Weapons of Mass Decentralization
Recent discussions surrounding the conclusion of the Bronze Age have drawn intriguing parallels to what many perceive as the impending end of our own era or even civilization as we know it. Patrick Fitzsimmons, a postdoctoral fellow at Penn, explores how certain technological advancements can act as centripetal forces, drawing people into larger groups governed by strong centralized powers, while others have a centrifugal effect, breaking down vast empires into smaller communities.
Transporting tin for bronze production required a trader willing to take on significant costs and risks for long journeys. In contrast, Iron Age smiths could locate sources of iron closer to home. A study of Iron Age artifacts in Denmark revealed that iron was primarily sourced from bog iron in local wetlands and smelted using charcoal from nearby forests.
This technological shift had profound political consequences. Since iron could be processed locally, previously marginalized communities were able to equip themselves with weapons comparable to those wielded by the elite within the core of the empire. Unlike bronze, iron democratized access to violence.
Fitzsimmons’s insights resonate with Luke Kemp’s Goliath’s Curse. Kemp characterizes “civilization” as a construct of armed factions that seize power to exploit natural resources and labor for personal gain:
As the post-Ice Age climate warmed, Kemp notes a notable “shift toward social relations defined by dominance hierarchies,” largely fueled by increasing access to “lootable resources,” such as grain, which enabled individuals and groups to amass not only wealth but also power. Alongside resource acquisition, the other two “sources” of Goliath fuel were “monopolizable weapons” for plunder and “caged land,” which refers to resources or individuals unable to escape subjugation. Often, groups sought to flee from powerful aggressors, if they had the means to do so.
Michael Hudson’s research on debt in the Ancient Near East complements these ideas:
This narrative is echoed in Michael Hudson’s Killing the Host (2015). Hudson emphasizes how debt allowed the wealthy to accumulate more resources, often by seizing farmland from indebted farmers unable to repay loans for seed grain, or by converting them into slaves. Eventually, this depletion would leave rulers with a diminished workforce, tax base, and military. Hudson illustrates how debt has led to the downfall of entire empires, prompting rulers to periodically annul debts.
At the conclusion of the Links article, Fitzsimmons reflects on the impact of emerging technologies today, questioning whether they serve as centripetal or centrifugal forces:
A contemporary example is drones, which have revolutionized warfare in the Russia–Ukraine conflict and reportedly caused up to 80 percent of recent fatalities as of 2026. A drone that costs only a few hundred dollars can threaten tanks, artillery, or command posts valued significantly higher. The advent of drone warfare has lowered the barriers to entry in conflicts, enabling small guerrilla groups to challenge dominant powers more effectively.
Additionally, we can find parallels in the realm of AI. While access to AI technology is decentralized and open to many individuals, it carries the potential for destructive use. However, companies providing AI technologies hold the power to centralize control by restricting access, akin to the advantage enjoyed by Bronze Age leaders who monopolized tin supplies.
Indeed, while Fitzsimmons accurately notes that AI can empower individuals or entities acting outside of established state systems to cause disruption, this potential remains contingent on the permissions granted by technology owners. Operating AI requires vast resources, including energy and specialized infrastructure, far beyond the capability of an individual with a simple laptop. Clearly, AI functions as a centripetal force within human society, enabling unprecedented surveillance and repression.
Additionally, Joseph Tainter’s explorations on the inherent complexity within civilizations are relevant in this context. Tainter asserts that civilizations often become ensnared in a spiral of complexity, requiring progressively more energy to maintain their systems until they ultimately collapse when they can no longer meet these elevated demands.
