My favorite book about this is Lucifer's Hammer: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer%27s_Hammer
Not perfect but certainly echoes the article's theme that we'll still be in society, even after a catastrophe, and will have to work within it.
The only solutions here are big systemic. It cannot even be attacked at a local level.
What does a local community do when the wells and reservoirs dry out?
Where do they get the food from when there's country wide shortage?
Rationing only goes so far.
James Burke is a science historian and BBC documentarian, and in his first episode of "Connections" a series on the nature of innovation, he talks about how fragile our complex infrastructure can be, and, much like this article, how hopeless individualist survival skills would be once we "leave our technological womb".
In his later series, After the Warming, a 1988 documentary which imagines what it would look like in 2050 if we failed to act on climate change (in which it predicted refugee crises, wars, hurricanes, mass flooding), and looks back on thousands of years of climate shaping civilizational rise and collapse, from the Ice Age to the Nabataeans to today and beyond. It gets most things scarily right, with the notable exception of failing to see Japanese economic bubble popping in 1991.
If you manage to live a year most of the original violence will have passed. You will need to start to build a life where you can make and store foodstuffs to survive through seasons where food is more scarce (I live on 66°N, winter would be harsh). Hopefully you will be in a small band of survivors that are pooling strengths to get by and can learn farming all over again.
If you do survive this period then on a timescale of decades small camps of survivors will be able to connect and start to build back up again.
Like food or the tools necessary to get food? Kind of hard to survive without that.
No, I think the OP is absolutely right. Humans are social animals, and large groups of humans are more powerful than small ones. Those who survive will be those who join the best groups. And the best way to ensure you're in a good group is to use your abilities to shape your group into a good group.
One year is good for surviving something local, like a hurricane or landslide or such.
Many mormons are "preppers" in that their religion urges them to stockpile up to a year of food.
Well, those are the "annoying vegans" of the prepper world. That or folks using publicity to scare up interest and sell you things here and now.
Any prepper with an actual interest in long-term survival knows the importance of OPSEC.
I think you're experiencing selection bias.
You can (a) run away and watch them starve or (b) rush the compound and hope to get some food.
Threats -- and demonstrations -- of violence are only reliable if the person being threatened has something to lose.
I'm not convinced that people would be rational about their prospects if they were being shot at.
If there's a 90% chance you die storming the compound, a 10% chance you survive storming the compound and obtain food and a 100% chance you die if you don't find food soon, why wouldn't you take the chance at survival?
I admit many of us have fantasies of climate-change-apocalypse working out like that, but the author is correct: we will not be facing a sudden collapse of society allowing small bands of survivors to go live on farms, at least not in the first world.
Instead, in the first world, the effects we'll feel are billions of climate refugees moving across the world in search of safety and arriving at our borders. There will be there current border arguments x1000, and we'll either have to deal with the economic impact of having refugees or the moral impact of not. But those aren't the kinds of triggers that will suddenly lead to people going and founding communes in the remains of society.
I've read articles about Syria being the first casualty in the coming migrant wars due to climate change.
Closest places will get hit first.
The best business is a protection racket. Establish martial superiority before someone else does. You can even offer a nicer protection racket than the others. But you’re gonna need organized firepower if you want to keep any of the wealth you produce in the long term
And if you study real doomsday periods in history, the plague, the fall of the roman empire and such things, in the end society somehow survived. During the plague even wars that have started before it continued. And England kept the state and government prett much going.
And the larger, long term changes and impacts most likely cannot be mitigated on the individual level. Certainly not by stockpiling on stuff.
Suppose the global trade is hit, you don't have enough food and growing things locally becomes impossible. Will you find someone brilliant enough to solve it in a small community? It's not very likely... War is more likely.
Look into what happened after Black Death epidemics.
We take for granted at the moment how critical law and law enforcement is for the stability of our society, and the major reduction in violence, civilization has enjoyed. 
Evolution has favored an evolutionary stable strategy, basically a Nash equilibrium, between those who would exploit, those that are passive, and those that fight back when exploited.  A collapse of civilization would mean that as a society, we’ll have to recover and restore systems that allow us to cooperate and fend off those willing to exploit others for their own gain.
