It's kind of funny to me that so much post apocalyptic writing is so overly concerned with technology when technology without much wisdom was what likely caused the apocalypse in the first place.
And that's hardly something there's an easy how-to answer to.
A primitive tribe or band tends have each member strongly connected each other member since with few resources, the people are the resources. Modern people don't have to care in the slightest about their neighbors and this is weakness in an emergency situation.
Moreover, a "collapse" situation, in many instances, would imply a general social failure even more complete than recent problems we've seen (consider "I'd rather X many people die than the economy suffer [from Covid or limiting carbon pollution or etc"] a statement about non-community). I don't know how mainstream society would even come back from that. Perhaps the Amish would do well.
I live in central Pennsylvania, in Lancaster County - there's an Amish farm walking distance from where I sit.
I think about societal collapse a lot, and was just recently ruminating on how the Amish would do in that scenario.
They're clearly more prepared for it than most of us, but they're a bit more dependent on the outside world (or "the English", as they refer to us) than you might expect.
It's pretty common to see buggies parked at farm and tractor supply shops around here, and you'll even see them in the local ERs. When they sell stuff at farmer's markets I've seen a lot of plastic wrap, plastic containers, plastic bags, and aluminum foil. Some even have cars, depending on the sect.
All that said, they do live much simpler, lower-tech lives, with plenty of ingenious manually-powered tools (I once saw a mule-powered lawn mower in action while driving past a farm).
I expect they'd have some bumps adjusting, but that they'd mostly be able to, unlike the rest of us.
Most people will quickly assemble in groups/tribes/families. People can realize danger, and even independents will know when it's time. Chaos will be transitory and most people will be unaffected; however, supply lines will be limited to neighboring friendly tribes/villages. As a result, shipping things from the other side of the world will be expensive and slow. Products will make their way slowly, so you'll always get the end product but inefficiently.
No. Cities will be affected disproportionately but that's it. The crime rate is too low. Even if it x10, it'll be roughly the same as Brazil or El Salvador (which still has people and communities living there!).
> Criminal types will flourish taking what they will.
Corporations and large enterprises will likely be targeted more.
> Most will die from starvation pretty soon though.
No.
> Those who have some sort of food source will become huge targets very quickly.
People will trade with farmers; like they did before? Just food will become more expensive. There is massive food waste (especially in the US), and even places like Africa will be fine.
A post-Apocalyptic world is more about the collapse about the current order (current government, corporations, current powers) than the death of the people. Unless a nuclear winter sets, most people will be fine.
Looking at the world today you see societies crumble while others thrive. This, despite having access to the same or similar technology. The difference being in how they organize themselves and their vision of themselves.