[Hermes]

Book: The Mountain People
Link at Amazon.com

I'm going to remember the book imperfectly... but I'll relate as much as I can, as accurately as I can.

The author visits the Ik tribe in Africa to study them. He happens to arrive as they're entering a vicious drought. They were already hungry, and had had it tough for some years, but the drought diminishes the available food dramatically.

I read it because I wanted to get an answer to this question which is: What happens to a group of people as they starve to death, because of course it's what is about to happen and I want to prepare.

The Ik people behaved somewhat differently than I expect so-called first world people to behave in the circumstances. First of all they knew how to hunt and gather. Second they had social systems which at least partially weathered the storm of starvation.

In our case I expect things to be far more decimating. Almost no one in this society can forage. This society is deeply removed from the earth, and as it is forced to return to the earth in order to survive it will be less successful than the Ik were.

That said the Ik stole food out of their grandparents' mouths as they were chewing, ate smooth rocks to keep their hunger pangs down, restructured their language itself to equate the individual posession of food as the purest good, and eventually shambled along from place to place to be with other starving people so they could die in one another's company. Children were tossed out at about 3 years old because they were too much a burden.

Children banded together into little gangs. The first gangs were of the 3-10 year old range, and the second gangs were of the 10-15 ish year old range. After that people were pretty much adults in their society, and began to "settle down" more.

The young went out and foraged. And especially the young adults (10-20 or so) ranged out for days in search of food, and were successful in stuffing themselves. The older (25 yrs old or more) just remained near the village, trying to keep their death at bay for as long as possible. 35 years old was OLD. At 45 a person was ancient. There weren't more than a few people 55 years old.

The big lesson, and one which the author himself was fascinated by, was that even though they could have moved to somewhere else where the food was better, even though their social bonds were so deeply and horrifically fragmented, even though moreover their water was rank and foul and better water was elsewhere ...
... they stayed there in the villages.

Yes, those that could went out on food gathering missions, but they kept coming back to the horror of their village. They always returned (Except for one notable exception in this one family which apparently permanently got out. But there was furthermore another family which got out for some months, lived a great life elsewhere... and then ended up returning back to their horrific village)

Yes, the Ik society is different than ours. But at the same time when a human animal suffers this kind of starvation I doubt the cultural laws which made the Ik and Joe 6-pack different will much exist anymore. Both will be driven by a deep desire to eat, which will overpower all else.

Among the things I took away from the book was a sense that in the USA people will generally stay put. Indeed, people everywhere will generally stay put.

And they will die right there where they are.

Yes, some will range out on multi-day foraging missions, but they will almost always come back to the city again. Furthermore a handful will make it out of the city and never return, but they will be a VERY small number.

But is this so hard to believe though? Look deeply at our current society. Who but an insane person would stay in it? Who but an insane person would want to stay in the city TODAY? And yet they all do remain.

So I do believe that there will be roving zombie bands, but not roving hordes. They will be small groups of enterprising young people looking for food and a quick smash-and-grab looting that they can bring back home to the city with them. And I believe they will range out about 40-60 miles from the city but probably no further. The rest of the population in the cities (all other ages than the generally 10-25 year olds) will remain in the city, starving to death.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '
')There are people who live in the 3rd world on $300/month in densely populated cities. If they can afford to eat food sent in 3,000 miles away

[vetusfirma]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kjmclark', '
')
I would guess that most starving masses wouldn't try to go far and mostly wouldn't succeed if they tried. However, the starving masses I'm concerned about are gangs, teens/young adults who might join gangs, people selling or transporting drugs, and the prison population that the state releases when it can't afford to house them any longer. I suppose you could add former military, though for different reasons.

Now, what percentage of the US population is gang members, potential gang members, prisoners, and former or current military? I would expect the veterans to mostly be willing to work for the food, and only take it if the answer is no and there are no other options. The criminal types I don't expect to bother to ask. It would only take a few armed gang members to ruin your day.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '.')..
Transport aside, how will packing people together like sardine cans surmount the problem of growing enough food for them when we're only able to do that now because of fossil-fuel-derived fertilizers? I just think there will be shortage of food regardless of where people live, 5000 mile diet or 1 mile diet. Truly sustainable agricultural practices will necessitate a smaller population.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hermes', '
')Yes, the Ik society is different than ours. But at the same time when a human animal suffers this kind of starvation I doubt the cultural laws which made the Ik and Joe 6-pack different will much exist anymore. Both will be driven by a deep desire to eat, which will overpower all else.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '
')Of course we'll have a smaller population!
But that doesn't mean we can't have big cities right? Even if the world population drops to only 1 billion why can't we have a couple mega-cities of 7million++ New York, London, Moscow, Tokyo?

[Hermes]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hermes', '
')Yes, the Ik society is different than ours. But at the same time when a human animal suffers this kind of starvation I doubt the cultural laws which made the Ik and Joe 6-pack different will much exist anymore. Both will be driven by a deep desire to eat, which will overpower all else.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hermes', '
')What happens between right now and the "starving masses in the cities" point is a different conversation that I'm not attempting to address.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '.')..
I just don't see how 5/6th of the world's population can die off rapidly without having enough of a ripple effect on the world to cause WWIII. I just don't see how you can sandbox a die-off of that magnitude in such a way that the major 1st world cities just kind of coast through it by virtue of their wealth-advantage.

[Pretorian]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '[')Sterile males continue to compete for mates, reducing the number of successful fertilizations. Sterilizing males is the preferred practice for controlling animal populations. Why would it be different for humans? Men don't generally have the drive to have a baby that women have, they mainly seem to want to have sex. Sterilized men would still want to have sex, and would compete with fertile men for mates, reducing the total number of fertile unions.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pretorian', '
')Man is born to father children-- as many as possible.-- or at least to try his luck.

[Hermes]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'A') 1st world nation falling into decay starts out with a great deal of resources and mobility. People will exercise the options they have while they still have it long before their society breaks down to the level of a Unicef commercial. Not only that, if people really do "get it" and realize that humanity is going to go through a "die off", they will not abide by the law the way they did during the great depression, because they will know the situation will only get worse. Then it's every man to himself.

[AgentR]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'I') think what's more likely is a "zombie horde lite" which is just people strategically moving from collapsing cities to rural regions. In so doing they will destroy these rural areas with thier sheer numbers. They will move while they still have the means to do so.

[CACynic]

When I was a reporter covering the L.A. riots (scariest three days of my career), I realized that law enforcement won't be able to do much in the first days of a major collapse. All they'll do is sit in their cars and watch. It will depend on how quickly it happens, such as food and water running out. I think desperate roaming mobs will exhaust themselves within a matter of days, possibly a week or two, allowing the authorities a chance to mobilize and restore order. Therefore, I think the best bet is to have the resources, including guns and ammo, to stay locked inside for a month just to improve the odds. Long-term, of course, is another story.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AgentR', '
')If you intend to be one of the zombies hunting for "helpless" rural folks...

[Fredrik]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'I') just don't see how you can sandbox a die-off of that magnitude in such a way that the major 1st world cities just kind of coast through it by virtue of their wealth-advantage.

[wisconsin_cur]

Mos, Wouldn't that require an ability to sell the old home in the now unattractive city in order to buy or build the new place? And do they commute to the old job from the boonies?

My point is the old model of the despoiled enclave was dependant upon cheap oil. Take that away and people will hit the ground (in he early days of a crisis) and try to deal with things were they are. I admit, I am becoming increasingly convinced that people will primarily stay were they are and go out only if they have a destination or goal in mind.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wisconsin_cur', 'M')os, Wouldn't that require an ability to sell the old home in the now unattractive city in order to buy or build the new place? And do they commute to the old job from the boonies?

[wisconsin_cur]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wisconsin_cur', 'M')os, Wouldn't that require an ability to sell the old home in the now unattractive city in order to buy or build the new place? And do they commute to the old job from the boonies?

[Karlos4]

Fascinating debate. IMO, much of what is anticipated here depends on one thing: the ability of the military and police to keep working. As long as they keep following orders, they can distribute food (scarce as it might be), shooting looters, implementing curfew. At the very least, telling people what to do, which is what they would be waiting for.
How long would that work? At a certain point, there would be no gas for police cars or tanks. And when even their depots of food run out, the soldiers would be starving like everybody else. They would have a family too, somewhere, in trouble. When and how would the security forces disintegrate?
I agree that a lot of people would stay, and die, in the city. A lot would not recognize the problem until it's too late.
In Spain, I don't expect the military or police to form gangs. They would keep working until the last minute, then go home. But there would be gangs, I'm afraid following ethnic lines.