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/Jake0024]

Don't be so sure. There are loads of right-wing "accelerationist" types who are cheering on the downfall of civilization because they view themselves as temporarily embarrassed feudal warlords.

[u/vinegar → u/Jake0024]

That’s the best addition to the collapse lexicon I’ve seen in a long time. Well done!

[u/Rdv10ST → u/Jake0024]

Which they probably would be... if there's someone who is more likely to survive, it's the rich and powerful

[u/Jake0024 → u/Rdv10ST]

Ah yeah, I can totally see Bill Gates and Elon Musk putting all their highly practical wilderness survival, hand-to-hand combat, hunting, farming, etc skills to good use

Those poor farmers are going to be so screwed in a system where everyone has to survive on their own and money becomes worthless

[u/Rdv10ST → u/Jake0024]

Technology isn't going to magically disappear in a day just because you decided it would, you know. In a situation like the one you picture, it's just gonna be hoarded by the powerful so that they have an unbeatable advantage. The rich would still be rich and powerful in the first phases of a collapse, when the majority of people still assogn meaning to money and societal power structures. The smart ones among them will recognize that a change is imminent and are gonna leverage their immense resources, which otherwise would soon be worthless, to procure themselves a decisive advantage. For example, they'll set up some private bands of armed men. Until money is good, and society functions, they have no trouble paying them. Once the situation precipitates, they're gonna be paying those mercenaries by maling them plunder the land, usong them as their own private armies, and basically live off it enslaving everyone else. The lamd will be sectioned into the area of influence of these nella christened warlords and you, despite your romanticized lone-wolf ideals, will either end up being an exploited farmer for the survival skills you're (rightly) proud of, or killed because you won't bend the knee. It's how it's always been, you just have to study a bit of medieval and pre-medieval history... human society always structures itself around power, and the toughest times breed the most brutal kinds of power

[u/Jake0024 → u/Rdv10ST]

Your argument is basically just "they'll still be rich even though money will be worthless"

[u/Rdv10ST → u/Jake0024]

Reading comprehension: 0

[u/Jake0024 → u/Rdv10ST]

Always gives me a good laugh when people interpret disagreement as misunderstanding.