Epistemic status: an idea I believe moderately strongly, based on extensive reading but not rigorous analysis.
We may have a dramatically wrong idea of civilization collapse, mainly inspired by movies that obsess over dramatic tales of individual heroism.
Traditional view:
In a collapse, anarchy will break out, and it will be a war of all against all or small groups against small groups. Individual weaponry (including heavy weapons) and basic food production will become paramount; traditional political skills, not so much. Government collapse is long term. Towns and cities will suffer more than the countryside. The best course of action is to have a cache of weapons and food, and to run for the hills.
Alternative view:
In a collapse, people will cling to their identified tribe for protection. Large groups will have no difficulty suppressing or taking over individuals and small groups within their areas of influence. Individual weaponry may be important (given less of a police force), but heavy weaponry will be almost irrelevant as no small group will survive alone. Food production will be controlled by the large groups. Though the formal "government" may fall, and countries may splinter into more local groups, government will continue under the control of warlords, tribal elders, or local variants. Cities, with their large and varied-skill workforce, will suffer less than the countryside. The best course of action is to have a stash of minor luxury goods (solar-powered calculators, comic books, pornography, batteries, antiseptics) and to make contacts with those likely to become powerful after a collapse (army officers, police chiefs, religious leaders, influential families).
Possible sources to back up this alternative view:
- The book Sapiens argues that governments and markets are the ultimate enablers of individualism, with extended-family-based tribalism as the "natural" state of humanity.
- The history of Somalia demonstrates that laws and enforcement continue even after a government collapse, by going back to more traditional structures.
- During China's period of anarchy, large groups remained powerful: the nationalists, the communists, the Japanese invaders. The other sections of the country were generally under the control of local warlords.
- Rational Wiki argues that examples of collapse go against the individualism narrative.
Most of the pessimistic people I talk to don't think the government will collapse. It will just get increasingly stagnant, oppressive and incompetent, and that incompetence will make it impossible for individual or corporate innovators to do anything worthwhile. Think European-style tax rates, with American-style low quality of public services.
There will also be a blurring of the line between the government and big corporations. Corporations will essentially become extensions of the bureaucracy. Because of this they will never go out of business and they will also never innovate. Think of a world where all corporations are about as competent as AmTrak.
hmm, blurred lines between corporations and political power... are you suggesting EU is already a failed state? (contrary to the widespread belief that we are just heading towards the cliff damn fast)
well, unlike Somalia, where no goverment means there is no border control and you can be robbed, raped or killed on the street anytime....
in civilized Europe our eurosocialist etatists achieved that... there are nor borders for invading millions of crimmigrants that may rob/rape/kill you anytime day or night... and as a bonus we have merkelterrorists that kill by hundreds sometimes (yeah, these uncivilized Somalis did not even manage this... what a shame, they certainly need more cultural marxist education)