Interesting thing to think about... in the past century, Earth's population has quadrupled, with most of that occurring along coastlines. That means we built enough housing in a century to accommodate four times as many people in those coastal cities. Why can't we just keep building? Population growth has mostly leveled off (we're looking at no more than 50% population increase over the next century, probably less), and we have much better tools now than we had then. If New Orleans floods, you don't necessarily need to move to Kansas to escape it - and the mouth of the Mississippi will continue to be a vital trade corridor even if the oceans rise.
The changes are generational in timespan. Think that way.
It's not like an event labeled "climate change" is going to hit us next Thursday and we're suddenly going to be reduced to roving bands of survivors who will be wishing they had signed up for that survival training class yesterday.
I'd worry more about getting our government officials to put more resources into disaster preparedness than I would how to start a fire or how best to lead a band of frightened survivors.
The big problem here is that such preparations ahead of time are not exactly economically viable, and mostly impossible "just in time" as they require systemic changes.
Once these pressures are bad enough, we'll have a big problem.
And at what scale are we talking? A local community, or a nation, or the world? The instantaneous collapse of global civilization, with no instantaneous trigger, seems unlikely to me. The idea that no government will be able to stand and keep order, from the UN to the US on down to every town in the world? Nah.
I play a game sometimes in my head. It's a kind of speculative daydream. In this daydream, I'm sitting around a campfire with my band of fellow survivors. Things have calmed down and we've settled into a groove. The "game" has no name, but if it did it would be called "nostagia". Everyone goes around the circle and says something they miss from the old civ that they took for granted:
"I miss my dentist."
The breakdown of civilization will be horrifying.
I have been a self-decribed "Apocalyptic" since sometime in my early teens. I took a look at what people were up to in re; technology and the environment and decided that we could kiss our asses good-bye in maybe fifty years. That was about thirty years ago and we are right on schedule.
The first problem is going to be water. Then food. There's only about three days worth of food in a modern city at any given time. If the production and transportation system seriously breaks down for more than a week over a large enough area... Well, as the fellow from New Guinea said to the missionary, "If God didn't want us to eat people He wouldn't have made us out of meat." Check your history books if you dare, but I don't advise it unless you have a strong stomach. Heh.
Best advice to survive a serious breakdown of civilization: "Live someplace three days farther than a hungry person can walk."
The best time to prepare for this bleak future is now, before it happens. If you're not prepared to move to the middle of nowhere and set up a self-sufficient homestead then you had better get serious about fixing our global problems.
This is where "it will be empathy, generosity, and courage that we need to survive. Kindness and fairness will be more valuable than any survival skill. Then as now, social and leadership skills will be valued. We will have to work together. We will have to grow food, educate ourselves, and give people a reason to persevere. The needs will be enormous, and we cannot run away from that. Humans evolved attributes such as generosity, altruism, and cooperation because we need them to survive. Armed with those skills, we will turn towards the problem, not away from it. We will face the need, and we will have to solve it together. That is the only option. That’s what survival looks like."
It's this moment right now. You're living it. This is what the breakdown of civilization looks and feels like. Where are the insects? Where are the birds? The weather is weird. There are strange signs in the Heavens. Someone is trying to tell you something.
We have solutions.
Permaculture and other kinds of applied ecology can save our bacon: it's fun and easy to get back in touch with Nature (and she's delighted to have you back!) Things like the "Core Transformation Process" are algorithms for overcoming our problems and baggage. It's there, it works. Or just "Non-Violent Communication", etc. Or find Jesus and live up to His expectations.
Change your life, start with your diet, it's healthy to eat food grown in healthy ecosystems: foster some. We can do this, "we have the technology", it's up to us.
"...it will be empathy, generosity, and courage that we need to survive. Kindness and fairness will be more valuable than any survival skill"
If you're interested in a concrete discussion of what a collapse may look like this is not for you. He says it won't hurt to know survival skills and that mainly you should learn to be kind (as if you missed that lesson in pre-k). One thing is for certain; he's definitely a paragon of morality. I mean.. you can't write an article like that without being totally rock solid.