Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 | >
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Survival Prep (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=141)
- - Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=269603)

Caligula | 05-30-2008 08:01 AM
Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. http://www.energybulletin.net/20051.html Original: http://transitionculture.org/2006/09...-got-it-wrong/

brosil | 05-30-2008 08:11 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Yeah ok. He has his opinion, I have mine. I think I'll just muddle along doing what I'm doing.

Glass | 05-30-2008 08:28 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. what a tosser. now that survivalist is a dirty word you have dribble like this. Its thick with double think. He says you cant go live in the country because you're on your own and you can't do it all yourself. He also says you don't know nothing about growing food. For 1, I think isolationist survivalists are a smaller %. Most survivalists will still live near towns and interact. And for 2 I think its better to be learning the lessons now when there is still access to ready supplies. I would not want to be learning lessons that meant I was going hungry for months because a crop was ruined. complete idiot. I hope this stuff doesn't spread. its hard enough getting people moving as it is.

Twisted Avatar | 05-30-2008 08:39 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by brosil (Post 1124608) Yeah ok. He has his opinion, I have mine. I think I'll just muddle along doing what I'm doing.
Basically....... We will see who comes up short in due time. T

TLM | 05-30-2008 08:58 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. At least the guy admits TS could HTF. Most of the people I know think I'm speaking Chinese when I talk about stuff like this. Rolling eyes, blank stares or laughing

Merlin | 05-30-2008 09:13 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. First of all, I object to the term "survivalist." It suggests that I'll be lucky to squeak buy, lucky if I don't freeze to death, a mentality that most of us at GIM do not share. Look at Tn...Andy and his wife. They look prepared to thrive regardless of what happens. Second, the idea of bugging out to some place in the woods, far removed from civilization of any kind, is a myth. I read an article some months back that said that there was one spot in Yellowstone National Park that is 30 or 40 miles from the nearest road. Everywhere else in the U.S. is laced with highways and roads laid out regular as clockwork, usually no more than a quarter to half mile apart. The mere idea that you can really get away from access to other people is pure myth. The frontier in the U.S. is gone, kaput. Third, survivalists exist on a kind of spectrum. Some people preparing for Peak Oil actually intend to stay in the city (a really bad idea in my view.) And, of course, many want to get as far out into the country as possible (no matter how near to people that may actually be.) But the vast majority of those preparing for Peak Oil already recognize that long-term survival is only possible within the context of community. None of us have the skills and resources that would enable us to live well without other human beings. The author refers to a very small sub-set of survivalists, not the mainstream.

ProblemSolver | 05-30-2008 09:25 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. I haven't had a chance to read the entire article, though I intend to (and the comments). I did notice, however, that it was written in Sept, 2006. I'm wondering if the recent food riots in Asia, etc. have had any impact on his way of thinking. Probably not. Of course, we ALL know they weren't really rioting, they were holding hands and singing...

Twisted Avatar | 05-30-2008 09:28 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by ProblemSolver (Post 1124710) I haven't had a chance to read the entire article, though I intend to (and the comments). I did notice, however, that it was written in Sept, 2006. I'm wondering if the recent food riots in Asia, etc. have had any impact on his way of thinking. Probably not. Of course, we ALL know they weren't really rioting, they were holding hands and singing...
Yeah........... just "slight misunderstanding" about how foood should be distributed. :bull-buddy-icon: T

Avalon | 05-30-2008 09:37 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin (Post 1124693) Second, the idea of bugging out to some place in the woods, far removed from civilization of any kind, is a myth. I read an article some months back that said that there was one spot in Yellowstone National Park that is 30 or 40 miles from the nearest road. Everywhere else in the U.S. is laced with highways and roads laid out regular as clockwork, usually no more than a quarter to half mile apart. The mere idea that you can really get away from access to other people is pure myth. The frontier in the U.S. is gone, kaput. .
Umm, no it's not a myth...I have my place in the woods all picked out. :D I plan on being FAR away from people WTSHTF. It may not be total isolation but it takes some effort to get there. It has limited access and it can be guarded like the pass in Sparta.. :bear_tongue: I spent some time at Yellowstone. The place is huge. A person could disappear there if they had supplies. Surviving the wonder would be very hard through...

