"Humans do not, under the pressure of an emergency, socially collapse. Rather, they seem to display higher levels of social cohesion, despite what media or government agents might expect…or portray on TV. Humans, after the apocalypse, band together in collectives to help one another—and they do this spontaneously."
Preconceptions made me click - what the heck did that paragraph have to do with the onion router? And now I have more curiosity - what other interesting and thoughtful essays will I find on a site whose purpose is to convince me to purchase books ? (a practice I am not all opposed to, as witness the ever-growing population of book shelving furniture)
@DialMforMara ...possibly-obvious thought: people who want to write about characters doing things that society prohibits might choose a post-apocalypse setting to help them pass off their characters' destructive actions as Necessary™
without much concern for what would actually happen in such a situation
and then that pattern might replicate itself and become a trope
@DialMforMara interesting how this article neglects how American fantasies of disaster-initiated social collapse and violence are racialized. Solnit's "elite panic" would probably more accurately be called "white panic" in which "violent" non-whites revert to their "natural" state in the absence of white supremacist social control.
race, class, apocalyptic lit Show more
@TrannyOakley Just because elites are basically exclusively white does not mean non-elites are exclusively nonwhite. I agree with the writer that it's more of a class thing than a race thing, though the conflation of race and class in North American society that comes from our history of racism does make it complicated.
@DialMforMara i'm not suggesting democracy is a bad model
i'm just trying to say that at specific implementations (winner takes it all) tend towards "Meritocracy" rather than social justice
but even so, most democratic nation states do not lend (social) justice towards all citizens, but rather compromise on the cost (or bribes) of the implementation.
considering the human cost is a rather new fashion
@DialMforMara @meena not to sound contrarian/combative, but I think it's important to ask why you believe roads or internet need centralization. Decentralized mesh networks are viable for internet connectivity on metropolitan scales, and it seems reasonable that cities would negotiate ways to connect with each other. Rural connection is harder, but not impossible, especially since we already have a lot of the infrastructure for it.
@DialMforMara @meena the answers to this are probably different depending on the specific anarchist ideology, but for me anarchism is moneyless and based in reciprocity, mutual support, etc. If we maintain supply chains, the resources come from the same places they do now in addition to whatever can be supplied locally.
I did not know that about Meyer! What book was it?
And that really is the question. I don't have a perfect answer for it, but I still believe it's possible. Unionization, formation of co-ops, etc are all good starts but also nowhere near enough. One interesting answer I learned of recently is "venture communism." I'll find the thread about it, hold on 😊
@beezyal "Venture communism" is a great phrase.
The book is called The Host. Earth has been invaded by brain parasites a la Animorphs, but unlike the Yeerks they override their hosts' violent behaviors and the worlds they conquer into peaceful moneyless utopia.
The story is told by a resistance leader and the brain parasite commando who's been sent to Earth to calm her down by any means necessary.