• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Live as a survivalist or die?

Would you want to survive the collapse of society

  • Yes, survive at all cost

    Votes: 34 82.9%

  • No, better off dead.

    Votes: 7 17.1%
  • Total voters
    41
I have contemplated such on many occasions so much so that I have endeavored to develop and hone my skills, not from a paranoid stance but rather preparedness. The largest fear I have is infection. If one survives the first 2-3 months where the true radicals will be killed/die out the balance of life will be one’s ability to deal with nature.
 
Dickieboy said:
I have contemplated such on many occasions so much so that I have endeavored to develop and hone my skills, not from a paranoid stance but rather preparedness. The largest fear I have is infection. If one survives the first 2-3 months where the true radicals will be killed/die out the balance of life will be one’s ability to deal with nature.
Click to expand...

I saw one of those "End of the World" documentaries they were running a few months ago and the order of most likely mass kill scenarios was an epidemic first. Some new form of mutated virus or bacteria, highly infectious with a 2-3 incubation period and high death percentage. Then came massive solar flare knocking out the grid, super volcano, asteroid/comet strike, nuclear war etc. It's always people who live in remote places like down under or far north that have the highest survival rate.
 
I doubt we would devolved into COMPLETE lawlessness.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Very. Chaos is exciting.



For what? It'd provide me with a new form of entertainment. It'd be a fun social experiment I'd like to witness with my own eyes.
Click to expand...

I do not mean this in any derogatory sense, but chaos is not exciting. Chaos, events for which you are at their mercy, is not entertaining. Watching people you care for get hurt or die, is the least entertaining thing I can imagine.
 
One more thought, my father is a survivalist. The contemplation of the end of society was an anchor around my neck since I was old enough to understand it and until i could make my own life.

If any of you survivalists have children, consider not saddling them with end of the world talk while they are young. Preparation, fine, but constant vigilance and discussion about contemporary events and how those events could end life as they know it, not so much. Life is fraught enough with everyday worries for kids without end of the world talk on a regular basis.

/end of buzz kill
 
American said:
I doubt we would devolved into COMPLETE lawlessness.
Click to expand...

I wonder, tho, how the densely populated areas would fare when they run out of food.....should only take a week or so.
 
Gina said:
I do not mean this in any derogatory sense, but chaos is not exciting. Chaos, events for which you are at their mercy, is not entertaining. Watching people you care for get hurt or die, is the least entertaining thing I can imagine.
Click to expand...

I agree - most people who have survived a tragedy where those closest to them have died almost inevitably voice the wish that they had died with them.
 
Gina said:
I do not mean this in any derogatory sense, but chaos is not exciting. Chaos, events for which you are at their mercy, is not entertaining. Watching people you care for get hurt or die, is the least entertaining thing I can imagine.[/QUOTE

Agreed - I see no reason to relish a meager existence.
Click to expand...
 
Gina said:
One more thought, my father is a survivalist. The contemplation of the end of society was an anchor around my neck since I was old enough to understand it and until i could make my own life.

If any of you survivalists have children, consider not saddling them with end of the world talk while they are young. Preparation, fine, but constant vigilance and discussion about contemporary events and how those events could end life as they know it, not so much. Life is fraught enough with everyday worries for kids without end of the world talk on a regular basis.

/end of buzz kill
Click to expand...

Interesting viewpoint, Gina.

It strikes me as being similar to the preachers who hammer constantly about the end of the world coming the next week.

I cannot understand how these folks, when constantly proven to be wrong, keep singing the same song over and over again.

Being diligent and prepared is much different than being psychotic and paranoid about an event or time.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I agree - most people who have survived a tragedy where those closest to them have died almost inevitably voice the wish that they had died with them.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is cowardly, either. It seems to have been expressed in this thread that those who do not want to live as a survivalist, have no honor.

SMTA said:
Interesting viewpoint, Gina.

It strikes me as being similar to the preachers who hammer constantly about the end of the world coming the next week.

I cannot understand how these folks, when constantly proven to be wrong, keep singing the same song over and over again.

Being diligent and prepared is much different than being psychotic and paranoid about an event or time.
Click to expand...

It is very similar and just so I'm being fair, those who hammer on their kids about environmental end of times, and I have a friend who took this to an extreme placing the onus on kids under 10 for one thoughtless act, are just as bad.

