[Ayoob]

A new thought has popped into my head over the last month or so. The world is not evenly industrialized. In the United States, the cities are not equally wealthy or clean. The different states are wealthier or poorer as the case may be.

Living conditions in the US are much better than they are in Mexico, and Mexico is a dream compared to Africa. Japan is an oasis of technological utopia and Japanese goodwill. I think the Japanese have goodwill towards each other though it might look odd to the outsider as their culture is very inwardly-focused.

I've come to think that the decline will be a different story in different places. In some, it will be chaos with brother on brother. Africa is that way already, and I guess it will continue to go that way. In others, brother will join with brother and expand their territory together. I bet Japan will go that route.

China will become more repressive. Russia will become more nationalistic. The US... I don't know, really. Maybe the whole North American continent will balkanize and some new group of nations will form. The deserts go to the Mexicans, the mountains and snow to the Euros, the swamps and coastline of the south central US to the blacks, and the Asians move in everywhere there's a buck to be had or some math to be done.

The more cohesive a group of people are, the more they band together and expand their territory, the less cohesive the more they tear each other apart and are food for the Hun.

This leads me to the conclusion that some areas will fare better after the first halving than others. More cohesion is better than less cohesion. If you're in a cohesive area then you can you can undertake group efforts to make things happen. Solar panels, wind turbines, crops, livestock, and dogs will all be less likely to be stolen. There will be some kind of code of behavior that is acceptable and another that is unacceptable. Less liberty, more safety, and better odds at sleeping through the night.

In less cohesive areas, robbery is the order of the day. It will be more difficult to set up anything outside that doesn't have an armed guard standing on the high ground. Much more expensive to keep things moving. Thus, poorer.

The less cohesive areas go up in flames first, and the most cohesive areas maintain their status longer.

What leads me to this conclusion is that right now, there are huge third-world populations that don't have running water. Today, at the maximum output of fossil fuels, they can't join hands and put a common agenda up that gets them out of having piles of garbage everywhere they look.

In a long-term peak oil scenario, no individual is an island unto themselves. No household is an island. You have to be part of a larger community. It has to be big enough to feed you, populated enough to defend itself, and cohesive enough to root out those who would sell their community out.

I think the best bet is to live in a place where conformity is the rule, differences are punished, and under no circumstances would anyone consider welcoming outsiders. Aggression is valued over kindness. Share with the in-group and who cares who the out-group is. You are not punished for what you do outside of your home territory. Bring home the money/slaves/meat and all is forgiven.

On the upslope of fossil fuel production, liberty is the most successful strategy. On the downslope, it's cohesiveness.

[roccman]

Good insights Ayoob,

Some things I have read over the years say that 80-120 individuals is an ideal number for a tribe/group.

Do you have an opinion on this or have read something different?

I agree that at some point folk will need to work together if we do not nuc ourselves off the planet.

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ayoob', '
')who cares who the out-group is. You are not punished for what you do outside of your home territory. Bring home the money/slaves/meat and all is forgiven.

[ZombieHordeLeader]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ayoob', 'I') think the best bet is to live in a place where conformity is the rule, differences are punished, and under no circumstances would anyone consider welcoming outsiders. Aggression is valued over kindness. Share with the in-group and who cares who the out-group is. You are not punished for what you do outside of your home territory. Bring home the money/slaves/meat and all is forgiven.

[Denny]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('roccman', 'S')ome things I have read over the years say that 80-120 individuals is an ideal number for a tribe/group.
Do you have an opinion on this or have read something different?.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ayoob', '
')
I think the best bet is to live in a place where conformity is the rule, differences are punished, and under no circumstances would anyone consider welcoming outsiders.

[mmasters]

I think it will unfold differently in different places as well. The first world will become a savvy version of the 3rd world (think Jamaica or Brazil). And the third world will become much like Africa. It will be the haves and havenots throughout with totalitarianism being the high order through media, government and resource control. Of course this will all come to pass through the program of global terror and global warming for which the people will consent to a global government to handle these "global" issues. The future overall will be of a new feudalism combining high and low tech. Better to be one of the haves for sure. Areas of self rule and sustainability may be labeled the new terror camps.