This is a well written and thoughtful essay, and enjoyable read to boot, thanks for writing it! The only area where I think it may be benefited by further exploration, is its lack of grounding its vision of post collapse renewal in concrete civic and institutional traditions. I say this because, in my personal opinion, collapse alone doesn’t generate liberty, liberty is generated and sustained by systems, and the removal of one regime doesn't automatically produce a better one. That’s where I’d suggest looking to the institutional structures of the American Old Republic, I'm specifically referring to the period from the 1830s to the 1950s (outside of many parts of the South, which for two different sets of reasons, one before the Civil War and one after its, weren't fully part of the program) which had concrete institutional designs that were successful in their "physical" purpose of generating a paradigm that simultaneously had deep integration AND decentralized pluralism. That long era saw a consciously designed architecture of decentralization, diffusion, and institutional pluralism, built on mass-member democratic parties, locally controlled capital, competitive but redundant economies, and a legal framework that allowed for policy variability and local semi-autonomy. It was far from utopia, but it was a working civic system who can provide important technical-mechanical insights and case studies for moving forward in the sort of situation you describe. Thanks again for the interesting writing, have a nice day. -- Mike
The idea of a re-localized society is totally out of the question unless paired with a massively scaled back level of technology (think pre-electrification, at least). The techno-industrial order requires an incredible level of coordination and centralization, so if the central hub starts to "collapse" it will be a much bigger catastrophe than depicted here.
I appreciate hearing a different perspective on what co-lapse can mean. Thanks for sharing about insights from Scott's book. There is more work to envision and nurture the small collective communities to make it more humane, especially with great medical and food needs in our world.
I was going to bring up the herding of British farmers into factories (à la Stephen Marglin), but you beat me to it.
I'll look forward to reading Scott's book. Though I sympathize with the line of reasoning, I'll be wary about the evidence being depicted too rosily, to fit a narrative. Also there are some logical gaps that the book would have to fill: for example if there was a 4k-year gap between sedentary villageization and domestication of crops & livestock, how did they subsist? (Maybe this is the "wetland abundance"—continuous harvest of littoral bounty.)
There was a fad about ten years ago of predicting a wave of splintering (John Feffer for example), in part as backlash against globalization and its economical & cultural discontents. Brexit seemed consistent with that. I'd say though that there's a difference between splintering and collapse: the former can be planned or at least adaptive, with minimal loss, whereas collapse leaves voids and causes collateral damage, which kill and immiserate lots of people.
Lastly, what examples are there of civilizations that invested heavily and successfully in resilience, meaning the capacity to resist sudden or sustained adversity like drought? Or perhaps splintering into smaller, more mobile and agile units was a planned form of resilience.
The USA didn't become deeply economically and governmentally centralized until the advent of the so called Neoliberal Era, and it wasn't until the Regan admin that we entered deep economic central planning and standardization, absent the imperial structures of capital "G" Globalism, there extremely immoral economic extractions, and the resulting ability for the System to run perpetual large trade deficits, budget deficits, and high liquidity (which came later then the first 2) then our economic performance would have been terrible, and even with all those fruits of evil we've still been performing worse than before! So some "collapse" in the form of re-decentralization, re-pluralism, re-democratization, etc. then it could be quite for the good
I read “Against the Grain: How Agriculture Has Hijacked Civilization” by Richard Manning 20 years ago. It had a big impact on my thinking. Scott mentions the connection towards the bottom of page xv of the preface.
After much consideration and study I believe the oppressive systems could collapse if we stopped giving them attention, money and our energies. In reality , there will be many still seduced and blinded to the prison’s that enslave them that will continue in the failing systems. There will and always have been a minority who find ways to live outside of the dominant systems…that is where creativity and freedom abounds for those courageous enough to create them.
I really enjoyed this article Thomas and the clarity you have given to these options…I heard once that it all started going wrong when we became slaves to wheat and that is so true today , in so many ways.
"Keep in mind, those of our species who pathologically love control, will not give it up easily, no more than an emperor would change place with a salt mine slave. Not a normal abnormal emperor at least, not Jamie Dimon, say, or Elon Gates.
This means that control will have to be torn from their grasp."
This assumes that control will be torn from their grasp. If human history is any guide, oligarchs come and go, but all systems eventually become oligarchies.
We are now 3,000 times more numerous than were our ancestral Hunter-Gatherers/pastoralist just a few thousands of ears ago, with scattered embattled remnants still holding out in refugia. What could go wrong? Everything?
We line up to worship so many false idols these days. Greed, glitz and glamour are sought after more frequently than the goodness of God. So many are consumed with keeping up with Kardashians or any of the countless other social influencers, that sow discontent with our own lot in life.
Politicians, although tasked with representing the people, are for the most part dismal failures. Corruption and self interest too often take precedent, resulting in betrayal of the common good. No political party is innocent of this abandonment of principle. The current regime can't even be bothered to disguise the rot in its ranks. They are openly partnered with groups like Nazi racists, Christian charlatans and Technocrat antichrists. They all share the same rhetoric. A script of hatred for anyone that differs from their doctrine. Eventually, the glaring differences in the beliefs of this murky coalition against common decency will be their downfall. They will tear each other apart, fighting over the remaining scraps of civilization.
Will we people of compassion, kindness and love allow them to write the final chapter?
