OddFiction wrote:
I don't like the choices presented.
I think we would become second in commands.
Grab the closest Public Figure type, and show the SOB how to improve what he's doing. I see us as being the type that could improve efficiencies in any system, solve puzzles, and issues. All from a logical perspective. What we need is to find someone else who can translate our solutions and suggestions into motivating group cooperation and goal setting.
That's how I see it. Not necessarily official second in command in some kind of hierarchy, but definitely idea people, the quiet ones who because of their obvious inability to lead, are not considered a threat to a leader's position. Since they're not a threat, the leader(s) can listen to them without losing status; they're just the nerdy idea guy, not a potential rival.
Note that if we were to have to live in small bands, hunter-gatherer style, while the damage got repaired, we might start out with strong leaders to get over the crisis (and those strong leaders would be pretty much anyone willing to give orders), but would end up with more of a cooperative leadership style. Because these are small groups, the leaders have to work, too; they have to be liked by others. Someone who takes advantage of others is quickly deposed in situations like this. Successful leaders would be people who are best at coordinating and organizing the efforts of others--think, a competent supervisor, rather than a rich CEO.