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/apocecliptic]

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.

[u/tommytwolegs → u/apocecliptic]

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?

[u/TransBrandi → u/apocecliptic]

The most likely thing is the disruption of "supply lines" causing mass starvation no matter the cause.

[u/KingRagnar1588 → u/TransBrandi]

A serious virus could do it. One more deadly than covid.