Sharethepain

Sharethepain

We forge the chains we wear in life.
May 2, 2018
138
Hello everyone, I´ve just thought about something. What if the world became as it used to be, no laws, no society, no work, just everyone for himself, like a sort of apocalypse or anarchy scenario. You could do anything with no consequences, only those you inflict upon yourself. Imagine a global EMP where everything running on electricity goes permamently off and people start fending for themselves.
Would such a world be more acceptable? Would you feel less suicidal in a such a world?
 
Dead_Inside

Dead_Inside

Wizard
Jul 2, 2018
625
No. I want the opposite. I want what we use to have when people lived in close family groups and actually cared about each other.
I wish we could get universal income so we could all be able to work or not. Focus on what makes our lives meaningful and be ok to accept other human beings instead of fighting and hurting each other for no reason.
 
D

Deleted_9cKnXB34QG

Mage
Jun 26, 2018
501
I would off myself ASAP, I don't want to get tortured or brutally murdered lol.

To me the perfect world would be something like in the Girls' Last Tour anime - humanity is practically wiped out, me and my crush go on a tour around our devastated world, we discover some weird stuff along the way and try to enjoy our lives best we can. And we're completely content with the fact that we will not survive for too long anyway.
Ehhh...

Girls-Last-Tour-Cover.png
 
Last edited:
D

Dip

Student
Jul 27, 2018
171
Imagine a global EMP where everything running on electricity goes permamently off and people start fending for themselves.
Would such a world be more acceptable? Would you feel less suicidal in a such a world?

Such a scenario would be similar to economic collapse. As such the following points I mentioned about that are also applicable here:

-Civilized humans can ill afford to just go simpler ways en mass because

--There are around 4000 spent nuclear fuel ponds and 400 nuclear power plants dotted around the world that require industrial civilization to function
--Almost all the soil being used for farming has been farmed using various chemical fertilizers and pesticides that have rendered the soil dead and thus useless for more primitive humans for many years to come. Even farming communities like the Amnish (however you spell that) in the USA use various modern chemicals for farming
--The firsthand knowledge/experience/skills for living as subsistence farmers or hunter-gatherers is almost completely lost. Of the current 7.6 billion humans only a few isolated tribes are able to "live off the land" without support from industrial civilization
--Given the dead soils and nuclear radiation that would inevitably be released from unmaintained nuclear facilities very little (possibly even zero) percentage of the Earth's surface will be habitable by humans. Being in the right sufficiently isolated place and having all the skills/knowledge/experience for surviving in that place over the long term AND using only that place's resources will be very unlikely for civilized humans.
I won't sugarcoat things. I doubt you'll like:
-starvation
-thirst
-disease
-violence
-radiation poisoning if you're "lucky" to live long enough to experience that (4000 fuel ponds and 400 nuclear plants dotted around the world won't function without industrial civilization)

With dead soils, non-functioning infrastructure (including critical infrastructure like transportation, sewerage and water treatment) all you'll have to look forward to is either a slow death from 4 of the above or a fast death from violence (most likely someone killing you for food).

Because everything from food to toothbrushes to computers rely on global supply chains to be manufactured and transported you'll only have whatever stockpiles you can get your hands on which will inevitably run out. Even people who hide in some hole in the ground will be trapped with whatever supplies they have that will eventually run out since the global supply chains at that point will be unavailable.

Global systemic collapse will make previous famines like the Great Irish Famine of 1845 and the Soviet famines of the 20th century look tame by comparison.

Here's a small taste of the sorts of decisions you'll have to make (and keep in mind that this was just a famine, not permanent and total cessation of food production):
"
During the 1930s, multiple acts of cannibalism were reported from Ukraine and Russia's Volga, South Siberian and Kuban regions during the Soviet famine of 1932–1933.[117]

Survival was a moral as well as a physical struggle. A woman doctor wrote to a friend in June 1933 that she had not yet become a cannibal, but was "not sure that I shall not be one by the time my letter reaches you." The good people died first. Those who refused to steal or to prostitute themselves died. Those who gave food to others died. Those who refused to eat corpses died. Those who refused to kill their fellow man died. ... At least 2,505 people were sentenced for cannibalism in the years 1932 and 1933 in Ukraine, though the actual number of cases was certainly much higher.[118]
"

Pictures speak many words (and keep in mind these are very mild compared to total collapse):
659px-A_food_riot_in_Dungarvan%2C_Co._Waterford%2C_Ireland%2C_during_the_famine_-_The_Pictorial_Times_%281846%29_-_BL.jpg

A food riot in Dungarvan, Co. Waterford, Ireland, during the famine.
Date 10 October 1846

Maaselk%C3%A4_cannibalism.jpg

Finnish soldiers displaying the skins of Soviet soldiers near Maaselkä, on the strand of lake Seesjärvi during Continuation War on the 15th of December in 1942. Original caption: "An enemy recon patrol that was cut out of food supplies had butchered a few members of their own patrol group, and had eaten most of them."

GolodomorKharkiv.jpg

Starved peasants on a street in Kharkiv, 1933.

441px-Cannibalism_during_Russian_famine_1921.jpg

Cannibals with their victims, Samara province, Volga region, Russia, 1921.

Whenever law and order broke down in the past other crimes would also go through the roof like rapes. Don't think that being a man would keep you completely safe from that when dealing with desperate people with nothing to lose.

The only people in that situation who stand any chance of survival beyond the short term are existing hunter-gatherers living in incredibly remote areas, and they'll most likely succumb to chronic radiation poisoning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tiburcio
Revan

Revan

Darth
Jul 8, 2018
73
So cure my loneliness with... more loneliness, but also the constant danger of getting shanked?

What?

Primitive, nomadic humans lived in small tribes and were argubly egalitarian. I want that life, not perpetual anarchy. Besides, even if the world descended into anarchy, humans are inherently social creatures and would form tribes and, eventually, government anyways. It wouldn't be a massive battle royale.
 
D

Dip

Student
Jul 27, 2018
171
Primitive, nomadic humans lived in small tribes and were argubly egalitarian. I want that life, not perpetual anarchy. Besides, even if the world descended into anarchy, humans are inherently social creatures and would form tribes and, eventually, government anyways. It wouldn't be a massive battle royale.

There is indeed cooperation between social creatures like humans when there is enough to go around.

However, when there's far too many such creatures and only a few scraps to go around...

13930579102_be574c73d0_b.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Morning Angel
Lucas

Lucas

Member
May 26, 2018
81
The conditions for making a good world now seems to be unachievable. I used to fantasize about that but now I prefer not doing anything at all and accepting we are in a shithole.

Yep. Life is funny in a way that when you are young, you want to change the world and you question things, but as you get older you realize that people don't always do what's right or truthful and how they follow their emotions or believes rather than their logic. Then you kinda accept the world is what it is, better to play along and not cause fuzz.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tiburcio