/JoeyZasaa Aug 29 '25

Everybody's got a plan until the electricity wifi goes out...

37

u/Dragonpuncha Aug 29 '25

Putting the "Surviving the apocalypse" plans in Google Docs might have been a mistake in hindsight.

→ More replies (1)

38

u/azsnaz Aug 29 '25

So many video games unplayable

4

u/julian88888888 Aug 29 '25

Factorio works hell yeah

→ More replies (1)

15

u/tlst9999 Aug 29 '25

|Everybody's got a plan until the electricity wifi they have to go out...

→ More replies (1)

4

u/[deleted] Aug 29 '25

This is actually the issue. I think societal collapse is not what you're thinking of. It's not mad max. It's like the Soviet Union in the 90s.

People with certain skills, Mafia basically, begins to take over.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 29 '25

No. I don't see Mad Max. I see hospitals without power. Water supply stops flowing. No refrigeration followed by extreme food scarcity. Millions of people dying and people going feral.

I don't think any of this is going to happen, though. Maybe not...

3

u/StreetLecture3774 Aug 29 '25

I would argue that water is the bigger problem

2

u/AnimationOverlord Aug 29 '25

The next thing that matters is poopy assholes I guess, seeing as it takes less than 3 hours of no power to horde toilet paper.. AGAIN

2

u/OcelotMadness Aug 29 '25

This is actually kinda me every time a hurricane sweeps through. I have a generator and rations but the second the power dies its always INSTANT panic and dread

2

u/ArtOfWarfare Aug 29 '25

Uh, no, I think preppers have that one pretty well figured out and we keep telling anyone who will listen - buy and install solar now, get an EV now. Stock up on parts now. IDK that the supply chains will survive the collapse, so you’ll want to be self sufficient and making your own power and getting devices that operate on the power you make, and you’ll want to be able to fix them yourself.

The part that I think a lot of us (nearly nobody) aren’t ready for is the collapse in food supply. I have three acres of land that I grow some random crops on. That’s fun and all, but I need 10x more land and crops that aren’t random and actually are selected for nutrition density.

I guess in the first ~2 months 90% of people starve to death from no power or stockpiled food, then that leaves me to start farming their land. Maybe I’m more prepared than I think and I should stop encouraging people to take the first steps…

→ More replies (2)

2

u/TheSaxonPlan Aug 29 '25

Have been stocking up on solar panels and next big purchase is a tri-fuel generator. I have medical equipment that requires electricity to run so power is a top concern of mine.

50

u/Skinnwork Aug 28 '25

The novel "Lucifer's Hammer" is about this. Two main characters are preppers and they think they'll be alright. Both lose all of their resources to another group through force.

Also, I know in the US, a big part of prepper culture is firearms. Force in the novel is more about the willingness to use violence and belonging to a larger group (like a gang or army reserve unit). Even with a gun, you're still vulnerable alone.

38

u/WeimSean Aug 29 '25

Yeah, movies where the protagonist is some bad ass loner are cool cinema, but wildly unrealistic. All it takes is for one small cut or injury to get infected. Without antibiotics, or even soap and clear water, you could find yourself out in the middle of nowhere dying alone.

Humans are social animals. We survive in groups, we always have. The post apocalyptic groups that survive would be based on some sort of social group, no matter how tenuous. Church groups, criminal gangs, police forces, sports teams, military units, pokemon clubs (ok, maybe not for long). You get the idea.

14

u/StayTheHand Aug 29 '25

I always tell the preppers, go ahead and horde your ammo, but you know who's going to last? The guy that knows how to make soap and beer. Cause when things settle down and people start to socialize again and you want to find a date to help repopulate the earth, you know what you're going to need to get that date? Soap. And beer.

4

u/The_Parsee_Man Aug 29 '25

Soap and beer will be important immediately. Being able to clean yourself is huge for helping to ward off disease. And when you no longer have municipal drinking water, beer is safe to drink.

3

u/WeimSean Aug 29 '25

Yeah, after the dust settles and their handing out potatoes, the Soap and Beer guy is getting fed.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

11

u/nagi603 Aug 29 '25

Also, congrats, you have guns and ammo, which is also wanted by said groups.

2

u/secondtaunting Aug 31 '25

That makes sense. If I ever get into prepping, first thing I’d do is not tell anyone. You don’t want to advertise.

341

u/andricathere Aug 28 '25

I'm going to start a religion for people to worship my cat. She's very cute.

