Advanced search

This prepping lark doesn't seem very socialist

(53 Posts)
FunnysInLaJardin Thu 29-Oct-15 23:09:16

what with the talk of warding off non preppers with knives and is it each man for him/herself come the apocalypse?

BreeVDKamp Fri 30-Oct-15 02:19:29


It sounds like prepping takes up an awful amount of storage space.

Oh the depths you reach, late night MNing!

CheerfulYank Fri 30-Oct-15 02:34:05

I think it probably would be every man (or family) for themselves for a bit, until society rebuilt itself.

costbenefit Fri 30-Oct-15 08:15:11

Large scale socialism needs a fully functioning infrastructure to be practical. Still, part of the reason I have more than I think my family is likely to need in the most probable situations is that I'd like to be able to say yes to a neighbour who came asking, without thinking it was her family or mine. Mine obviously comes first for me.

ArmchairTraveller Fri 30-Oct-15 08:22:02

I'm relying on the antisocial and indifferent attitude of the English.
If you can barely nod to your neighbour for ten years, you are unlikely to storm the house. I'll just ignore the tentative ringing of the doorbell.

Toomuch2young Fri 30-Oct-15 08:25:30

I would genuinely go and help out my elderly neighbours in the event of a disaster. As do people all over the world in times of need. I accidentally fell into the preppers board last week and although some of the ideas are sensible and a bit of water and candle storage and a weeks food are on my to do list, a lot of the mentality seems very strange to me. I agree op. Not the sort of society we are aiming for, surely?

ArmchairTraveller Fri 30-Oct-15 08:31:37

What preppers board? I thought we were in the process of asking for one.

I'd like a society that took care of its vulnerable as a priority, but that's not what we've got, is it? We look after ourselves and others as a personal choice, because the overall ethos is that most people don't care about those they don't have a direct interaction with.
As is demonstrated by the EC, the refugee crisis and the border closures.

swisscheesetony Fri 30-Oct-15 08:35:32

Oh gosh, will there be a collective islington whine of "but it's not faaaa-air" when shtf?

ArmchairTraveller Fri 30-Oct-15 08:36:51

They'll be stunned they can't outsource the problem.

Toomuch2young Fri 30-Oct-15 08:37:28

The Ebola board that's been taken over, that we are on now it would appear, so confusing when posts come up on active, don't know where we are! I wish it would have its own section too.
Huge numbers of us are interested in what is happening in Calais, Kos, Lesvos and others and are making a difference in the small ways we can.
The 'I'm alright Jack' attitude doesn't sit well with me and I don't mean that in a sanctimonious or preachy way. Just I couldn't sit around with my mountains of food and supplies while my vulnerable neighbours died around me confused. I don't really know the answer, and like I said I do think a bit of basic preping is a good idea and I am thankful to Mumsnet for learning those tips. But I agree with the op about not ever see on myself guarding off my starving neighbours at knife point!

ArmchairTraveller Fri 30-Oct-15 08:39:22

You think that's what MN preppers are saying in earnest? hmm
Rather than alongside snippets about eating cats and How To Kill A Zombie?
Where are you reading that?

ISpidersmanYouMeanPirate Fri 30-Oct-15 09:01:46

I don't read it as "alright Jack" at all.

I read it as being prepared for a change in circumstances, whether that comes from outside (and affects everyone) or inside (e.g. cash flow problems)

By stocking up on food, water etc. I'm providing for my family and not relying on someone else to provide it for me. That doesn't mean that if the water supply in my building gets cut off, I won't be going knocking on my neighbour's doors checking they've got enough water. Of course I'm not going to be sitting on my supplies of water giggling to myself that I've prepped and no-one else has hmm

Also, the more people are made aware of the value of prepping, the better it is for everyone.

warmastoast Fri 30-Oct-15 10:23:12

Where/ when there's a break down in infrastructure it's necessary for as many individuals as possible to have alternative means of survival. Or it could even be a personal emergency - a car breakdown in an isolated location.. for example if you did become a refugee with only one bag to carry what would you pack? Perhaps the thought seems remote to most in the UK but it's actually not so far from the lives of many. Once in a theatre group we recounted the stories of how our families came to the UK and almost everyone had in fact come as refugees at some point in the last century- pogroms, the Holocaust, Idi Amin's Uganda, Somalia, Bangladesh.. We might all be comfortable in the here and now but it's possible to have slightly longer memories of times of scarcity and instability and think it's worth learning about coping strategies for whatever scenarios you feel is most relevant.

suzannecaravaggio Fri 30-Oct-15 10:31:58

when there's a break down in infrastructure it's necessary for as many individuals as possible to have alternative means of survival

Not really
Only the useful would survive
When resources are very limited non contributing members are a threat to every ones survival

cozietoesie Fri 30-Oct-15 10:37:17 is it each man for him/herself come the apocalypse?...

