What would rise from the ashes? More of the same?

[Corax]

Somalia and Afghanistan in recent decades spring to mind. Slightly different is Poland in 1980 but interesting nonetheless as the state lost all legitimacy among the people resulting in the military stepping in.

Somalia & Afghanistan are very different situations with regards to resources imo. I'll take a look at Poland 80 though, thanks.

 

[Corax]

Problem is that things are fairly set in stone as they are, even in peoples minds.
Even if things were more evenly distributed, how would you facilitate this? Those with an particularily high percentage are those you would need to convince without some kind of violent uprising and they have less reason to go along with it. Even then assuming a 'fair' distribution there are always going to be people who want a bigger slice of the pie, those at the bottom who have got this through equalising things will be happier, granted. However without some form of advantage to be gained from making more effort than average or doing the less than pleasant jobs. Who fills the gaps at the top and bottom of the career (to take one single example) ladder, when there is no benefit or reason to do so over not doing so?

I think you're missing the point of communo-anarchism somewhat. Everyone gets as much pie as they need, and it's not linked to your 'job'.

 

[dylanredefined]

The muslims would still have the mosques to organise large groups and could thus take over and establish sharia law.

An unpopular poor minority would get to be in charge how exactly ?

All the people with access to weapons and knowledge in their use would probably have problems with that .And everyone else would not be in favour of no drinking So unless they find a get out clause for that .Their take over is doomed to failure.

 

[IC3D]

Rimmer: "They say that every society is only three meals away from revolution. Deprive a culture of food for three meals, and you'll have an anarchy. And it's true, isn't it? You haven't eaten for a couple of days, and you've turned into a barbarian."

A good example of this is what happened in the Superdome after the New Orleans flood, I don't doubt that it would settle into some sort of society but if people are short of recourses they will at first fight each other then group up and fight other groups (or compete with an implied violence like is done on the world stage now, All be it disguised as politics ) has there ever been a time of world peace?

 

[EddyBlack]

An unpopular poor minority would get to be in charge how exactly ?

All the people with access to weapons and knowledge in their use would probably have problems with that .And everyone else would not be in favour of no drinking So unless they find a get out clause for that .Their take over is doomed to failure.

I wasn't being entirely serious with the takeover bit. Just that for many muslims, the mosque is the centre of their lives and that wouldn't change regarding this bit of the OP:

I think that, once the government and friends had lost control, people would automatically come together in local groupings, to discuss how they as a community could best deal with the situation.

And one of the first things that would happen, probably at the first of any such meeting, would be a vote and the election of a committee, panel, or whatever you want to call it.

The army already have the hierachy, and as you say the guns so would be in a far more realistic position to takeover as has happened in lots of countries.

 

[samk]

feudalism and very large rodents?