Being prepared for catastrophes, as we have been made all too aware in the last decade (extreme weather events) is a good thing. A constant dialog about political foes coming to get us or bomb us (Russians in my day), is incredibly frightening in its powerlessness for a child.
 
Gina said:
I don't think that is cowardly, either. It seems to have been expressed in this thread that those who do not want to live as a survivalist, have no honor.
Click to expand...

An honorable death is better than a dishonorable life.
 
Gina said:
I do not mean this in any derogatory sense, but chaos is not exciting. Chaos, events for which you are at their mercy, is not entertaining. Watching people you care for get hurt or die, is the least entertaining thing I can imagine.
Click to expand...

Chaos is exciting. You never know what might happen; it keeps you on your toes! We have to watch people you care for get hurt or die all the time, nothing would change.
 
Oh, the "state of nature".

I'll push and try to live. Would need to be armed and ready at any time though.;)
 
MaggieD said:
I've already answered this post, but I had another thought. I don't have enough ammunition. Or enough guns.

It's not beyond the realm of possibility that power grids could be taken out by terrorists that would put us in the dark for 4-5 months. That's reality. If that ever happened, we would quickly revert to survival of the fittest. Bullets would count.
Click to expand...

I'm not a survivalist but I do have lots of guns and thousands of rounds of ammo. This book does have me thinking though how fragile our food infrastructure really is and it might not be a bad idea to have a few months of food laid in.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I'm not a survivalist but I do have lots of guns and thousands of rounds of ammo. This book does have me thinking though how fragile our food infrastructure really is and it might not be a bad idea to have a few months of food laid in.
Click to expand...

Food. Water. Cash. Silver. Gold.
 
This morning I took my usuall 2 mile walk down to my gate and back and along the way I found myself looking for the best observation post to watch the gate, how and where I would set up an ambush if some group of looters were making for my house. This damn book is getting in my head.:lol:
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Chaos is exciting. You never know what might happen; it keeps you on your toes! We have to watch people you care for get hurt or die all the time, nothing would change.
Click to expand...

Yes, there would be a dynamic change since the topic of this thread owes its premise to an unspecific calamity. That kind of chaos would not be exciting.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I am reading a book by James Wesley Rawles, Patriot. It is about the collapse of society and a group of survivalist fighting off roving gangs of looters. The picture he paints is very dark with prisons emptied out and no rule of law. The survivalist stay locked in a steel shuttered house filled with food and water and watch the world around them collapse in riots, rape robbery and murder. I just started the book and it may have a happy ending but it makes me wonder if things got that bad would I even want to survive. So I ask the question of you guys, survive or die, which is preferable?

By the way James has an interesting survival blog. SurvivalBlog.com
Click to expand...



My parents were Depression-era farmkids; my Dad was in World War Two. What some call "survivalism" my folks called "being ready for hard times".

"Never, EVER give up" is Clan McGoshin's motto. I was born to be alive. :mrgreen:



 
Those who think chaos would keep you on your toes would soon discover chaos fatigue. Just as in combat fatigue you can only take so much, no one is an endless fount of brave, unless of course it is on the interwebz... :)

Thinking those who have seen an endless parade of loved ones dying are rather clueless what this chaos will do to their loved ones.

Those who think the chaos world is close to their idea of the world they would like most likely would be the first killed off.

I tend to agree with American, there maybe areas where total lawlessness breaks out, lets face it most of suburbia is a week away from chaos if goods stop flowing in, BUT there won't be huge regions that lose any sense of order.

Now the book is a work of fiction and you must suspense disbelief to accept the story line. Some guys in Philly once brought this up, getting out of Dodge when it all goes south. Not likely. One thing I don't think many consider is a great many of the firearms so enshrined as home defense will be used by 1st time criminals looking for food or fuel to save their families. That and most modern houses are not even bullet resistant, much less proof.

My thought on if a huge region was to go rogue and the surviving parts too weak to restore law and order in the 'Badlands', the marauding bands will get better, not worse off. The weak and the reckless will perish, but the ruthless and skilled will continue. The hordes from the steppes that ran wild in Europe were the product of centuries of warfare on the steppes... some say those who invaded Europe were the LOSERS of the fights for the vast, rather empty steppes. Imagine if the winners came first!

most the honorable death/dishonorable life talk doesn't follow reality but seems more some community college course coffee discussion.

Best to just leave it at that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom