I was thinking homing pigeons but the cartels seem to have taken over that trade.
So apparently there’s a whole topic on this called the disaster myth.
Human response to disasters - Wikipedia.
I.e. that post disaster people go full anarchy. But all the evidence suggests much more pro social behaviour.
And also. That these myths get in the way of effective post disaster response. I.e. Hurricane Katrina
1 Like
I think the vast majority of responses will be pro-social, maybe 99 out of 100 people will pitch in, make shared sacrifices, and do the right thing. The problem is it only takes one well-armed ultra-violent group to screw it up for any group that doesn’t have heavy defenses.
I’m sure 99.9% of Afgani villagers are wonderful people. But warlords still dominated the hinterlands until the Taliban came along, and they suck just as bad. But for a lot of villagers, the Taliban might be preferable to getting raped and having their kids stolen by the local warlord.
If the factory farming/food production pipeline collapses, which I don’t see any way around, we’re talking about mass starvation. The planet can’t support 7 billion people living like pastoral villagers. Even good people turn nasty when they’re about to starve to death. Come join our militia. We have food.
Also there’s a gigantic difference between a local, temporary disaster and a planet-wide catastrophe that basically dissolves large central governments. For something like that, we should look at the collapse of previous civilizations imo. When drought hit and food got scarce in Mesoamerica, societies became more warlike, human sacrifice intensified, more defensive positions went up, etc. The cave dwellings in Mesa Verde are likely defensive positions to protect grain stores, which weren’t needed when times were more plentiful.
It seems to be a one-way ratchet. Once a war-like society starts dominating, the other civilizations follow suit. Eventually hopefully you get back to something like the relative peace (except for major wars) that came with the end of feudalism. Maybe something better than what we have now even rises from the ashes. But if I had to bet I’d think that will take generations with a ton of pain along the way.
Anyway, let’s hope we never have to find out who’s speculation is right on this.
1 Like
I don’t think “pro-social” and “violent group” are exclusive.
There will be a range of different large scale organisation, probably smaller than today.
Also. I think your understanding of the Taliban is probably incomplete, again, contrasting them in opposition to pro-social behaviour.
1 Like
If you’d asked me to speculate on prepper demographics I would have guessed whiter than wig powder. Seems I would have been wrong:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/prepping-disaster-diversifies-more-americans-lose-trust-2024-03-09/
Grunching
My guess is that they never get used unless a group of teens or college students get access and then it’s party central.