Collapse of Complex Societies: How Long Do We Have Left?
In which we dive back into secular eschatology, which I have neglected for too long.
Published: 1988
262 Pages
Briefly, what is this book about?
A new (at the time) theory for the collapse of societies based on declining marginal returns to complexity.
What's the author's angle?
This is a book definitely written in opposition to previous theories (think Spengler, Toynbee, etc.) many of which Tainter rejects as overly moralistic.
Who should read this book?
If you’re interested in how the United States will end (and I can’t imagine how you’re not) this is a great book.
Specific thoughts: Okay so this is how collapse happens. Can it be stopped?
In addition to being interesting, the mechanism laid out in this book also feels inevitable. States naturally solve problems in ways that bring with them a certain amount of complexity. This complexity compounds until it eventually starts to collapse under its own weight. But each element in the complex system is load bearing, so any attempt to decrease complexity just makes the whole structure more likely to collapse.
Perhaps there’s a way to reduce complexity in a way that doesn’t take down the whole system? (And certainly we see occasional examples of simplification. For example Aurelian evacuating Dacia. Or Vietnam’s “Project 30”.) Unfortunately even if such simplification were easy (it’s not) the rate of reduction would have to be greater than the rate at which complexity increases (i.e. the rate at which new problems arise). Even the most optimistic accounting of things would have to conclude that we’re eliminating complexity far more slowly than we’re adding it. To make things even worse, it takes wisdom and unity to eliminate complexity, and those two qualities are decreasing precisely when we need them the most.
The reduction of unity is particularly alarming. Long time readers will know of my interest in civic religion, and the role of some form of religion as the core of all civilizations. In this respect Tainter and I are very much on the same page.
Complex societies are focused on a center, which may not be located physically where it is literally implied, but which is the symbolic source of the framework of society. It is not only the location of legal and governmental institutions, but is the source of order, and the symbol of moral authority and social continuity. The center partakes of the nature of the sacred. In this sense, every complex society has an official religion.
While it may be hard to pin down how close we are to complexity driven collapse, no one would deny that our “official religion” has grown very weak, if it exists at all at this point. A civilization can weather a lot if it maintains its center and source of order. Once those things go away even minor shocks can cause major damage. (A process I believe to be playing out as we speak.)
Tainter does not offer any hope for reversal.1 Certainly he offers up no civilization which has managed to hold complexity steady, or successfully reverse it. As such it’s always going to be a matter of when, not if. Add in the breakdown in civic religion—the disappearing center, along with massive amounts of complexity, and the “when” seems likely to be quite soon.
Of course, when you’re talking about civilizational collapse, “soon” could still be 100 years away. And I am obligated to say that there could be some sort of technological singularity between now and then. Though I have long expressed my doubts about a positive singularity (as evidenced by the title of the blog.)
From the eventuality of the collapse one begins to wonder about the qualities of that collapse. The Roman Empire had very little effect on the Northern and Southern Dynasties in China. And the collapse of the Classic Mayans had no effect at all on Europe. Should Western Civilization collapse it will have major impacts everywhere in the world. And while I suspect that the postapocalyptic world will look nothing like how it’s portrayed in books and movies, it will nevertheless be enormously consequential.
One of the things I ended up discussing with my father when I made my own predictions for how soon collapse was going to occur was whether it would be a slow decline (my prediction) or a Hemingway-esque collapse (my father’s prediction).2 I guess at a minimum I’d like to have some warning. If I do, I’ll share it with you in this very spot.
Obviously Tainter’s theory could be wrong. I myself was curious about how influential he was, so I reached out to an acquaintance of mine who’s involved in the discipline of collapse studies and he said Tainter is still “well regarded among people who do collapse research”.
Referring to Hemingway’s description of a bankruptcy “How did you go bankrupt? Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.”
This is so much superior to Jared Diamond. I feel like, just based on the little you have said, that Diamond should be repeatedly flogged with this book.
I think it’s an interesting test case to examine iterations of ostensibly continuous societies. For example: China. How many Chinas have there been? Everyone subject to cycles of collapse. But China still is, in some form that is recognized. And, at least according to the CCP (which should be considered dubious for self-interested reasons) continuous for the last 5,000 years. So did Chinese civilization collapse or not?
Ditto with places more familiar to Westerners like England or France. How many Frances have there been? How many Englands, United Kingdoms, Britains? Are they the same civilization? If so, why? And is a place like Italy or Germany or Greece different? The latter have seen many collapses and then re-emergences in very different forms. Was Prussia German? Was Ancient Greek Turkey or Italy Greek?
These are salient questions because the popular imagination among collapse enthusiasts or Doomers seeing collapse as negation. The United States and America will disappear, largely without a trace, memory, or continuity.
But Ancient Rome didn’t disappear! In its Eastern iteration continued for another millennia. And we still, today, many of us, speak its language in an evolved form, live under its legal structures, and even believe its religion.