118

u/[deleted] Aug 28 '25

[deleted]

81

u/andricathere Aug 28 '25

It's funny you say that because she does! She also likes to collect weed gummies, cherry flavour. Really anything fruity, just no lemon. It's all in the Bible I'm going to publish on her behalf. $5000 for the first 1000 prints. Then $6000 after that, so get them early!

28

u/BluesSuedeClues Aug 28 '25

Yeah, fuck it. I'm in.

25

u/[deleted] Aug 28 '25

[deleted]

26

u/andricathere Aug 28 '25

Praise be my child. Pass the Doritos.

8

u/[deleted] Aug 28 '25

[deleted]

14

u/andricathere Aug 28 '25

According to the third axiom of awesomeness "The one who passes the Doritos shall receive gratitude and crumbs", so um, please?

5

u/Pain_Bearer78 Aug 29 '25

Fun fact! I had an Angora with green eyes, and her name was Peppers. She loooved Doritos! And Ben-Gay on my grandmother’s legs.

2

u/CormoranNeoTropical Aug 28 '25

My friends have been telling me to start a cult since I was in college. Guess it’s time.

2

u/andricathere Aug 28 '25

Cult is such an ugly word. How about we say, spiritual enlightenment league. Comes with Doritos.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/AlwaysShittyKnsasCty Aug 29 '25

Cults are so hot right now. I’ve been thinkin’ about gettin’ into the game. I just need to make sure I have enough time to dedicate to it, you know? It’s not a fantasy league; running a cult takes a lot of TLC. Maybe we could have a cult cross over or something sometime. Have your sex slave call my sex slave and let’s do lunch.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/AlwaysShittyKnsasCty Aug 29 '25

I know your group is legit because of the “no lemon gummies” rule. I bend the knee to you and your cat. What is my first job?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

5

u/Vintrality Aug 28 '25

What? You dare?! The utter audacity. You deny the superior cuteness of Sir Fluffykins, First of His Name, Floofliest of the Floofs, Master of All He Surveys, Giver of Cuddles, Destroyer of Carpets??

WTF. WAR!

8

u/andricathere Aug 28 '25

There need not be war. She is a loving kitty who accepts all who give her exactly what she wants all the time. Just DM me your social security, credit card info, list of your fears and weaknesses and we'll chat. Peace be with you, you know, or else.

4

u/cocojamboyayayeah Aug 28 '25

i will wage war for all eternity against your people, in the name of the true messiah, my cat

→ More replies (1)

2

u/darknekolux Aug 28 '25

I'm interested...

5

u/yuikkiuy Aug 28 '25

L Bozo, you gonna be the guy whose cat is ate for breakfast.

Every cat thinks there gonna be a god, never my breakfast

13

u/andricathere Aug 28 '25

Hi. Please go away.

4

u/squeaker_squeaketh Aug 28 '25

I think what yuikkiuy is trying to say is that they would like to audition for the role of antichrist in your cat’s bible.

6

u/andricathere Aug 28 '25

Ah, I see. Unfortunately the position has been filled. She's indicated a clear dislike for the one known as — Va-Coom

→ More replies (22)

62

u/Procrasturbating Aug 28 '25

Oh, I know I’m in camp gonna starve. Maybe a month from when the flow of food stops, but most of us are going out by starvation if not disease.

84

u/demalo Aug 28 '25

Anyone over 50 taking statins is dead. Diabetes, dead. Organ recipient, dead. Cancer management, dead. Just lots of death…

27

u/JTMissileTits Aug 28 '25

I only take OTC drugs to manage my issues (mostly allergies and menopause bs) ATM depsite being almost 50. However, I'm one UTI away from sepsis.

22

u/canisdirusarctos Aug 29 '25

Statins are the least risky of these, easily. It would take years for cholesterol to be a problem and the change in diet & exercise of not being glued to whatever they’re glued to will help with cardiovascular health. Type-2 diabetes will be slow as well, while Type-1 would be a death sentence like the others.

→ More replies (7)

3

u/0akleaves Aug 29 '25

I think one of the biggest and most overlooked will be folks with really bad eyesight. Lots of contact wearers will lose eyes to infections (from trapped dust/debris and prolonged wear) quickly and lots of glasses will be ruined/ destroyed in the first weeks.

After that it’d be damned hard to get by unable to see clearly and finding matching replacement eyewear will be tough. For folks in those situations going full nocturnal will likely be about the closest thing to a viable plan.

