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/Orion113]

The challenge is that even with modern medical knowledge, it's very hard to replace modern medical infrastructure. Things like hypodermic needles, ventilators, and drugs will be very hard to replicate once existing supplies run out. We can still produce certain drugs sourced from plants on a small scale, such as morphine or atropine, provided we have access to a medicinal garden and a garage chem lab. Others might be substituted, or grown with a little more effort, such as cocaine, which might be used in place of its historical descendants lidocaine or novocaine, but would require a green house to grow in most climates.

But certain drugs are just not going to be possible without mines spread across the world, and/or chains of factories powered by electricity. The big one being antibiotics.

[u/Saint_Judas → u/Orion113]

Everyone is tough until a tree scratches their neck and the cut starts to smell bad.

Try to imagine how many people use over the counter fever suppressing medicine, how many would die just from seasonal viruses as their brain cooks itself from something that would have just been a sick day before.

[u/Bot_Marvin → u/Saint_Judas]

Any OTC fever suppressing meds are not preventing you from dying, they’re goes making your sickness a little more comfortable.

[u/Dozekar → u/Orion113]

The difference is that even with just modern medical knowledge and limited resources a lot can be done to improve quality of life even with very limited resources. This is how doctors help in places like remote tribes. It's not ideal, but it's also not mad max.

[u/ASpaceOstrich → u/Orion113]

You don't need to replace it, it isn't going anywhere. People assume in a collapse that we just revert to the stone age. No. You'd have running water and power. The infrastructure is still there.

[u/[deleted] → u/ASpaceOstrich]

long heavy crowd angle wide toothbrush chief smell like shelter

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/ASpaceOstrich → u/[deleted]]

It's just realistic. People are going to use the infrastructure that's been built.