DogFarm | 05-30-2008 09:38 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. I like to think of my preps as a very cheap form of insurance. When things go bad, they seldom go bad on schedule or when you expect them. Enough said

Twisted Avatar | 05-30-2008 09:47 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by Avalon (Post 1124736) Umm, no it's not a myth...I have my place in the woods all picked out. :D I plan on being FAR away from people WTSHTF. It may not be total isolation but it takes some effort to get there. It has limited access and it can be guarded like the pass in Sparta.. :bear_tongue: I spent some time at Yellowstone. The place is huge. A person could disappear there if they had supplies. Surviving the wonder would be very hard through...
especially when that supervolcanco erupts. :confused_ma: T

Avalon | 05-30-2008 09:48 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogforme (Post 1124738) I like to think of my preps as a very cheap form of insurance. When things go bad, they seldom go bad on schedule or when you expect them. Enough said
That's why Mountain House is great.. No expiration date and you can leave the stuff to your kids in your Will. :s9:

Avalon | 05-30-2008 09:53 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by Twisted Avatar (Post 1124749) especially when that supervolcano erupts. :confused_ma: T
TA, My Sister was part of a New Age group that went to Yellowstone and did a group meditation and prayer because they felt the volcano was at risk. I dont "do" group religion but I was not passing up a trip to Yellowstone. It actually turned out to be quite nice joining in... Yellowstone is simply magnificent. I have lived on the east coast my whole life and am used to the mountains here. I found Yellowstone to be almost surreal. I can see why so many people lose their heart to the area. Besides if the caldrea blows you might as well be on ground zero....

Ash_Williams | 05-30-2008 11:11 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Do you look around the house for other people and help those out that you can, or do you bolt out of the house at the first sniff of smoke? The survivalists are like the latter, like those who were first off the Titanic in the first lifeboats that were launched half empty. I deeply question the morality of responding to a crisis by running in the opposite direction and leaving everyone else to stew.
The author can deeply question whatever he wants while he starves. His point makes about as much sense as stepping onto the street at a crosswalk while a truck is speeding towards you on the road. "Oh well I have the right of way, if that truck hits me, the driver is in the wrong."

luft97 | 05-30-2008 11:19 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Maybe he is just jealous because he is not in a situation where he can't get out of his "city" life so he has to think up reasons why it's not such a great idea. For me if nothing happens that's just fine. I want to get back to my roots, if nothing happens that will be great but once I'm settled in I won't be coming back.

THE FRENCH BLACK SHEEP | 05-30-2008 11:22 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by TLM (Post 1124659) At least the guy admits TS could HTF. Most of the people I know think I'm speaking Chinese when I talk about stuff like this. Rolling eyes, blank stares or laughing
THE FIRST RULE OF SURVIVAL DO NOT SPEAK WITH ZOMBIES

Abouthadit | 05-30-2008 12:56 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by Avalon (Post 1124736) I spent some time at Yellowstone. The place is huge. A person could disappear there if they had supplies. ..
until the IR satellite passed overhead, then followed by the black helos with their IR, then UN ground troops with dogs and Tazers.

ShirleyUGeste | 05-30-2008 01:48 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. How funny that people like this author don't think twice about spending thousands of dollars a year for home, auto, life, rentrs, disability, medical, or business insurance (among dozens of others), yet they want everyone to believe that prepping is immoral/insane/irresponsible etc. My preps are the best form of insurance I can think of: if TS doesn't HTF, I get every bit of my "premium" payments back, since the food etc. is still usable; and if TSHTF I get my premiums back with a bonus ...I get to live. I'd say that's a pretty good insurance policy, wouldn't you? It beats anything Allstate has to offer.