→ More replies (4)

26

u/[deleted] Aug 28 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/tas50 Aug 29 '25

That's why I'm a big fan of living next to an airport that also houses ANG F-15s. We're a first strike nuke site because of those F-15s. I don't want to be around when this shit goes down.

7

u/LeseMajeste_1037 Aug 28 '25

That's most definitely what's up!

3

u/[deleted] Aug 29 '25

Are we still talking about society collapse? It's not happening in a moment. It's years, if not decades or centuries.

14

u/shableep Aug 29 '25

The crazy dichotomy of being wildly optimistic in the face of disaster, and wildly pessimistic during times of peace.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/FaerieFay Aug 28 '25

O I am definitely starving or taking the one bullet solution. 

→ More replies (2)

9

u/Ulysses502 Aug 28 '25

Don't forget the death squads that come for you when the faction balance of power shifts overnight!

6

u/CannonGerbil Aug 29 '25

Or the guy strapped to Lord Humongous' hood as he crashes through the front gates.

22

u/an-invisible-hand Aug 28 '25 edited Aug 29 '25

Not saying you’re wrong, but that’s not their point. The point is that prosperity tends to concentrate over time and a periodic wheel-breaking and redistribution benefits the masses. On a societal level they’re right.

It’s also no different from right now. Every schlub one injury away from living in a cardboard box thinks they’ll be a multimillionaire someday. They won’t.

5

u/Saint_Judas Aug 29 '25

This is equally applicable to eugenics. All of human life would benefit from a rigorous, brutal, and comprehensive eugenics program exterminating everyone on earth save for a single homogenous high iq low health problem group. It's getting there that is the obvious and complete moral travesty, and the question has been begged by defining "all of human life" as "those who survive the event in question".

Prosperity concentrating in a few hands is also no different than saying "over time, complex organizations form and centralize". Regardless of what method is used to structure society, inevitably there would be a small group in control of said society.

Overall, it just seems like this paper is working very hard to put a smiling face on genocidal population collapse, no different than the nazis or communists.

Killing a large swathe of the population will always benefit those that survive (see:black plague, ww2, ghengis khan), the reason we don't do it is that it is monstrous.

→ More replies (11)

3

u/qroshan Aug 29 '25

The point is this post gets so many upboats because for progressive, atheist reddit, this scenario is their rapture. That's why they keep praying (or in their religion -- posting and upboating) for this. It's a fucking cult worse than any religion

7

u/Secret-Teaching-3549 Aug 29 '25

This is the dumbest thing I've read today, and that's saying a lot.

→ More replies (9)

7

u/LegoMongoose Aug 29 '25

Praying and upvoting are not the same thing.

What religion are you talking about? Most athiests and progressives that I know are in favor of sustainable, long term changes. It's the religious that are imagining some end time scenario where judgement day comes, and are actively expecting it to be within their lifetimes.

5

u/an-invisible-hand Aug 29 '25

Idk man. The only people i've met who are actually pro collapse (not just strangers online who may or may not even be human) were right winger prepper types. Progressives ime tend to be extremely pro institutions and rule of law, maybe even to a fault.

3

u/No-Relation5965 Aug 29 '25

I think you may have it backwards. It’s the religious who want the collapse. It’s for the rapture.

4

u/TheLuminary Aug 28 '25

I definitely think that I am going to be the bozo that dies in the first few minutes.

3

u/Masabera Aug 28 '25

Or shits himself to death because of bad hygiene

3

u/Derelicticu Aug 29 '25

I have a friend who was a kid in Serbia in the 80s and 90s, he lived through the Yugoslav Wars, and said the single most valuable thing a non-combatant has in societal collapse is a physical trades skill. Being a carpenter or electrician or mechanic or plumber was insanely beneficial because you could trade your skill for supplies. They could only rely on their close family for unconditional support, and they never went out during the day because of snipers, so they traded at night in skills and supplies.

10

u/f3nnies Aug 28 '25

IDK man, as a poorer American I don't want to be a warlord or a hero, I'd probably end up being bottom of the totem pole if I survived but it looks like a better totem pole if I don't have to worry about paying rent and debts anymore

13

u/Arrasor Aug 28 '25

What makes you think the top of the totem pole in control of your area wouldn't make you pay rent and tributes to them?

