For centuries, human societies have cycled through the rise and fall of civilizations, often crumbling not from external threats but due to internal decay. Despite the countless lessons of history, we continue to build structures that defy the natural limits of human social capacity, propping up illusions of stability through complex hierarchies, governance, and control. If we look closely, the cracks are always visible — signs that what we consider progress might be nothing more than a well-maintained façade, hiding the inevitable collapse beneath.
. . .
Historically, humans thrive in groups of up to about 200 people — roughly 25 families. And yet, despite centuries of evidence, we seem unwilling or unable to learn from this fundamental truth.
When villages grow too large, they inevitably begin to fall apart. People become unseen, unheard, and disrespected, causing social cohesion to fray. On a grander scale, this disintegration necessitates the creation of narratives and control structures to sustain the illusion of sociopolitical stability. We are told that for a society to function, hierarchical frameworks are essential, that rules, laws, and policing are critical, and that the privileged few at the top are qualified to make decisions for the many.
But it doesn’t work. If we’re honest, we see that this kind of system is a ripe target for corruption, open and vulnerable to those who seek power and control; historically, it always leads to societal and civilizational collapse — again and again.
Why, then, do we believe the modern era will be any different? Is our hubris, born of industrial and technological advancements, so blind to the human factor that we think we can indefinitely defer the inevitable?
Our governments, in alliance with the banking system, quite literally make money out of nothing to sustain this false sense of function, stability, and sustainability. As a matter of practice, these institutions are deemed “too big to fail” and must, therefore, be defended, funded, bailed out, and artificially maintained. Meanwhile, they implement taxation — portrayed as necessary for maintaining a safe and secure society (including a military force, improved roads, and social programs) — yet it serves primarily as a mechanism of social control. It’s complete fiction, and demonstrably so, for those willing to examine it closely. In truth, tax dollars go elsewhere entirely, into unseen trusts and accounts that benefit what is arguably little more than a parasitic class (culturally misrepresented as “the elite”), the obscured and occulted owners of everything.
All the while, a cultural story is maintained through artifice and puppet representation, complete with talk of balanced budgets and fiscal planning. It’s all for show. And to preserve their power, they must control the sociocultural narrative, reinforcing structural myths so the populace remains blind to the system’s weaknesses and frailties for what they truly are.
Politics, cultural inculcation, and indoctrination are crucial to this process. Without the constant reinforcement of national identity, patriotism, and the concept of a greater social tapestry, society would quickly revert to tribalism and fractious individualism — ironically, despite the best efforts of the powers that be.
Humans naturally gravitate toward smaller, cohesive family and community units, yet modern society has atomized us to the level of the individual family, and, increasingly, the single, sexless individual. This atomization creates a weak foundation for sociocultural cohesion, but that doesn’t stop installed political leaders from trying. They must justify their existence, they must perpetually sell the population on centralized government and authority, or the entire house of cards, built on paper-thin frames, will collapse.
A critical eye reveals that it is only our widespread and misguided belief in the façade that sustains their control and influence. We all know corruption exists at every level of governance, in every lauded institution, and within every centralized authority — yet, we choose to play along.
We pretend the system works, that a certain degree of corruption, wastefulness, cronyism, and stupidity is not only part of the process but inescapable and to be expected. We draft constitutions and bills of rights, assign representatives, and presume a modicum of our voices, aspirations, and desires are heard and considered, in an age-old effort to protect “We the People” from the machinations of a government that will inevitably run amok.
And yet, that same government can and will — and perhaps must — simply bypass and sidestep, through legal, political, economic, or even military means, any and all idealistic preparations, if and when it suits their needs or agendas.
In the same light, we convince ourselves that voting and democratic processes matter, that they somehow serve the greater population, even when the outcomes rarely bring real change, meaningful progress, or any semblance of equity, balance, and egalitarian benefit for all.
These centralized systems, which we have grown increasingly dependent upon over generations — fostered by times of abundance and prosperity — are, regardless, perpetually dysfunctional, often teetering on the edge of failure, while harming more than helping the very citizenry they claim to serve.
We, in quiet desperation, try to convince ourselves that next time, “our man” or “our woman” will set things right. But they never do. They can’t. The system was never meant to work, not in any grandiose capacity, to be fully functional, fair, equitable, sustainable, or trustworthy — not without perpetual instability, and severe and ongoing compromises to morality, ethics, economics, social infrastructure, and cultural identity.
It is the enemy we see right in front of our faces, the enemy we agree, as a society, to accept as necessary, right, and just.
Sure, it’s perpetually broken, hemorrhaging resources, self-serving, and increasingly authoritarian — but it’s all we’ve got. What nonsense!
We have no grounds to claim “they did it to us” or that we’ve been dealt an unfair hand. We agreed to the conditionality of an impossible ideal, and so we must, in our day-to-day, go along to get along, believing that any disruption to the fabricated, easily manipulated infrastructure of the city, state, or nation is somehow more terrifying than maintaining the unhappy, imbalanced, intractable-yet-tolerable status quo.
Is that good enough? Clearly, it is not. Is there a solution? No, I don’t believe so, at least not for the monstrous machine that is hopelessly reliant on Big Government, Big Money, and Big Industry.
Solutions, as ever, are found in the small scale. They lie in small, purposeful communities, of up to 200 people, or about 25 families. True cohesion and sociocultural stability demand that we take full responsibility for our lives, hold ourselves accountable in all aspects, and reorient ourselves toward what is natural: simplicity. These communities can certainly exist in both cities and rural settings, though the pressures and stressors differ greatly and must be carefully weighed. The more densely populated an area is, the more likely autonomy and sociocultural diversity are compromised and, perhaps necessarily, conformed.
