It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Also sounds for me as the most realistic long term scenario.
originally posted by: Rainbowresidue
Being human, and knowing human nature, we would just repeat the same mistakes again.
I'd like to think that in the beginning people would be kind and help each other out, maybe even some type of barter system instead of money.
But in the end our human nature would win I'm afraid, and back would come the money, taxes, politics, etc.
We are not mature enough for a peaceful utopia, I'm not saying it will never happen, just that it would be very hard, and we need to mature more as a species.
originally posted by: DISRAELI
What makes you think there would be time to discuss and make decisions?
Social organisation would be as scrambled and ad hoc as food production and distribution.
A big man in your locality with half a dozen strong friends would take charge locally, bully everybody else into doing what needed to be done, and take the lion's share of whatever might be available.
This brutal tyranny in the middle of general chaos would constitute the "freedom from government" which anarchists dream about.
Sorry, I'd clarify that. Let's say on area not much bigger than Ireland, so 10 people/km2. Ocean all around. Friendly, hospitable climate. Plenty of food at start.
originally posted by: newthings
You leave out the most important parameter –
How may people survive and with what geographic dispersion?
If the population was dropped to 10 million world wide, 100,000 small groups would make a 100,000 experiments play out against the local conditions. A localized competition for scarce resources and a spectrum of ideologies would take place.
If a large number survive and the threads of our modern political infrastructure remain, then we are doomed by our immaturity, just as Rainbowresidue asserts.
I believe that a small residue of society could start off in a new direction and be mature enough to advance several generations without disaster.
The KEY issue is size. We have matured enough to make a small society work, applying all of our insights. At some point, maybe it is the sheer numbers or the scarcity of vital resources, but at some point, society becomes self-destructive. We are not mature enough to manage and operate a society of large numbers. That is the root cause of any problem you can name in today’s world.
Resetting the planet, with a mass annilation of humans worldwide, offers a chance for many isolated opportunities, but only a very few would move in a utopian direction. Small groups will try every stripe of organization from despots and warlords to mystical cults.
Its just nature’s way to throw out the beans and see which ones grow. Nature does not care, Sorry, but its almost an accident that the society we know has gotten this is far. It’s Groundhog Day until we stumble on a good way on a good day in the universe.
originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: Shadow1024
If you are starting from square one then you would need to define the most valuble resources for your Species,and to me that would be healthy breeding age women because immediate repopulation would be paramount to Humanities Survival.
As it should be it would be no women no children,those two resources would be all Humanity would have to bank their future on and EVERY SINGLE PERSON would need t give 100% to protecting and preserving this resource.
A global real-time vote as we are heading towards is the optimal managment system for Humanity,NO LEVELS OF REPRESENTATION BEYOND THE INDIVIDUALS VOICE,which will be enforced and protected by law.
If you remove the artificially catalysed levels of representation that all governments have and then manage world resources via Global Humanitarian vote,then we will self-organise,we will come together and optimse the planets resources and grow our population to a sustainable 50-10 billion happy well looked after potential soldiers to fight off the coming Alien hordes.
The problem here is economics of scale - some production (computers, mobile phones) becomes only profitable when you can sell millions devices every year. Otherwise - no point. If you decide to have small, better managed groups you have to deal with problem that you risk regressing to technological level from the eve of industrial revolution.
originally posted by: newthings
The KEY issue is size. We have matured enough to make a small society work, applying all of our insights. At some point, maybe it is the sheer numbers or the scarcity of vital resources, but at some point, society becomes self-destructive. We are not mature enough to manage and operate a society of large numbers. That is the root cause of any problem you can name in today’s world.