CajunCoin | 05-30-2008 02:00 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. First, you must realize the source of this article is from the UK which has not had a major catastrophe since 1940-1945 and that one is dimmed out by the passage of time and the natural loss of people who lived through those times. Second, the UK is not like the US because of distances are closer and the society is more urban than the US. Due to the NannyState nature of the UK, most British have developed a very sheeple attitude towards disasters and can not understand things such as Katrina since their Civil defence is geared to moving the populance around, not the supplies. I have lived through KATRINA and RITA and my British Friends still ask why the GOVT took so long? (Moral of Story-don't depend on GOVT) The writer of the Article thinks and believes that survivalism is a concept based upon "Far Right wing Beliefs" when he has not fully investigated the movement. The amassing of Goods and material in case of emergency is beyond his pale since the UK has not had an actual emergency since WW2. Third, most non preparers do not understand how shortages can develop, communications can break down and utilities can be undependable due to their blind faith on Government, Industry and the Public Goodwill to keep things moving. First example is Katrina which overwhelmed the local Government's ability to provide material and manpower to alliviate the suffering and misery. If it would not have been for local charities/govt (outside the metropolitan area) Katrina could have been much worse, BUT THEY PREPARED AND HAD SOME RESOURCES!!!! Second, is the British in WW2 who were supplied beyond their home islands and did not have the resources at home to keep up the war effort. Without the USA, the UK by mid 1942 would have been powerless to stop the Jerries from parking their tanks in Picadilly Square!! Good supply lines are a must since no person is an island and self reliance is a must to repair and keep up you equipment and supplies. Victory Gardens in the UK became the standard and people who grew roses now had to grow their food since there was strict rationing in place. My Aunt's Brother (UK war Bride) recalls her brother in the Merchant Marine had picked up in Canada a load of wheat and brought home 2 100# sacks of flour for the family, a boon in those days. My aunt's mother recalled that flour in pre-war Britian was distained since bread could be bought cheaply, those who had some saved were ahead of the game. BTW-the flour lasted for about two years. Third, Look a Myanmar (Burma) and you see a GOVT unwilling to let others help since they are afraid losing control, this is a chilling prospect indeed and the reason why preparation is tantamount to survival. Don't mistake preparation to survive as a militant action but rather a common sense approach to have insurance against the unforseen. The Author does not realize how close he is to missing a meal since he has not missed any and does not realize that survival is up to each person.

momopanda | 05-30-2008 02:08 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. I think it's great article. I love when i see these things. I hope it was widely read and believed. Can you imagine what would happen if even 1% of the population started trying to order mountain house? (of course though I'd be pretty happy if they tried to buy some physical silver:wink:). I mean I hope it never comes to it , but I'm not in a position to worry about everyone else right now. Look at it as less competition for getting your stuff together.

nunaem | 05-30-2008 04:18 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. One comment: Quote:
I have the same sort of response to people (including my dad) who talk about the value of gold in a predicted time of hyperinflation. Like I’m gonna walking down the street with gold coins to the bartering market past starving neighbors! So as well the survivalist response seemed to offer little to me as an urbanite.
Am I the only one that gets a sort of sick satisfaction that all these fools who think they can provide for themselves AND everyone else when TSHTF, WITHOUT PREPARING, are going to starve? Don't they realize that people are starving AS I TYPE and there will NEVER be enough food to feed everyone?

DogFarm | 05-30-2008 04:20 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by ShirleyUGeste (Post 1125085) How funny that people like this author don't think twice about spending thousands of dollars a year for home, auto, life, rentrs, disability, medical, or business insurance (among dozens of others), yet they want everyone to believe that prepping is immoral/insane/irresponsible etc. My preps are the best form of insurance I can think of: if TS doesn't HTF, I get every bit of my "premium" payments back, since the food etc. is still usable; and if TSHTF I get my premiums back with a bonus ...I get to live. I'd say that's a pretty good insurance policy, wouldn't you? It beats anything Allstate has to offer.
excellent way of looking at it. what we are doing is basically 'self insuring' and thus, be it through the proverbial "beans, bullets and/or bullion" you pay a premium...yes, it can be argued that tying up $5K-$50k+ of USD in "premiums" means you lose out on a whopping 4% "risk free rate" at your local bank or S&L...or if you want to go to the world's largest casino and try and get a higher return....(his argument about being prepared leads to bad things happening has to be one of the worst arguments i've heard in my life.) but the great thing about self insuring is that if you don't need your policy you still have your premium. hell, with the way inflation is munching up the middle class you might even come out ahead (not including transaction and holding costs). and even better: if you DO NEED YOUR INSURANCE you can expect what, conservatively, a 2x return on your premium not including the value of your life, your family and your dogs.

mightyspuds | 05-30-2008 06:46 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. What a moron,rather die right off than at least try to save his and his families lives.Singing Kum-By-Yah! aint gonna cut it.

