This prepping lark doesn't seem very socialist

[FunnysInLaJardin]

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

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! When you're tired of London, you're tired of life!

exactly what kind of apocalypse are we talking about?

I think the first question would be 'is it even worth surviving'?
Given the choice of a quick death or a slow lingering rotting away from starvation, disease or radiation sickness I prefer a quick death

That's not the first question. Because human nature means people try to live through the initial issue, whatever it is. I'd rather do that efficiently.

In our case, it's the Cascadia earthquake... www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one

Believe me, after three days the UK without electric the Home Counties will look like downtown Aberjan. Supermarkets will have no food, petrol stations without fuel, no water, no gas, sewage backing up.

It WILL be every man for himself.

are there any real life instances that we can extrapolate from?

Sarajevo? New Orleans? Some crises hit and are resolved quickly, some take weeks. Let's be honest, WWII is only 70 years ago. That's not that long...

Greek people flogging life jackets filled with paper. Profit at the expense of a life. People are not necessarily nice, and that's not even in a life for a life situation.

Stop thinking someone is going to give you their last pint of milk. They're not.

Urban areas would be catastrophically bad very quickly. Country areas where people have naturally prepared for snow storms and the like are better prepared and people tend to help each other than relying on 'the authorities' who largely dont exist outside towns.

I think you are right stratter5 , it's the minority that help unless there is a big group push or media around.

^ so true. In the sticks we already have a community which look out for others. Nobody lies dead for weeks without being found and nobody is homeless. Supermarkets don't deliver but no "little old ladies" go without deliveries. Community action in action.

This "the government will sort it" baffles me - especially when it's oft the socialists spouting it - who are usually loudly proclaiming how useless the government is. Wait and see eh?

Am I the only "prepper" who gets nervous about being potentially stranded in a city when there's a disaster? I was in LA last year for work and my first morning there was an earthquake of 6.4 and I was all "oh for the love of god"! ;)

The thing is that in the countryside everyone stores food and fuel or grows or gathers it. Towns have barely 1 week supply of any essential life sustaining resource.

Yes, I've only lived here for 4 years, yet I know everyone, and everyone knows me. We do all look out for each other, but we do all also know who is unreliable and unlikely to be a team player. This is how we used to live, the big, anonymous city full of individuals is a very recent thing, and does nothing to encourage community spirit.

m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10100517468616382&id=84104259&set=a.567971658922.2079938.84104259&source=48

I am looking forward to watching this.

Looks rather good, howto.

We are well set up in our country home, as long as we can get through the snow. If it gets really bad, we'd get out on our motorbikes and emergency bags only. Kids can each ride with one of us. Any minor power failure/storm situation, we'd stay in the city. We did have a local power cut situation about a year ago, most uncomfortable!

Thank you for the book tip Ispiderman just started reading it

swisscheesetony I don't really see why having savings and emergency preparedness for crisis situations should inevitably be perceived as selfish rather than practical. In development work I've been involved in we did encourage people to use water filters and provide them to schools but also teach individuals about water purification, as well as looking at ways in which people could build up a savings system which made them less vulnerable to sudden shocks and financial crises. It's not a binary-give everything away and scratch out a subsistence living to qualify as unselfish, or else your mindset is 'I'm alright Jack'...

I'm not a prepper but I find your title a bit odd.

Is it compulsory to be a socialist?

But you indicated that us "preppers" should share with you - so I was just wondering why you don't currently share all your wealth with the food bank right now today.

Socialism only works if Capitalism has built up a pot for the socialists to spend. Preppers are preparing for the possibility of societal failure. Those that can't provide for themselves will first rely on family/neighbours etc possibily a wider setting. Those that fail to prepare will muddle along/steal/fail to survive. In the midterm it will be skills that are useful so true prepping means building skills as well as storing. True socialists don't exist imo the champagne socialists we currently see will probably struggle come the apocalypse/blackout/financial collapse.as their politics are to share (obviously not their money everyone else's) but come the collapse they will hoard like everyone else. Very interesting debate here at Lightning Towers on socialism and prepping.

I'm pretty confused by the accusatory tone in this thread tbh. For my part I wasn't talking about complete societal collapse (which is an interesting and more extreme context to consider theoretically) but more practical emergency preparedness for common crises, which includes developing basic life skills as well as preparing some resources. Not sure how that translates to either hypocrisy for not giving all my current possessions away to charity or alternatively expecting to mooch off other people in the event of a crisis

Don't worry about it warm that poster has confused you with somebody else.

Like yourself I'm interested in general
emergency preparedness (I've had to spend five figures on flood preparedness this year ) but all this gleeful Chicken Little end of the world stuff is really offputting. This thread has so much pointless impotent hostility.

The absolute worst part of preparing for natural disasters is having to wade through (mostly American) websites which mix hostility towards "liberals" with actually helpful advice.

MN generally has a healthy sense of humour and skepticism towards expensive scams so I do have high hopes generally for a dedicated preparedness board.

Socialism only works if Capitalism has built up a pot for the socialists to spend. Bully bully bullshit. One could argue that hunter-gatherer societies are 'pure' socialism. The gatherers collect and share most of the calories for the group. Hunters go out at intervals and get very much needed protein, which is valuable and sought after. Neither could exist without the other. Elders are needed for their knowledge. Teenagers are needed for their energy and risk-taking. Children are often communally looked after by the group.

Don't get me wrong I believe in pure socialism all working all sharing all benefiting but that is not what happens in modern society. I am neither socialist nor capitalist.. The point raised was that prepping by its very nature isn't about sharing. It's a very interesting thread title and worthy of discussion and the question an earlier poster said if you would share come the apocalypse why aren't you now? Modern socialists do spend without generating to match; Hunter gatherers didn't. Equally Hunter gathers probably wouldn't have tolerated scroungers they would have been driven out. In reality Hunter gatherers were probably benign dictatorships: living conditions were far too hard for democratic debate and no non benign dictator could have held groups together for long. They definitely weren't socialists prime meat/furs would have gone to the strongest.

Equally Hunter gathers probably wouldn't have tolerated scroungers they would have been driven out. In reality Hunter gatherers were probably benign dictatorships: living conditions were far too hard for democratic debate and no non benign dictator could have held groups together for long. They definitely weren't socialists prime meat/furs would have gone to the strongest.

Obviously, it's difficult to know exactly what all H-G groups did but the evidence from surviving groups is that they were not as you describe.

Living conditions were hard in some ways (lack of medicine, issues with weather) but actually in terms of day to day work, they were not working every hour. They were not dictatorships, benign or not but collectives. Scroungers were not 'driven out' necessarily. More likely (and this is seen in more than one culture) shamed. Piling lots of food up out side their living space is a common theme.

Prime meat probably went to the hunters; their need for protein was greater. But get too arsey with that and you will find that the gatherers would just eat their stuff as they gather and the calories you rely on to live (gathering is much more reliable) would dry up.

There were instances of 'crime' which could be punished with banishment or maiming or death (all of these really are a death sentence). These seem to be rare.

Once fixed agriculture starts, this changes out of all recognition. Strength wins when you can hoard and control food. The biggest gets the prize.