5 Countries That Could Survive the ‘Collapse’ of Civilization
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- These 5 countries could survive the ‘collapse of global civilization,’ according to a new study.
» Subscribe to NowThis: go.nowth.is/New...
» Sign up for our newsletter KnowThis to get the biggest stories of the day delivered straight to your inbox: go.nowth.is/Kn...
For more world news, subscribe to NowThis News.
#Climate #Energy #Agriculture #Politics #News #NowThis
Connect with NowThis
» Like us on Facebook: go.nowth.is/New...
» Tweet us on Twitter: go.nowth.is/New...
» Follow us on Instagram: go.nowth.is/New...
» Find us on Snapchat Discover: go.nowth.is/New...
NowThis is your premier news outlet providing you with all the videos you need to stay up to date on all the latest in trending news. From entertainment to politics, to viral videos and breaking news stories, we’re delivering all you need to know straight to your social feeds. We live where you live.
/ nowthisnews
@nowthisnews
I've always said for more than 50 years, why are they pouring concrete on top of fertile land,we will need it one day.
Corona is living proof that that country wouldn't last because of the level of stupidity and pride it has ....
@@odd7646 Americans would survive but the country itself would collapse almost overnight. We’re already running on a hair trigger as it is anyway
Thank god, I thought I was the only one
Would be interesting to have a link were we can see the rest of the ranks.
'Rank' might actually have dual meanings depending. ;)
@@redbarchetta8782 😃✌😂🌹
You can Google the researcher and institute.
I would like to see where California would be if it was on it's own.
Michigan. Great Lakes on 3 sides of both peninsula.
The next 200 years are gonna be very rough everyone.
What on Earth? A place like Bolivia would do so much better than any of these. There is already a huge farming population and an extremely low population density. People would eat. They have significant coal reserves as well, so electricity could be done. People in all of the listed countries have expectations for a quality of life that is just not realistic post-apocalypse. Bolivia isn't a hellscape or anything, but it's got a lot less distance to fall.
Coincidentally it’s also an Indigenous majority population ♥️. "We shall remain" looks like the prophecies are coming true 👍
Woo hoo!
GO NEW ZEALAND!
(My country rocks!)
The only problem is that NZ doesn’t have an army to at least protect themselves against possible invaders…
@@Ineffabile1 What??? Of course we have our own military, ffs! including the army.
The united kingdom would do horrible in a apocalypse. Its too small and too dense full of people. All of its stuff are imported. In fact all of these countries rely on others to do well because they are small desolate locations with little resources
No Australia has lots of natural resources. No one will importing or exporting anything. Or using fossil fuels. Small groups of survivors will be living off the land. The nation's with the most natural resources that aren't completely destroyed by climate change and/or its own people will be the safest
@@susigriinke1242 yes but where would you get soil to grow food? Or how will you survive the desert with no ac?
@@whospilledmybeans indigenous Australians lived here for 60 000 years without farming for food and without air conditioning. Don't get me wrong most will perish
Their military is big enough to keep it secure internally in forms of martial law if necessary good enough economy to last longer good location for closed borders Would eventually need to do something about food though maybe go full Viking and raid it’s neighbours
"When the last tree is cut, the last fish is caught, and the last river is polluted; when to breathe the air is sickening, you will realize, too late, that wealth is not in bank accounts and that you can’t eat money." Alanis Obomsawin
I don't think people realize how dire our situation actually is.
What do you mean ?
The inclusion of "population growth" as a metric seems overly malthusian of them. Especially considering how many countries are experiencing population crises and need replacement level immigration to stay afloat. Don't mean to catastrophise population decline either though.
UK doesnt belong on that list.just saying
All islands I note.
I expected all of these with the exception of the U.K that one was a surprise
What about North Korea they have been more or less doing it by themselves (badly) for over 60 years.
This doesn't sound right. Going to see if this study got published.
The real answer is Patagonia.
I think all the comments miss the statement that this could happen within a year. I heard another scientist say it could be within 5 years. But like frogs in a pot to boil, we humans have no concept of how 8 billion people on a small planet can so quickly overrun the sustainability of a finite habitat. Like bacteria in a Petri dish. Good Luck, people. Remember. We only reached 1 billion planet population in 1804.
All are islands.