Unclad Lad | 05-31-2008 03:27 AM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin Second, the idea of bugging out to some place in the woods, far removed from civilization of any kind, is a myth. I read an article some months back that said that there was one spot in Yellowstone National Park that is 30 or 40 miles from the nearest road. Everywhere else in the U.S. is laced with highways and roads laid out regular as clockwork, usually no more than a quarter to half mile apart. The mere idea that you can really get away from access to other people is pure myth. The frontier in the U.S. is gone, kaput. Umm, no it's not a myth...I have my place in the woods all picked out. I plan on being FAR away from people WTSHTF. It may not be total isolation but it takes some effort to get there. It has limited access and it can be guarded like the pass in Sparta.. I spent some time at Yellowstone. The place is huge. A person could disappear there if they had supplies. Surviving the wonder would be very hard through...
There are places far from the road. The key is in the defintion of "road". In places like Yellowstone or Yosemite, there are are fire roads that tourists never see. There's no two-way traffic, no guard rails, and anytime outside the fire season there are muddy spots that could swallow Al Gore's ego whole. So that is a road as much as I-75 is, but the odds are the Golden Horde will not be marching to your doorstep on it. Quote:
until the IR satellite passed overhead, then followed by the black helos with their IR, then UN ground troops with dogs and Tazers.
Actually, Yellowstone would be a good place to hide from IR searching since there is so much geothermal activity. Park yourself 10 meters from a remote hot spring, and nobody will take a second look. As a bonus, if you're parked in a spot where the ground is much warmer than regular dirt, it'll make surviving winter much easier. So many possibilities...

thorgrim | 06-01-2008 06:35 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by Abouthadit (Post 1124992) until the IR satellite passed overhead, then followed by the black helos with their IR, then UN ground troops with dogs and Tazers.
It wouldn't be that easy for them to pick you out with IR. If you were within the tree line you would be mostly shaded from view. With all the critters like deer, elk, bears etc running around they would be getting all sorts of signatures. You would also be shielded by cloud cover sometimes as well. Now if you are walking in the desert where there is no cover and no animal sized animals around and few clouds than maybe they might spot you.

sirius007 | 06-01-2008 08:10 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. If Caligua is right, we all continue to live as we are from day to day, eating, drinking, marrying, and giving in marriage. If those that prepare for a SHTF scenario are right, I'm sorry to say Caligua could be a very sad camper. So, he'd better be right. In fact, I hope that he is. His life and most others are sadly vested in being right. And I'm sirius.

Ardent Listener | 06-01-2008 08:41 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by DogFarm (Post 1124738) I like to think of my preps as a very cheap form of insurance. When things go bad, they seldom go bad on schedule or when you expect them. Enough said
Isn't that the truth. I can't even time the silver market much less when it's going to hit the fan.

Irons | 06-01-2008 10:21 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. If you can kill and clean your own game and fish you will be OK.If not you will starve.Pretty simple.

Ash_Williams | 06-01-2008 10:26 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
If you can kill and clean your own game and fish you will be OK.If not you will starve.Pretty simple.
Does the author of that article count as 'game'?

Irons | 06-01-2008 10:38 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash_Williams (Post 1127941) Does the author of that article count as 'game'?
LOL! Mabe to a fellow city person.We will never get that hungry ourselves.The Manistee National Forest is full of food and thankfully not full of people.:wink:

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:08 AM. |
Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 | >
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM

Gold & Silver Forum - Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong.

Page 2 of 2 | < | 1 | 2
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Survival Prep (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=141)
- - Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=269603)

extremist | 06-02-2008 05:37 PM
Re: Why the Survivalists Have Got It Wrong. Hostility against a particular viewpoint often comes when someone is convinced of the opposite and doesn't like contrary evidence or arguments. But note that this goes both ways.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:08 AM. |
Page 2 of 2 | < | 1 | 2
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM