zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. Peteri+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-01-28 13:17:38
I agree, but there is a meaningful difference between having dispossessed hordes on your doorstep and being among those dispossessed hordes having to find a place for yourself; and if the price of grain doubles, for a poor community that means starvation while a wealthy community would barely notice.
replies(1): >>TheOth+aj
2. TheOth+aj[view] [source] 2024-01-28 15:24:32
>>Peteri+(OP)
...until the dispossessed hordes burn it to the ground.

The belief that rich people will be able to ride this one out is a huge part of the problem. No matter how deep your bunker, no matter how many acres of land you own, extreme weather will make all of it worthless.

replies(2): >>ilikeh+Tl >>Peteri+3D
◧◩
3. ilikeh+Tl[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-28 15:45:42
>>TheOth+aj
You seem to believe that the disposed hordes will inevitable be able to burn it to the ground despite primarily being dispossessed from places with near primitive military practices, alone supplies. While we’re writing fictional tales, there’s an alternative ending to this fiction that ends with the dispossessed hordes simply losing.
replies(1): >>amanap+yr
◧◩◪
4. amanap+yr[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-28 16:24:45
>>ilikeh+Tl
By losing you mean starving, I assume. If the rich northern countries can even come to some sort of agreement that the poor from the south should be kept out by killing them when they try to migrate north. This is all going to be horrifying no matter what.
◧◩
5. Peteri+3D[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-28 17:33:00
>>TheOth+aj
This scenario is not a zombie apocalypse where the hordes are literally at your doorsteps and it's individuals protecting themselves from other nearby individuals.

The climate change may easily cause large scale international conflict or fights over resources at national level, but the distance between places without capacity to handle the weather and the better-off areas generally are thousands of miles and an ocean, and the parties to any conflict would be neighboring communities of many millions of people each - I mean, this discussion is about "what will happen to the population of current Bangladesh, and what effect that will have on neighboring countries" not about what will happen for few rich people in USA against their literal neighbors from the same state and county.

I fully expect that the wealthy countries can handle some internal displacement due to e.g. sea level rise without mass violence and a general breakdown of internal order - people having to abandon coastal properties in Florida would cause economic woes and internal political pressure to Do Something (not necessarily constructive), not cause the displaced Florida men to form large uncontested gangs roaming the Midwest looking for bunkers to loot.

[go to top]