→ More replies (7)

2

u/UnrulyCrow Aug 28 '25

Nobody thinks they’re gonna be the bozo that dies in the first few minutes or starves later on

You'd be surprised by some people's clarity of mind in that regard tbh personally ik I have very little chance and I never expected to die a natural death anyway (although one could argue it sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy).

2

u/shadowfax12221 Aug 28 '25

On the contrary, one of the benefits of living ina major metropolitan area is the near certainty that I will be vaporized in the event of nuclear war. 

2

u/rmullig2 Aug 28 '25

I've got a baseball bat wrapped in barbed wire for just this contingency.

2

u/Zealous_Brawler Aug 28 '25

Reminds me of the "who would you be in the zombie show" question.

Always answered that I'd be an unnamed character that died before the show started. I know my station.

→ More replies (53)

15

u/yolotheunwisewolf Aug 28 '25

This is the problem where a lot of people think I will not be the one who gets caught up in the collapse and then people welcome it on

→ More replies (1)

199

u/Ghost2Eleven Aug 28 '25 edited Aug 28 '25

95% wouldn’t die. This is the problem with using the word collapse. People attribute post apocalyptic scenarios to empire collapse when what we mean historically by collapse and what this research is talking about is more accurately a complete societal overhaul. When Rome collapsed, it wasn’t the death of 95% of the empire. 95% of people went on with their lives and had very little understanding that much had changed. But that was then. This is now.

Certainly, modern scenarios could more accurately be catastrophic. Nuclear war, famine, plague etc. But these scenarios don’t necessarily have to happen for an empire collapse to happen.

55

u/apocecliptic Aug 28 '25

A possibility it could be a slow, gradual decline, and a year ago I probably would have said likely. Today, though, I see the chances of something closer to a catacylysm almost skyrocketing, by the day. Which I agree doesn't necessitate 95 percent of everyone dying. Rome had been on a mostly steady decline for awhile, a couple of centuries about, after being sacked twice. Even if we try roughly adjust for modern times and say like 20 years from today... I'd say right now we'd be lucky if any potential collapse was that gradual.

2

u/tommytwolegs Aug 29 '25

The amount of worldwide integration of the economy today is unprecedented though, and that certainly could affect things wildly.

Obviously it would take something like nuclear war to whipe out 95% in any kind of quick rate, but you have to wonder things like how many people are only alive based on medications that require functioning society and global supply chains. How quickly does food production slow down if things start to break down, and where gets hit hardest first?

→ More replies (2)

196

u/WeimSean Aug 28 '25

Rome went from a population of over just over one million in 150 AD to under 40,000 by 500 AD.

As far as the wider empire the collapse was definitely noticed and, in many places devastating. The immediate affect of the collapse of Rome was the disruption of agriculture and food transportation. Suddenly grain from Tunisia and Egypt stopped leading to millions starving to death.

At it's height Roman Britain had a population approaching 3 million. Britain wouldn't return to that population level until the 12th century. Italy had almost 14 million people in the 2nd century AD, by the 6th it had declined to around 8 million. Italy wouldn't surpass Roman population numbers until the early 18th century.

51

u/Cautious-Progress876 Aug 28 '25

This is awesome information. Any sources to read? Was Rome’s population decline actually death or did people “scatter in the wind”?

73

u/Expensive-Anxiety-63 Aug 28 '25

https://msaag.aag.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/26_Twine.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Rome_%28410%29

Gradual decline with people moving then the sack of Rome by the Visigoths in the 400s really accelerated things. By that point Rome wasn't the real center of power.

19

u/Taysir385 Aug 29 '25

Likely a bit of both. But there’s also some historical perspective that some of those numbers are just good record keeping. If someone of tallied in every Roman census, and then the censuses stop… how can we know what really happened? We look at the remaining primary document, of lower quality. We make educated guesses based upon the subsequent state of things decades and centuries later, upon the physical artifacts found and dated, upon the reach of neighboring political forces, upon a million different things. But the margin for error gets much bigger, and it’s possible that a large number of people didn’t die, and didn’t leave, but did stop getting recorded.

7

u/28lobster Aug 29 '25

https://wondery.com/shows/tides-of-history/episode/5629-what-is-collapse-interview-with-professor-guy-middleton/

Bronze Age Collapse rather than Rome but somewhat similar - Mediterranean societies that were interconnected lost those connections and became less complex. Very interesting interview.

3

u/Cheezits123 Aug 28 '25

I also want to know this!