In that light, overpopulation is not an issue. In fact, much of the Earth remains uninhabited. The greater concern is the philosophy, values, practices, and expressions of populations. We’ve seen all manner of political concepts and constructs come and go — along with their inherent biases and ultimate failures. They may be adaptable to smaller communities or limited audiences, but expanding these principles to a nation, or across nations, introduces complexities that are rarely, if ever, adequately addressed.
For greater governance to work, it would seem that the less of it there is, the better it might function. National pride should naturally emerge from a government by and for the people, rather than by dictate, control, or coercion. This would only be truly effective from the ground up, not top-down.
We need to re-examine our ideas of nationality and sovereignty. Throughout history, we’ve tried to adapt them to structures that far outweigh and outpace their capacities.
Systems that are inherently corruptible will always attract those who are inherently corrupt, no matter how well-meaning, experienced, wise, or resilient they may claim to be. The forces involved, as history shows us, ultimately override the best intentions, regardless of their origin or foundation.
If we can accept this profound truth, perhaps we can avoid pushing ourselves, in greater and greater numbers, toward the calamitous cliffs and societal collapses of our own design.
Solvitur ambulando
Further reading, resources, and considerations, inspired by this video:
The Limits of Community Size and the Inevitable Decay of Large Civilizations
Anthropological research, particularly Dunbar’s Number, suggests that human beings can maintain stable and healthy social connections within communities of approximately 150 people, or about 25 families. This limitation is rooted in our cognitive capacity for managing complex social relationships, promoting accountability, trust, and resource sharing within smaller groups. Historically, many hunter-gatherer societies and early village communities naturally adhered to this scale, promoting resilience and stability.
However, as communities scale into cities, states, and nations, the inherent social cohesion begins to fracture. Bureaucratic structures emerge to manage the complexity of larger societies, but these systems are often susceptible to corruption, manipulation, and self-serving behavior by those in power. Centralized control, coupled with complex governance systems, frequently leads to obfuscation, exploitation, and a loss of accountability—conditions that create fertile ground for systemic decay.
The cycle of civilization collapse typically involves an initial phase of growth and innovation, followed by power consolidation, inequality, social division, and ultimately, collapse—a pattern observed from the Roman Empire to modern nation-states. The discussion highlights how modern systems, including economic, political, and social institutions, exhibit signs of this decay through wealth inequality, political corruption, and media manipulation.
A potential solution lies in returning to smaller, decentralized communities, where transparency, direct relationships, and self-sufficiency can thrive. Alternatively, some advocate for systemic reforms or leveraging technological advancements to restore accountability and resilience within larger societies. However, history suggests that reforms within inherently corrupt systems often face significant challenges.
Books
“Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered” by E.F. Schumacher
Advocates for human-scale, decentralized approaches to economics and society, emphasizing sustainability and well-being over blind growth.
“The Art of Not Being Governed” by James C. Scott
Explores how communities throughout history have maintained autonomy and resisted state control—celebrating human resilience and freedom.
“The Human Scale” by Kirkpatrick Sale
Offers a thoughtful examination of bioregionalism and the benefits of living in smaller, community-focused societies.
“The Fourth Turning” by William Strauss and Neil Howe
Discusses historical cycles of societal change without a doomsday tone, focusing on generational dynamics and opportunities for renewal.
“Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants” by Robin Wall Kimmerer
Blends indigenous perspectives with scientific knowledge, promoting harmony with nature and respect for human and ecological balance.
“The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture” by Wendell Berry
Advocates for agrarian values, community resilience, and reconnecting with natural cycles, avoiding modern technocratic ideologies.
Documentaries and Films
“The Biggest Little Farm” (2018)
Follows a couple building a sustainable farm, highlighting regenerative agriculture and human ingenuity without falling into anti-human rhetoric.
“The Human Scale” (2012)
Based on Jan Gehl’s work, it presents how human-centric urban design can foster healthier, more connected communities.
“Living the Change” (2018)
Explores solutions for sustainability, including permaculture, community initiatives, and individual agency, focusing on positive change.
“Back to Eden” (2011)
A documentary on regenerative agriculture and self-sufficiency through traditional, harmonious practices with nature.
“Surviving Progress” (2011)
Examines the consequences of humanity’s pursuit of progress and how it often leads to systemic collapse.
“The Human Scale” (2012)
A documentary inspired by the work of Danish architect Jan Gehl, exploring the importance of human-centered urban design.
“Century of the Self” (2002) by Adam Curtis
Explores how media, psychology, and political manipulation shape societies, offering insights into systemic control.
Articles and Essays
“The Tainter Hypothesis: Complexity, Collapse, and Resilience”
Explores societal complexity and collapse without advocating for population reduction or technocratic solutions.
Essays by Wendell Berry
Available through various publications and collections—emphasizes localism, community, and natural law.
“The Simple Life Manifesto” by Duane Elgin
Advocates for voluntary simplicity and a return to more meaningful, community-based living.
Podcasts
“The Survival Podcast”
Focuses on practical self-sufficiency, decentralization, and thriving in harmony with natural systems—without doom-laden narratives.
“The Permaculture Podcast”
Offers insights into regenerative practices and community resilience, highlighting human adaptability and ingenuity.
Web Resources
The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE.org)
Offers articles on decentralization, human freedom, and natural rights, often with a critical view of technocratic control.
The American Conservative
Provides thoughtful critiques of globalism and discussions on community, tradition, and human-scale living.
Front Porch Republic
Explores localism, community sovereignty, and the benefits of smaller, more intentional societies.