The Question Thread

[O Really]

... The first Civil War wasn't over in a year....

"first"?

First- yes. Consider how many people there are running around who didn't learn anything from the first one. Unlike the first one, however, the next one won't have nice neat boundaries separating a pretend country. It'll be more like Iraq.

[Vrede too]

Just remember, Ashevillian, not everyone in Hendersonville is the enemy.

[O Really]

There were a lot of people in the first Civil War that didn't really have a dog in the fight but got drug along (sometimes literally) into the Army of the Insurrection. History would have been much different if enough of those had banded together and said "hell no, we won't go" or "we're not going to die for some rich cotton farmer." But instead, you've got guys thinking "oh what a great adventure" and going up to Virginia from Texas to join the fight. Sadly, I don't think a lot of people have gotten much smarter since then.

[O Really]

Even if you can put away a years worth of food, it's still only a year. Nuclear destruction isn't going to be over in a year. Total breakdown of the economic and governmental system isn't going to be over in a year. The first Civil War wasn't over in a year.

...The Trump presidency won't be over in a year...

Hey, there are still over 6 months left to see - who knows, we can always hope.
But I'd still rather see him stay in office for the 2018 elections.

[rstrong]

This talk of civil war gives a Canadian new worries. A (color) state could cut pipe lines and hydro lines, leaving us selling only to one side. We'd want to remain neutral, selling to both sides.

[Vrede too]

We will deflect from the looming Civil War by invading Canada, instead.

There was strong resistance to the draft in both the North and South. It was brutally repressed.

[JTA]

... The first Civil War wasn't over in a year....

"first"?

First- yes. Consider how many people there are running around who didn't learn anything from the first one. Unlike the first one, however, the next one won't have nice neat boundaries separating a pretend country. It'll be more like Iraq.

Yeah, there's no clear-cut dividing line. I could foresee sometime in the distant future there being sectarian violence of sorts, maybe. A bunch of bubbas forming militia checkpoints outside of urban areas and stopping those traveling through, or something to that effect.

Still, at the moment, I think the internal division of the US is vastly amplified by media/those in power. Most of those becoming more "extremist" live a virtual life of heavy consumption of TV and social media information silos and have a vastly skewed vision of the world. Unfortunately, this appears to be the path we're going down, so I think that vision will eventually become even more amplified.

[billy.pilgrim]

So many people are prepared for the 19th century

Maybe for the 1st year - 20th century

2nd and maybe 3rd 19th century

After that 14th century


Best self-defense is to learn a 12th to 14th century sought after skill.

Not the best example, but I got my journalist son an antique printing press with a lot of type. He said that printing was the only old skill that he needed. Who am I to argue or explain that he won't be able to haul it around.

Metallurgy will be high demand skill.

medicines are another

[JTA]

I thought it would be cool to learn how to brew liquor. Surely that would be in demand. But alas, it's illegal.

[Vrede too]

Given the power of our modern police and military, I worry more about repressive dictatorship than I do about enough of either being on opposite sides to make a viable Civil War. That said, I remember enjoying reading 1975's Ecotopia.

[rstrong]

Maybe for the 1st year - 20th century

2nd and maybe 3rd 19th century

After that 14th century

5th century, not 14th, in terms of chaos and average life span. Because even 19th century technology would not support the 21st century population. The early famine death toll would be harsh. And any city that loses its fire department would quickly burn even without humans causing the fires.

But there would be a quick return to the late 19th century once the population (and ability to feed it) stabilizes. There's a whole lot of infrastructure about. Even without the power grid there will be pockets of areas with electricity. Plus many solar-powered homes. Diesel powered vehicles will be kept running.

Metallurgy will be high demand skill.

I doubt it. There will be so, so much metal laying around unclaimed. No need for mining and smelting and refining. And little need for moulding it into something new that you can't already scavenge.

[JTA]

I was reading something, can't remember what nor where, that made the claim that should modern civilization collapse, we'll almost assuredly never be able to reach our current technological achievements since most of the easy to get minerals/resources have already been extracted, and anything remaining will be incredibly difficult if not impossible to extract with older technology. For example, oil.

[JTA]

That reminds me, have any of you watched Threads?

[rstrong]

That reminds me, have any of you watched Threads?

I recommend the BBC series Connections, the 1978 version, about all the weird and wonderful connections between different inventions and inventors and how one led to another.

Especially the first episode "The Trigger Effect", which is a whole lot more eerie today than it was then.

"The Trigger Effect" details the world's present dependence on complex technological networks through a detailed narrative of New York City and the power blackout of 1965.

It starts off at the ground level and then on the rooftop of the World Trade Center, and tells the true story of an airliner - with city lights and air traffic control gone - heading for the WTC.

It asks the question of how far do you as a city dweller have to flee, ignoring the problem of the others doing the same, before you can find relatively permanent safety. (Spoiler: A farm that still has an old-fashioned plow stored in the barn.) Then it covers how the first farming led to civilization.

[rstrong]

I was reading something, can't remember what nor where, that made the claim that should modern civilization collapse, we'll almost assuredly never be able to reach our current technological achievements since most of the easy to get minerals/resources have already been extracted, and anything remaining will be incredibly difficult if not impossible to extract with older technology. For example, oil.

Minerals and other resources won't be a problem, since there will be just so much or it laying around to scavenge.

As for oil, globalization would disappear, as a vast amount of oil is used to moved goods across oceans and continents. And after a big collapse the population will be much smaller, so oil demands will be much smaller too.

And that's in the 1980s. Today and beyond the rebuilders would have vast numbers of working or refurbishable windmills and solar panels. Lots of hybrid and electric cars that we could scavenge for old batteries or lithium for new ones. Lots of gasohol.

I think we'd reach our current technological achievements, just with more energy-efficiency and less globalization.

[O Really]

I'm thinking "Road Warrior" got it right in a lot of ways.

[billy.pilgrim]

I'm thinking "Road Warrior" got it right in a lot of ways.

Cormac McCarthy - The Road

[Vrede too]

That reminds me, have any of you watched Threads?

And The War Game and The Day After, all 30 some years ago, though. Reagan made for some frightening times. How did you come across Threads?

[JTA]

That reminds me, have any of you watched Threads?

And The War Game and The Day After, all 30 some years ago, though. Reagan made for some frightening times. How did you come across Threads?

I have an obsession with post apocalyptic and dystopian books/films. I think I found it on Wikipedia browsing through a list of nuclear war films. It sounded especially grim/realistic. Or maybe it was Reddit, I can't remember.

If you haven't seen it, check it out. It's super realistic imo. Very grim and very depressing. I really dig the way it was filmed. Sort of like a documentary.

[Boatrocker]

Depends on how "civilization" falls. If it's the result of a major nuclear exchange, it'll be more like the Stone Age (and I don't mean The Flintstones) for a while, until the pitiful remnants in very isolated places die off of massive climate damage or radiation- whichever gets to 'em first.

As for apocalyptic fiction, I still like many of the finer details in The Stand. The supernatural shit aside, I expect King hit pretty close to life after a major die-off that doesn't completely trash the infrastructure. Lucifer's Hammer is good, too.