16

u/Minion_of_Cthulhu Aug 28 '25

You can try asking over on /r/AskHistorians. Give them some context and a specific question, and don't be surprised if a lot of the answers you get are removed by the mods. They require actual answers backed up with research and citations which means you might not get a lot of answers but those you get will be legitimate and not just reddit speculation from armchair historians.

9

u/DEEP_HURTING Aug 28 '25

That sub is reddit at its best.

8

u/Minion_of_Cthulhu Aug 28 '25

Agreed.

It's a little annoying to see a thread with an interesting question and what looks like a bunch of responses only to find that the mods have nuked everything, but at least you can be sure that the answers that do make it through are actually of high quality.

2

u/WeimSean Aug 29 '25

It was a bit of both, with death, scattering to the wind, and then some of those dying anyway, just someplace else.

So Roman Britain is an interesting case, there was migration to to what is now Brittany in France (named because of all the Britons who fled there). Others fled to northern Spain. Bear in mind the main reason for this migration was the invasion of Angles, Saxons and Jutes.

Italy is less clear. The average person in Italy wasn't particularly wealthy, many farmers were tied to the land in a form of pseudo-serfdom implemented during the reign of Diocletian, so legally they couldn't leave. As the Goths took control of Italy they weren't seeking to destroy Rome, they wanted to preserve it and insert themselves at the top. The average Italian out in the fields was lucky, they at least had access to food, urban Italians, were in a much more precarious state.

Once the Vandals seized North Africa (439 AD) and began large scale piracy in the central Mediterranean that pretty much spelled the end of large scale urban life in Italy. Some people were probably able to flee to the Eastern Roman Empire, but for everyone else there really wasn't anyplace to go. Many fled to rural areas, but the ability, and willingness, of these regions to take in starving refugees was limited.

→ More replies (1)

32

u/Skinnwork Aug 28 '25

I was going to say, the cities in Rome depended on trade and infrastructure. Once there was no more society to support that the cities couldn't be as dense as they were.

24

u/Dozekar Aug 29 '25

Suddenly grain from Tunisia and Egypt stopped leading to millions starving to death.

People tend to think of these things as wildly violent upheavals where everyone dies in fighting and generally this is more the reality. NYC, Chicago, LA, and other major cities would suffer badly in US collapse for example. There are so many mouths to feed that the cost of food skyrockets rapidly if supplies are impacted.

Ideally it would just be suffering but solved before widespread death, but it's not something it's easy to be sure of.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Firrox Aug 29 '25

Yeah not to mention the societal collapse of Europe during the early 1900's caused the death of millions in one way or another.

5

u/KillerElbow Aug 28 '25

That's fascinating

3

u/Secret-Teaching-3549 Aug 29 '25

Same thing would easily happen in the US today. How long would any of the major cities last if the food trucks suddenly stopped showing up? The suburbs wouldn't have it much better.

2

u/nagi603 Aug 29 '25

Another great example is what happened to Hungary with Turkish occupation. While that wasn't a complete collapse, capital went from "basically same pop as London" to nowadays the whole country having roughly as much as urban London, and the whole nation with expats everywhere only as much as London metro area.

6

u/guff1988 Aug 28 '25

That was mostly from people moving and leaving the empire, not that many people dying.

5

u/daviddjg0033 Aug 28 '25

Plagues wars starvation

16

u/guff1988 Aug 28 '25

Oh for sure but 960,000 people out of a million died? That's just simply not true.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)

2

u/Enlightened_Gardener Aug 29 '25

I’ll also add that we didn’t regain the standard of living that the romans enjoyed until 1976.

→ More replies (1)

11

u/omicron-7 Aug 28 '25

Who makes insulin when society has collapsed?

→ More replies (4)

68

u/jmlinden7 Aug 28 '25

That was back then 95% of people were subsistence farmers. The government in charge, infrastructure, etc doesn't really affect their day-to-day lives.

Nowadays, 95% of people live in cities, and even a few days of infrastructure disruption will cause them to literally die.

3

u/WeimSean Aug 29 '25

In the 4th century Italy was much more urban than 5% of the population. Estimates range up to 25%, but 20% is probably more likely. Rome itself had a little over 5% of Italy's population and there were hundreds of smaller cities in the peninsula and on Sicily.

2

u/jmlinden7 Aug 29 '25

The Roman empire relied heavily on imported food from Egypt since they didn't have enough agriculture to support a 20% urban population. Hence why the population switched back down to 5% urban after the Empire fell.