No sources cited
Definitely New Zealand. Heard about the bunkers they're putting all over the island 😏
This video is utterly misleading as you've not considered the rising water levels!!!
it's why billionaires/millionaires are trying to move to new zealand.
ye and I'm not happy
@@waynenz1 it's not easy to get permanent residency in nz. hope they don't ruin in, esp. buy your politicians. they are a bossy, arrogant lot.
I see a correlation, Low population density, geographical isolation, and enough food. All of these follow it except UK
instantly knew New Zealand and Iceland would be on the list. Surprised by Ireland and Tasmania but the UK makes no sense
No natural disasters good economy and military with steady location easily able to lock its borders with good amount of fish and farm land but would have to raid its neighbours to sustain sort of like the Vikings but it is fairly likely to survive if done right
@@snowtfl5617 Are you referring to England? if so thats hysterical
@@jujitsujew23 what’s hysterical
I find it interesting that they chose island nations when sea level is rising - do all those countries have enough high ground to contain their population and still have arable land left to grow food?
Definitely. Ireland exports most of its food produce. Not overpopulated either. Much of the land that would be affected by rising sea levels is unproductive marsh, dunes, waste etc. But the cities could be in trouble unless tidal barriers are erected
@@mikeryan7213 thanks Mike - good to know
If you're smart and wise then new New Zealand will be your choice.
Agreed
new zealand will get invaded
All very well until those with means flood into these safe places, like a tidal wave, as the countries they currently inhabit collapse under the weight of their greed and abuse..
So big islands basically
Uk shouldn't be on that list. Switzerland or Norway is better
I don't think I can agree with UK and Ireland. Over population and a history of potato famine, respectively, don't really sit well with me.
Not the US. Right?
So what you're saying is - pick an island to live on
Actually Indonesia
Probably too hot with global warming.
That settles it I’m moving to New Zealand.
I thought Japan 🇯🇵 would be in there
Canada came in 14th on this list for sustainability and tied with the US but one of our main problems is the border since hordes of Americans will cross over and....well, just imagine.
Canada?
But will they be able to survive rising sea levels?
No.
@@TheBLGL Why not?
Literally every single dinosaur got destroyed. I doubt we would survive
Birds survived
@@ragingshibe so basically it's death < evolve into a bird???? I'll take death ;) hahaha
Bullcrap. It only mentions countries of English colonization. I’m tired of this Eurocentric way of thinking. There are many underdeveloped countries with far more resources than that. Plus England wouldn’t last a week in a crisis like this, cause it’s completely dependent on imports for feeding the population.
What asian countries that dosnt rely on China and US ?
What kind of random video is this? What do you know, nowthis?
See all the rich people flock to buy property on these countries.
So basically move to a Island NOW!
New Zealand is a super continent. So shoudl a seismic activity take place, it will gain land mass like Himalayas and be better off than most country
Can you explain this please ?
@@tvextminecraftvideos6683 a super continent is a landmass that sits on a giant tectonic plate. And when the tectonic plates barge into another plate the surrounding areas get elevated. Since Zealandia plate is bigger that Oceania plate hence the new Zealand will gain land while Australia will lose land
@@sourojeetmaitra1583 thank you
@@sourojeetmaitra1583 That is not the definition of super continent. A super continent is "a single continental landmass made of all or most of the continental lithosphere at the time" such as Gondwana, Pangaea, or Rodinia millions of years ago when all of the lithosphere (landmass) was connected into one or two giant pieces of land. NZ is not a super continent - there are no super continents today.
NZ is a country which straddles two different tectonic plates, and, in fact, whether these plates are diving down (and pushing the other one up to create more land), or vice versa, varies along the boundary of the plate. This means that a fault on one part of the plate will result in rising land in the east and sinking land in the west, but at a different part of the fault it would be rising land in the WEST and sinking land in the east. In the middle, where the faults slide past each other, the mountains there are the fastest growing in the world, however landslides and rockfalls happen more often to compensate, so the mountains stay more or less the same height. Mother nature likes to balance everything out.
So, we can gain landmass in some of these rupture events but it is not significant, and many areas will also sink or subside in the event, which makes any land gain redundant. For example, Wellington's motorway, and some of our CBD, can only exist because of a major fault rupture which occured in the 1800s - before this, that land was under water. But it is only a very small area.
Australia is not affected by these processes because its landmass does not meet any tectonic borders; their land sits in the middle of the plate, far away from the boundaries. This is why Australia is not known for its earthquakes or landslides.
Besides, any rupture event which was large enough to have such a significant impact on NZ's landmass would completely destroy all the infrastructure which exists here, so it is not a positive thing from any angle.
Yes that may be true, but if any such collapse takes hold, these havens will be inundated, which would ruin their chances of coming out unscathed. And you omitted two others: Russia and Canada. Huge landscapes that are quickly melting, and they will have to absorb a large part of refugess from the collapse.
Russia borders too many countries and also it’s still too cold in the winter… and Canada borders the US so these countries aren’t really good options compared to the ones in the vid, also the elevation of NZ, Ireland and Iceland are high elevations.
And the most important thing, since they are all island it's difficult to invade them.
And easy to be underwater with rising sea levels! 😆
errr you sure about that? yeah im sure iceland could fight off being invaded by the usa for example
I had no doubt U.S. was not on that list.
But could they survive the Thanos snap though 🤔
I get were in trouble but this is a bit much. Spreading fear.
UK...?😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Hey that means UK will one day return to its former glory by ruling the waves.
Former glory? What, buy oppressing millions and being a heartless colonial super power. Weird definition of glory.
Islands
I live in Tasmania but this report gives no comfort to me .Being a lifeboat for the rest of he country/world would most likely be unsustainable
Just close your border for a couple of years, cut the Bass Strait cable, and the problem will have gone away after that ;-)
As a Kiwi I agree. The lifeboat would just exacerbate existing problems in the host country - transfering the conditions and issues of overpopulation that contributed to that collapse and their inability to survive domestically. To my mind, in consideration of an undersupply of affordable housing here, and in light of overseas countries buying up agricultural land and water rights, we need to be careful about increased pressure to creaking infrastructure and signing away our means of production.
I don’t know. Having 7 billion new neighbors on your island might be fun.
Man the beaches man! Tell the rest of oz you're busy.
Uk study predicts Uk would be one of few places on the planet that could survive collapse of civilisation. 😂 Personally as someone coming from the UK, I smell a rat!
Uk is a total mess right now
Yea that made no sense to me lolol political/social/population issues aside, who says UK climate would still be temperate?
Canada makes about a hundred times more sense than the UK, and I wouldn't exactly put us anywhere near Iceland or New Zealand. I was more so expecting something like Switzerland or a country near the southern tip of South America with very little going on.
Well if civilisation really does collapse, at least we’ll have something to eat. 🐀
Speak for yourself, the cornish don't consider ourselves to be really part of the uk, we'll pick clean what's left
I knew the US would never be on there
Everyone knows that the US wouldn’t be on there. We’d probably be one of the first countries to collapse in the first place
@@ElizabethsLizard usa is the reason and it's because of them printing money as they wish and cosuming everything like a drug addict and it's not so far likely will happen in 4 years max
We will be Madmaxing and hating on each other...
@ZN I’m from the US…and I 100% agree.
The US collapsing already 😑
Australia will find a way to mess up Tasmania. What about Denmark, Finland?
I guess one thing unites all on this list: Islands.
Neither Denmark nor Finland are islands, and adding to that both are quite low-lying countries, DK in particular.
Too economically interconnected with the rest of europe, arable land/population ratio too low.
Also, Ireland has Guinness. Very essential. 😋
Almost all of them, Australia excluded, are tiny islands. You really think they will survive rising sea levels?!?! Who did this Western-centric study. Shows even scientists do not want to admit what’s coming.
They said collapse of civilization, so social or political collapse is implied as opposed to collapse of the environment.
The expected rise in sea levels due to climate change is 30 centimetres by 2050, and 69 centimetres by the end of the century. The average elevation for New Zealand, Iceland, and Ireland, is 338 metres, 557 metres, and 118 metres, respectively. Not exactly nations that are any more threatened by sea level rise, than are nations on any of the major continents.
By the way, New Zealand is one of the largest island nations in the world, at roughly 270,000 square kilometres. And the United Kingdom is not far behind, at slightly more than 240,000 square kilometres.
Islands but not certainly not tiny islands.
Tasmania is a small island. It’s just shackled to a ruddy great continent.