This is a well written and thoughtful essay, and enjoyable read to boot, thanks for writing it! The only area where I think it may be benefited by further exploration, is its lack of grounding its vision of post collapse renewal in concrete civic and institutional traditions. I say this because, in my personal opinion, collapse alone doesn’t generate liberty, liberty is generated and sustained by systems, and the removal of one regime doesn't automatically produce a better one. That’s where I’d suggest looking to the institutional structures of the American Old Republic, I'm specifically referring to the period from the 1830s to the 1950s (outside of many parts of the South, which for two different sets of reasons, one before the Civil War and one after its, weren't fully part of the program) which had concrete institutional designs that were successful in their "physical" purpose of generating a paradigm that simultaneously had deep integration AND decentralized pluralism. That long era saw a consciously designed architecture of decentralization, diffusion, and institutional pluralism, built on mass-member democratic parties, locally controlled capital, competitive but redundant economies, and a legal framework that allowed for policy variability and local semi-autonomy. It was far from utopia, but it was a working civic system who can provide important technical-mechanical insights and case studies for moving forward in the sort of situation you describe. Thanks again for the interesting writing, have a nice day. -- Mike
The idea of a re-localized society is totally out of the question unless paired with a massively scaled back level of technology (think pre-electrification, at least). The techno-industrial order requires an incredible level of coordination and centralization, so if the central hub starts to "collapse" it will be a much bigger catastrophe than depicted here.
As it stands, periodic mini-"collapses" are already baked into the system, and shocks tend to make it stronger, as I explore here in my discussion of America's resounding stability: https://tobyshandy.substack.com/p/american-society-is-incredibly-stable
I appreciate hearing a different perspective on what co-lapse can mean. Thanks for sharing about insights from Scott's book. There is more work to envision and nurture the small collective communities to make it more humane, especially with great medical and food needs in our world.
I was going to bring up the herding of British farmers into factories (à la Stephen Marglin), but you beat me to it.
I'll look forward to reading Scott's book. Though I sympathize with the line of reasoning, I'll be wary about the evidence being depicted too rosily, to fit a narrative. Also there are some logical gaps that the book would have to fill: for example if there was a 4k-year gap between sedentary villageization and domestication of crops & livestock, how did they subsist? (Maybe this is the "wetland abundance"—continuous harvest of littoral bounty.)
There was a fad about ten years ago of predicting a wave of splintering (John Feffer for example), in part as backlash against globalization and its economical & cultural discontents. Brexit seemed consistent with that. I'd say though that there's a difference between splintering and collapse: the former can be planned or at least adaptive, with minimal loss, whereas collapse leaves voids and causes collateral damage, which kill and immiserate lots of people.
Lastly, what examples are there of civilizations that invested heavily and successfully in resilience, meaning the capacity to resist sudden or sustained adversity like drought? Or perhaps splintering into smaller, more mobile and agile units was a planned form of resilience.
The USA didn't become deeply economically and governmentally centralized until the advent of the so called Neoliberal Era, and it wasn't until the Regan admin that we entered deep economic central planning and standardization, absent the imperial structures of capital "G" Globalism, there extremely immoral economic extractions, and the resulting ability for the System to run perpetual large trade deficits, budget deficits, and high liquidity (which came later then the first 2) then our economic performance would have been terrible, and even with all those fruits of evil we've still been performing worse than before! So some "collapse" in the form of re-decentralization, re-pluralism, re-democratization, etc. then it could be quite for the good
I read “Against the Grain: How Agriculture Has Hijacked Civilization” by Richard Manning 20 years ago. It had a big impact on my thinking. Scott mentions the connection towards the bottom of page xv of the preface.
I have had thoughts along these lines, about how we might get started. Generally: https://seizethemeans.communitarium.org/baslow/tag:TheCommunitariumProject
and more specifically, a focused four-part series of posts: https://seizethemeans.communitarium.org/baslow/the-communitarium-project
After much consideration and study I believe the oppressive systems could collapse if we stopped giving them attention, money and our energies. In reality , there will be many still seduced and blinded to the prison’s that enslave them that will continue in the failing systems. There will and always have been a minority who find ways to live outside of the dominant systems…that is where creativity and freedom abounds for those courageous enough to create them.
I really enjoyed this article Thomas and the clarity you have given to these options…I heard once that it all started going wrong when we became slaves to wheat and that is so true today , in so many ways.
Thanks for the compliment, Susan. And *Against the Grain* is very much about when we became "slaves to wheat." Highly recommend it.
It’s on my list of books , thanks Thomas.
"Keep in mind, those of our species who pathologically love control, will not give it up easily, no more than an emperor would change place with a salt mine slave. Not a normal abnormal emperor at least, not Jamie Dimon, say, or Elon Gates.
This means that control will have to be torn from their grasp."
This assumes that control will be torn from their grasp. If human history is any guide, oligarchs come and go, but all systems eventually become oligarchies.
We are now 3,000 times more numerous than were our ancestral Hunter-Gatherers/pastoralist just a few thousands of ears ago, with scattered embattled remnants still holding out in refugia. What could go wrong? Everything?
We line up to worship so many false idols these days. Greed, glitz and glamour are sought after more frequently than the goodness of God. So many are consumed with keeping up with Kardashians or any of the countless other social influencers, that sow discontent with our own lot in life.
Politicians, although tasked with representing the people, are for the most part dismal failures. Corruption and self interest too often take precedent, resulting in betrayal of the common good. No political party is innocent of this abandonment of principle. The current regime can't even be bothered to disguise the rot in its ranks. They are openly partnered with groups like Nazi racists, Christian charlatans and Technocrat antichrists. They all share the same rhetoric. A script of hatred for anyone that differs from their doctrine. Eventually, the glaring differences in the beliefs of this murky coalition against common decency will be their downfall. They will tear each other apart, fighting over the remaining scraps of civilization.
Will we people of compassion, kindness and love allow them to write the final chapter?
No , many of us are writing and living the next chapter for ourselves 💖
Thomas Neuburger, you go where others fear to tread: A very good piece, thanks.
Appreciate it, Mark. Hopefully food for thought.