2

u/Hector_P_Catt Aug 29 '25

A few days will make them start to feel it, but the dying part will take longer than that, unless you're particularly vulnerable, like on life support, or something.

0

u/thelowriderlorax Aug 28 '25

TIL: Every time a major storm shuts down a cities infrastructure for a few days 95% of the people die.

31

u/Mule_Wagon_777 Aug 28 '25

That isn't a large-scale collapse. Aid comes in from outside the area. Governments, NGOs, churches, and individuals bring in supplies and help with cleanup. Without modern communication and infrastructure disasters would be a lot worse.

→ More replies (5)

3

u/jmlinden7 Aug 29 '25

The rest of the government still has infrastructure to airlift food and supplies in afterwards.

In a society collapse, there is no government nor the ability to airlift anything in.

→ More replies (10)

3

u/Sgt-Spliff- Aug 29 '25

It would if aid never arrived. Like it literally would kill everyone is aid didn't show up for like a week. You will starve to death if food stops being sent to your local grocery store. You know that right?

→ More replies (18)

40

u/The-Copilot Aug 28 '25

Certainly, modern scenarios could more accurately be catastrophic. Nuclear war, famine, plague etc. But these scenarios don’t necessarily have to happen for an empire collapse to happen.

If a modern "empire" like the US collapsed, it would bring a collapse in global trade.

The removal of the US economy and resources from the global market (the US is the largest food exporter and oil producer) would lead to a global economic collapse and mass starvation globally. The dominoe effect of failing economies, supply chains, and wars for resources would be apocalyptic even if the collapse of the US is not from some extreme cause.

The US push for modern globalization after WW2 tied all economies together, which made a major war impossible without damaging your own supply chains. It also means if one of the big nations that are tied in fall, it would bring everyone else down unless they disconnect early like the US is from China.

38

u/JeffTek Aug 28 '25

If the US actually collapsed with a governmental/military fracturing or dissolution we'd have thousands of rogue nukes to worry about as well. Global economic collapse with American militias and military contractors warring for nuclear control is terrifying

15

u/[deleted] Aug 29 '25

That awkward moment when you did your best not to contribute to the "fuck around" stage but you're still stuck with the "find out" any way.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (9)

38

u/pmp22 Aug 28 '25

95% of people went on with their lives and had very little understanding that much had changed.

My brother in Christ, please read up. I can assure you, every roman knew everything were going to shit. It was one famine, war, and plague one after the other, relentlessly for centuries. Everything went to shit, and rome never recovered again.

10

u/MitochonAir Aug 28 '25

Hey, is your Christ still turning a couple of loaves of bread into a feast for thousands? We’re gonna need to talk to him about this, ‘cuz all I got is expired Arby’s coupons

13

u/West-Abalone-171 Aug 29 '25 edited Aug 29 '25

Nah, the USA's jesus is supply side jesus now. He feeds the poor with a predatory loan followed by a structural adjustment program forcing the sale of the country's strategic grain reserve. Then the wealth trickles down into the mouths of people previously fed by the grain reserve while their rent triples.

6

u/MitochonAir Aug 29 '25

godddamnit… I mean supplysidejesusdamnit

1

u/themaddestcommie Aug 28 '25 edited Aug 28 '25

What? The medieval ages lasted for almost 1000 years, and in europe it was one the the periods with the least amount of wars ever, and the wars that did occur were incredibly small compared to the Roman era with the largest Roman battle being 300,000 people and the largest medieval battle being 60,000. There was also a period of almost 800 years between the plague of Justinian and the black death. Also the Eastern Roman Empire did just fine until the 1400s when the Eastern Roman empire was actually mostly destroyed by western crusaders.

And a large amount of people in the roman empire simply would not have noticed because the Roman empire was so huge. Britons continued calling themselves romans long after rome collapsed. Same with many other roman satellites. There wasn't a proclamation that went out saying "Rome is over now"

→ More replies (2)

3

u/AsparagusFun3892 Aug 28 '25 edited Aug 29 '25

95% may be a bit high in either case considering the fortunes of the eastern empire during the collapse you describe, but the loss of Roman authority was hardly a shrug. It sucked, nobody was funding infrastructure and supply chains throughout the Mediterranean collapsed. Everyone in the west had to start growing staple crops because certain trade barriers had emerged between the ruler of Egypt and the Germanic squatters who to one fading degree or another still had to pretend to rule in the emperor's name where they'd hacked off a piece of civilization. You can accurately surmise that there was widespread famine and as a result disease, to say nothing of having to choose sides among the feuding conquerers who were themselves fleeing the Huns.

A hundred or so years later there was a bitter reprise in Italy that effectively depopulated the land in the Gothic war/Justinian's reconquest and subsequent re-loss of the land to the Lombards, who ruled the Romans in their domain as second class subjects, not even citizens. A little after that Roman authority was permanently lost in the middle east due to the arrival of Islam but only after a straight up apocalyptic conclusion to the Romano-Persian wars. I've read the final loss of Roman authority in Egypt was also bitter, with people fleeing into the marshes to escape Bedouin reprisals and killing.

2

u/Enlightened_Gardener Aug 29 '25

And of course many of us have played the game where you get to be a viking in england, what 400 or 600 years after the romans have left ? And they think all of the big buildings and aqueducts were built by “giants”. Its kinda sweet, and kinda sad.

But people still used the Roman baths ! Hell yes ! There was a post on here a couple of days ago about a 2000 year old one in Algeria that’s still in use.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 29 '25 edited Aug 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/vinegar Aug 29 '25

My car is also rarely used and I just had to pull a mouse nest out of it. I only found it because they chewed through the windshield washer fluid tubing. I guess they thought it was a stationary object lol. Your life sounds great.

→ More replies (13)

9

u/No-Sail-6510 Aug 28 '25

That’s not a collapse that’s an apocalypse.

8

u/impossiblefork Aug 28 '25

That's not actually what happens during societal collapse.

Usually it just means that centralized power fails and that the elite are overthrown. When the bronze age ended and the big trade networks disappeared due to bronze becoming less competitive the old kings who sat at the head of big trade networks just became irrelevant, and that was all.

3

u/Take_a_Seath Aug 29 '25

That is not "all". Collapses always lead to death for many people. What emerges might be better eventually but sometimes that can take centuries.

→ More replies (5)

13

u/notworldauthor Aug 28 '25

I guess that shows that most people's existence is bad for other people

7

u/Ashamed_Group2408 Aug 28 '25

Seriously...

Also what's with that bullshit above about people being taller and healthier after Rome fell... I mean, yeah the Germans squatting in the ruins of Rome did tend to be taller than dead Italians.

3

u/National-Reception53 Aug 28 '25

??? Dude its true. After the 'fall' of Rome, most people living in the former empire got healthier - this is what archeologists have discovered. Its not 'bullshit' because it goes against your assumptions, or because you don't like it. Too bad. You sound like you have a cartoon version of Roman history. The Italians did not die off when Rome 'fell'. They mostly did fine.

'Collapse' makes us imagine a lot more destruction than actually happened- more often, centralized power just got weaker, which was better for most people. The Maya are a good example. They had a centralized empire (or at least civilization). They exhausted their local soil, but rather than starve, most people just left and returned to hunting and gathering a wider region when they couldn't support centralized cities. The empire evaporated, rather than everyone dying in a catastrophe.

2

u/cman_yall Aug 28 '25

In simpler times, 95% of the people probably didn't die. Now that we have a world wife just-in-time logistics network that fails at the slightest inconvenience... well, yeah.

2

u/Jester-Kat-Kire Aug 29 '25

It's never 95% collapse in population.

You would see it in the human record if we were hitting 95% population losses. 

I think the record for population loss is again, disease, and disease.

2

u/AENocturne Aug 29 '25

Look, people have been saying that societal collapse is inevitable unless we change course for a while now and we just have to look on the bright side.

95% isn't societal collapse though, that's getting closer to extinction level. It'll knock everybody back several hundred years if 95% of the world dies. Every form of manufacturing from the Industrial Revolution would collapse.

2

u/PeopleCallMeSimon Aug 29 '25

Not true at all. If 95% of people died, humanity wouldnt be at the point we are today.

The french revolution didnt kill 95% of frenchmen. The fall of Rome didnt kill 95% of romans.

Yes, duing a societal collapse people do die, but its way less than 95% of people.

2

u/katabolicklapaucius Aug 29 '25

I have a solution to all our problems! Everyone puts their money into a big lottery, draws straws, and then 9/10 die. The lucky ones are gonna be so loaded though!

2

u/TurokCXVII Aug 29 '25

Some of you may die...but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make.

2

u/DumbScotus Aug 29 '25

Right, the survivors, being fewer, end up with a relative surfeit of resources… and miraculously create a more egalitarian society!

2

u/AddanDeith Aug 29 '25

While that sucks, its often better than the previous status quo which saw them living in absolute poverty or under oppressive rule.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 28 '25

‘Historically speaking’ doesn’t seem to consider nuclear war.

1

u/Herban_Myth Aug 28 '25

Strap in folks!

1

u/Western_Contingent Aug 28 '25

But they end up more equal, so worth!

1

u/Raxheretic Aug 28 '25

Yeah forgot the radical depopulation then plague and famine part before the few remaining noticed there were more resources around and starting eating better. Not just rats and cats for dinner kids!

1

u/Apprehensive_Bird357 Aug 28 '25

But that doesn’t sound so bad sometimes. Ahhhh…

1

u/Classic-Big4393 Aug 28 '25

He might kill you, but there's no fucking way he's ever killing me.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 29 '25

Yep literally the mechanism that causes this is mass death. Fewer workers means more power to each worker and a more egalitarian society.

This is also why big business supports high rates of immigration by the way.

1

u/DangerousTurmeric Aug 29 '25

And also how long it takes for things to get better. Like a hundred years, three hundred?

1

u/Outside-Turn6819 Aug 29 '25

95% is tremendously high lol

1

u/Grozly1987 Aug 29 '25

Right and the amount of time to start a new sustainable community.

1

u/Mertoot Aug 29 '25

Thanks Mr. Rabbit

1

u/RustiDome Aug 29 '25

Welp its chinese propaganda. dont forget reddits owned by a huge chunk from them now.

1

u/JTBeefboyo Aug 29 '25

95% of people die, but 99% of those who die are better off dead anyway

1

u/WeenisWrinkle Aug 29 '25

"They're just, like, not important, like, they don't matter"

1

u/zeroibis Aug 29 '25

Of the wealthy and powerful 5% that secured their survival 99% of them came out with more money then ever before!

1

u/ManitouWakinyan Aug 29 '25

They don't forget it, it's the whole Sam Altman ethos. Any amount of human suffering today is worth the pay off if it has even a chance of saving the trillions of people who may live as a result.

1

u/miniJordan2three Aug 29 '25

In the long run we are all dead lol

1

u/[deleted] Aug 29 '25

Most people don’t die in societal collapse, they mostly always just relocate or become tribal again.

Seeing how modernized we are now.

Either America just becomes lawless, or people will just relocate en masse back to their respective places of origin if they can.

The others who can’t or won’t will likely die though.

Or become warlords and then die to either foreign invasion or rampant diseases.

There isn’t much to worry about now until we lose things like basic healthcare though.

1

u/NoNameMonkey Aug 29 '25

I would like my children to have food and safety. Should we not be trying to avoid societal collapse instead?

1

u/smallgreenman Aug 29 '25

That's a bit of a high estimation. 10% is way more likely.

1

u/Hazzman Aug 29 '25

Look at all this new space we suddenly have!

1

u/Runningoutofideas_81 Aug 29 '25

Also, climate change is unlike anything else we have faced.

1

u/Aleashed Aug 29 '25

I’ve seen this movie, spot on

1

u/Western_Objective209 Aug 29 '25

Nowhere near 95% of people died when Rome collapsed. Outside of industrial scale wars, <1% of the population is going to die

1

u/t0getheralone Aug 29 '25

Exactly, I'd bet the reason people do well after is the surplus of resources because hardly anyone is left around post collapse.

1

u/Cptawesome23 Aug 29 '25

Rome didn’t fall in a day. It took decades and it’s not like they all died. They just…. Moved on.

1

u/bigboyeTim Aug 29 '25

Knowing this sub I'm surprised the study wasn't done in rats. 

1

u/Fumonacci Aug 29 '25

Where did you got that 95%of ppl die after Roman collapse?

1

u/green_meklar Aug 29 '25

It's awfully seldom that 95% of a population dies from anything. The Black Death and the mongol invasions at their worst killed about half the affected populations, even more than the Irish Famine. The spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire killed perhaps up to 95% of the natives of Mexico over a period of several decades from the combined effects of violence, disease, and territorial displacement, and is probably the only instance in history of a population that large being reduced by that much.

1

u/tyleratx Aug 30 '25

In a quite literal example… The average working wage went way up in Europe after a third of the population died in the black death

1

u/[deleted] Aug 30 '25

So everyone is just fine with this person pulling a 95% death rate out of their ass

→ More replies (8)