They are not "tiny islands" - the islands which will be swallowed up by the ocean, for example Pacific nations, have little-to-no elevation gains in their topography. A wave could wash right over top of them. Most of the countries mentioned here have a vast swathe of high or even mountainous inland areas. Now, whether these inland areas are arable is another question entirely, but as far as sea-level rise goes, none of these places are in any danger of being swallowed up during our lifetime.
Where's Canada? Tons of fresh water, energy sources, and its arable land has actually been increasing with global warming.
As a Canadian, I was about to ask the same question. Our own energy resources and massive farming , wood operations… with a relatively low population…its a joke we didn’t make the list
@@Heywoodj1969 all the gun owners would be tyrants
@@Heywoodj1969 if USA Falls then Canada falls, Canada import 70% or more of their resources from the United States
@Ashleigh P yes I agree
@@Heywoodj1969 also desperate people from the USA will invade borders and that would be even more dangerous making Canada very unsafe
Did they take in consideration ocean rise and plate movement when reviewing these?
Clearly not! I say a small part of Brazil May survive, in the Amazon forest and it’s indigenous population. No one from cities used to clean water etc would survive!
No, of course not.
I think this video is talking about the short-term future only. Obviously nowhere on earth is going to be ok when Greenland and Antarctica melt completely, but that could take hundreds of years.
@@wilsonov87 Are you getting that timeframe from the same people who said that we had up to two years before the Taliban took over Afghanistan?
@@shecalledmelisalou no, I have a degree in geography and a special interest in climate change, I get my information from climate scientists. I don't think the people who do military projections are necessarily the best people to trust with climate modelling! Although I acknowledge they both have a shared interest in the data. Whoever thought it would take two years for Afghan government to fall was probably being paid by the US government to say that, haha.
The environmental changes of the 2030s and 2040s will bring this all on. It is going to be a wild story.
Several studies predict like a billion refugees from the climate crisis alone, our global society cannot handle such amounts
Weird to see the UK on this list - we're struggling enough with teething problems around Brexit, and the pandemic response has been appalling... can't imagine what would happen here if things really started going belly-up.
Propaganda video
R u kidding we distributed vaccines faster than any nation in the eu. And leaving the eu would help in a global collapse as it teaches us to be more self sustainable and not rely on our neighbours
@@JORDANLEWISFILM what! R u that delusional?
@@tag10 P R O P A G A N D A
@@tag10 UK has the exact same problems as other developed countries
Any island country has to seriously consider sea level changes.
Iceland, New Zealand and Ireland all have high elevations.
No way the UK can feed itself with 60 million inhabitants.
Fishing farming and raiding it could obviously for the UK to survive it would have to become a hostile isolation power with closed borders but it’s military is big enough and it’s location is good enough to survive but it would have to be unkind to the rest of the world similar to the Vikings
We can't continue as " normal" . People seriously need to prépare for an uncomfortable future.
I'd bet in Afghanistan. People there are so used with harsh conditions and doing whatever is needed to do, they would survive anything.
Also Japan, but the "excess" of older people would be a curse in this scenario.
Good point about Afganistan, it has survived so many invasions and wars over the centuries.
Unfortunately to westerners, the Taliban take over might be considered as a collapse of civilisation anyway.
The Japanese elderly are very resourceful and would be an asset in any scenario
You should have included India in the list afterall our illiterate PM modi is trying so best to make India great and sustainable
yall just curse at modi
UK is overpopulated has too much waste, demand for products and materialistic lifestyle.
I'm a NZer...a huge number of us don't have double glazing, live in wooden homes - very draughty with no central heating, sometimes leaky...so not a big leap from living outside really lol.
So yes we're ok if the rain & rot & earthquakes don't get us first.
Interesting all the survivable places are islands.
Island = no border crossing ?
Also more harder for other enemies to invade or cross the ocean or boarder
I’d love to see a more detailed account of this research. From this clip it doesn’t seem to take into account the effects of catastrophic climate change on global trade and mass migration. Eg. How Iceland going to rely on tech for agriculture if they can’t get access to cobalt? How is Tazmania going to serve as a lifeboat and support the whole of Australia’s population?
Interesting ideas though
I guess they don't want to admit that we are all doomed, even the places listed will have major challenges for survival. Tasmania got wildfires at a level they've never had before. The gulf stream has majorly slowed and predicted to stop soon as well. Ireland and Britain do well because of the current climate results of an active gulf stream. Siberia is burning out of control. All these Islands have cold adapted vegetation that may not survive the coming heat or revive from fire events. With vegetation loss comes topsoil erosion, landslides, sinkholes etc. Eventually, pockets of humanity will survive but I think they will be in unexpected places.
@@VynetteLisa1exactly
What about Canadá?
Invasion from the USA...
The UK?!.........since this is a subject about betting your life on a habitable place......wouldn’t do it, old chap!
NZ has it all dialed in. Wish I could move there. Seems chill and I'd prob spent most my time working and venturing out into nature.
Vector Hold I've been there. Such a beautiful place
itd get invaded by china
@@deanfowles3707 You'd get invaded by China? Anally or orally? Just an fyi brush up on your English grammar, bot.
Everyone forgets Madagascar.
Those island will not survive from the global collapse because it too big in size,population,economy the real survive is micro remote island in the ocean that have a little population or uninhabited
I don't know how well NZ will be doing after we all show up on their doorstep 😧
True
What is « global civilization » ?! Is this the Human Species ?! I don’t understand what the title means.
Should have stayed in NZ.
So it has come to this... a recommended showing possible sanctuaries for people after a collapse of civilization. Wonder what my recommended will look like in a few years time.
I gotta pat myself on the back right now, I guessed 4 of the 5 countries before I watched the video 😃
The only one I got wrong was the UK, I said Sweden. Still pretty close though.
I didn't think UK because of population and if there's going to be looting, big, well known places would get hit the hardest.
Wonder how close Canada was to making the list, sure we have lots of trade, but the east coast over here is clean, beautiful, full of farmland and great for fishing. That all goes away to more inland you go though, so I know that's why we wouldn't be doing so well.
This research is biased
This is racist
They cite land availability as if when the rest of the world collapses there won’t be billions of climate refugees…
they probably assumed most of us will be dead
@@Emiliapocalypse Or incapable of overseas travel.
@@genericusername2276 hmmm well most people dont have boats.
Is this ranking considered the chaos after the sun decided to unleash a super magnetic storm that ends modern life as we know it???
Canada and Russia would both be much stronger
But the Chinese will run to Russia and the USA to Canada.
I’d like to point out that 4 of the 5 countries had strong ties to the UK.
They must have thought about this when they were colonising us all those years ago.... CONSPIRACY!!!?????????? haha
Seems like they didn't think it through. If Iceland depends on fisheries and fisheries depend on oil, then a collapse of the oil trade would devastate Iceland. The reality is that Zambia should be at the top of the list as it uses hydroelectricity for power, and food production is a lot less dependent on imports such as oil and modern technology. without fertilizer production would drop initially, but if prices rise there is plenty of land and cheap labour for increasing production. Whereas in rich countries if the technology or oil is an issue then farming collapses.
I would think Canada would be on the list.
USA will pour over your borders.
Hawaii, though not officially a country, is motivated to become ever more self sustaining. And has great weather, water, and agriculture.
And it’s cut off from the mainland so it won’t be overrun by the crazies
Maybe the smaller islands away from Oahu would do best, but they need to invest heavily in solar power,
Hawaii is a hot spot for invasion, that's why its still with US
The UK? You mean the place that is suddenly experiencing heat waves and have never invested in AC?
Been saying for years I want to move to Iceland 🇮🇸
It's interesting to note that these are all island nations (except Tasmania, which is a part of a larger island nation).
the list:
-New Zealand
-Iceland
-Ireland
-Tasmania (Australia's island)
-UK
Tibet is isolated, populated by hardy people, and its elevation makes it cold.
so..........more and more people are asking this question = no one stands a chance
this may be helpful with the 2040 civilization Collapsation
these countries would simply get invaded
So ua need to be on an island. Great, I am completely landlocked. Ugh
Only islands need apply... And mostly low density islands... I sense an undisclosed bias with a questionable scientific basis.
Fact: All islands will shrink.
predictable pix, except uk..its 3rd world population its sinkin
I’ll take Canada 8 days week if I had to chose one place to survive. Iceland and Ireland don’t have enough wood to support people. NZ will fall quickly once they have zero supplies and materials coming. Canada is close enough to the US and far away from everyone’s problems to be effected. Plus they have the abundance of food and resources.
haha all those island are gonna sink with global warming, NZ is subject to strong earthquakes, iceland to volcanic erruptions, we are doomed :D