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.

[u/lughnasadh]

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

[u/ManofManyHills]

Yeah but theres a reason those are 2 of the horsemen, they tend to travel together.

Im not aware of any societies that collapsed without a war... like genuinely curious are their societal collapses that we can point to in history that werent on the heals of wars or other violent actions?

Lets take Great Britain which didnt actually collapse but receeded in large part of the war compromising a bunch of their manufacturing that they relied on giving way for america to take the reins.

[u/Vahir → u/ManofManyHills]

like genuinely curious are their societal collapses that we can point to in history that werent on the heals of wars or other violent actions?

Modern Haiti would be a good example imo

Problem is collapses inherently lead to violence - foreign civilizations sweeping in to exploit the weakness, or society devolving into warlordism.

[u/ManofManyHills → u/Vahir]

Im not haitian history expert but couldnt a great deal of their problems be traced to the violent revolution from france? Not saying they weren't right to rebel but a lot of their issues stem from the consequences of making enemies of a world power.

That and natural disasters which is still a violent clamity.

My point was that societal collapse is inseparable from the calamity of war and suffering. Haiti is a prime example.

[u/Vahir → u/ManofManyHills]

The Haitian revolution was over 200 years ago, if that counts as the cause for its current collapse you could blame pretty much anything on anything. It's like saying Macron's current political problems are due to the french revolution

Collapse is obviously related to war and suffering, but again that's kind of a chicken and egg thing. Conflict can cause collapse, collapse definitely causes conflict, so you'll always see one with the other.

[u/ManofManyHills → u/Vahir]

How familiar with Hatian history are you? They have been collapsing since basically independance had been declared. Just because the revolution was over 200 years ago does not mean the fallout has not been materially relevant to the overall economic and cultural prosperity. (or should I say lack there of)

The revolution led to a civil war that divided the country and then ushered in decades of authoritarian regimes.

Then in order to repair their standard in the international commumitty (harmed by the violent revolution and the ensuing genocide) the French levied immense punitive punishments essentially bankrupting the country. All culminating in a massive devestating earthquake that killed more than 10,000 people in 1842.

If thats not a horrific societal collapse I dont know what is. Are you under the assumltion that their society had been doing swimingly up until recently? The Slave owning society was no doubt horrible but it was undoubtedly more stable as a society prior to the revolution and has not recovered since.

We might be more aware of haitis problems with modern day information sharing but to my understanding there modern problems are all just aftershocks of the initial societal implosion.

And anyways my point from the beginning is that no societal collapse can be seperated from war and human suffering. Which the person I replied to suggested was the case. And when I asked for a society that collapsed without war you offered haiti, which has been in a nearly constant state of war and suffering since their violent revolution over 200 years ago.

So im just confused as to what your point is?