I reckon so - if you assume that 'self' includes immediate family and if the troubles, whatever they are, last for anything other than a very short time. Fellow feeling is already a pretty thin skim on the surface of society and I doubt it will last long when put under strain, especially if there are no working laws to bring people up short.

I think that older people will be valued, though, because they have practical knowledge (in their heads) which would be needed for survival.

ISpidersmanYouMeanPirate Fri 30-Oct-15 10:48:36

I read "One Second After" by William R Fortschen. Basically an EMP bomb over America takes out anything with electronics in it.

People did survive by working as a community...eventually. It is hard to go against our ingrained fight for survival - but working together does help the fight for survival.

I won't say much more but it is an excellent book.

cozietoesie Fri 30-Oct-15 11:00:41

It's the 'eventually' though, Ispiders. Consider the attrition rate until people realized that self interest would best be served by working together. And how long did that take?

Stratter5 Fri 30-Oct-15 11:17:42

It is a great book, I've read it too. The After The Fire trilogy is also excellent, and illustrates well how we need to form communities.

The problem is identifying those who will be good for that community. You want hardworking people with a useful skill set, and a willingness to leach/teach/contribute what they can. Anyone else is going to take, rather than contribute. And it's far easier, and more energy conserving to take.

Still, that is assuming something truly awful happens. I'm more inclined to prep for short term inconveniences. The U.K. showing of The Blackout is probably a good starting point for what it could be like, watch the BBQ scene in particular, it illustrates what I think v well.

OnlyHereForTheCamping Fri 30-Oct-15 11:17:59

How many bottles of highland spring and tins of ravioli does one need to survive an apocalypse? #askingforafriend

suzannecaravaggio Fri 30-Oct-15 11:32:08

I think most would see immediately that freeriding is not an effective strategy and would be more than willing to pull their weight

cozietoesie Fri 30-Oct-15 12:10:12

You should meet my extended family, suzanne. wink I can only think of two or three of them that would be prescient enough to realize that within the family ! (And caring for your family is supposed to be genetically programmed.) Thinking of the overall community would be beyond them for a very long time. (Assuming that the balloon really went up - they'd be thoughtful enough for a few days of Troubles but it would soon wear thin, I think.)

MrsTerryPratchett Fri 30-Oct-15 13:31:01

Prepping for the short term emergency is actually very Socialist. The idea behind the 72 bags/supplies is that relatively fit, younger, non-vulnerable people should deal with themselves while the emergency peeps get the older people, people with disabilities and the vulnerable, sick and injured safe. Why should I use resources that could be used to help my elderly, blind neighbour? I want to wave the emergency responders along to her house. We should be alright.

In the longer term, I do think it is every one for themselves. Fact is the world can't support the amount of people that live here. It is only order, chemistry, plumbing and medicine that keeps the population at it's unsustainable levels. I'm in Canada which is resource rich and has a low population so I think we could sustain most of the population we have if the SHTF. The UK? Not in a million years.

swisscheesetony Fri 30-Oct-15 13:44:57

warmastoast Do you have any savings? It's just that if you do, isn't that rather "alright Jack"? Why don't you donate each and every penny you have to those less fortunate in the name of socialism? Maybe you have a house? Sell it, buy a caravan and donate the proceeds to the foodbank.

It's all hypocrisy otherwise.

MrsTerryPratchett Indeed. Adults are instructed to put their masks on in a depressurised cabin before assisting children and others struggling. What use am I to anyone if I've run out of coffee? In answer to Canada being resource rich, parts of the UK are too - but they're outside the M25 by a fair whack therefore most won't have heard of them! grin

suzannecaravaggio Fri 30-Oct-15 14:26:20

You should meet my extended family, suzanne. wink I can only think of two or three of them that would be prescient enough to realize that within the family
familes eh grin

but seriously in a modern prosperous society the cost of being caught taking the piss isn't too high so it's generally worth the risk

post apocalypse taking the piss means being abandoned by the group and probably captured and roasted for dinner by some other group.

The forces shaping peoples behavior would be very different

Stratter5 Fri 30-Oct-15 14:33:43

I think you've got it the wrong way round. Bad people gravitate towards each other in exactly the same way as good people do. And they have less scruples, and are waaay more inclined to use force.

It's exactly that that worries me; not the cause of any situation, the resultant breakdown of normal values. The weak will be preyed upon, that's basic nature, and when you're really hungry, scruples go out of the window.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: