Global catastrophe / SHTF "survivable locations"

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Singularity

Basically consistent with the old practice known as premeditatio malorum. We all do this to a degree, but it seems that the more you do it, the better off (and less anxious) you are. Otherwise it supports the point that, just like not all who wander are lost, not all who plan for the worst are pessimistic doomsayers.

Inversion: The Crucial Thinking Skill Nobody Ever Taught You

When I was in business I was always preparing for what may happen, regularly did a swot analysis , Strengths, weaknesses , opportunities and threats. By not putting ones head in the sand one has a better chance. And yes, it amazes me how the devotees of the religion of optimism a quick to label people that question as pessimistic.

I now apply the "what ifs" to cruising, it instills confidence.

[outbound_308]

I would respectfully disagree. It depends how bad it gets. One could use The Newfoundland crisis or the great depression as examples and I think that lends credence to your statement. If we look at Venezuela, Haiti, Somalia, Rwanda, Russia etc we start seeing examples of the haves vs. the have nots quickly turning into the weak vs. the strong. I do think cruising is a viable solution. As Sojourner stated probably the best you could do is ten years self sufficient, but I think that ten years would be better than being involved in the turmoil and allow you to separate yourself until things get back to an equilibrium.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by daletournier

...And yes, it amazes me how the devotees of the religion of optimism a quick to label people that question as pessimistic...

Consider recalling the relatively contemporary philosopher Marcuse. I don't mean to promote his vision of a better future, but I think most opt-out sailors agree with his assessment on the here-and-now (see wiki for his book One Dimensional Man). He's not so keen on optimism zealots/power-of-now folks/Bertrand Russell turkeys:

Marcuse promotes the "great refusal" (described at length in the book) as the only adequate opposition to all-encompassing methods of control. Much of the book is a defense of "negative thinking" as a disrupting force against the prevailing positivism

[ClassicalBGP]

Originally Posted by daletournier

When I was in business I was always preparing for what may happen, regularly did a swot analysis , Strengths, weaknesses , opportunities and threats. By not putting ones head in the sand one has a better chance. And yes, it amazes me how the devotees of the religion of optimism a quick to label people that question as pessimistic.

I now apply the "what ifs" to cruising, it instills confidence.

I cannot comment upon where to go etc… I believe every SHTF event is situational. Yet, I truly agree with this post. I do not have a bunker or 6 guns for every member of the household. I truly do not want to see a any SHTF situation, I like my weekend sailing trips to the lake, going to the movies, and most of all seeing a doctor if I get sick. But, I do believe in being somewhat prepared, be it for even a personal level SHTF like job loss etc… So, yes I have six months of food stuck in the closet and I hope I never have to use it.

[Hardhead]

Originally Posted by outbound_308

I would respectfully disagree. It depends how bad it gets. One could use The Newfoundland crisis or the great depression as examples and I think that lends credence to your statement. If we look at Venezuela, Haiti, Somalia, Rwanda, Russia etc we start seeing examples of the haves vs. the have nots quickly turning into the weak vs. the strong. I do think cruising is a viable solution. As Sojourner stated probably the best you could do is ten years self sufficient, but I think that ten years would be better than being involved in the turmoil and allow you to separate yourself until things get back to an equilibrium.

I agree - staying out of the chaos, for as long as possible, is probably the best bet. I'd still be wary of a real threat of piracy, and deception, on the high seas however. All kinds of evil can sustain itself in a prolonged SHTF event.

[newhaul]

Have noticed several posters stating they are somewhat prepared with quantities of food stored . That's good ( don't forget the water )
just remember to cycle that food so none of it is so old that its not any good anymore.
We all have cans of food on the boat that has been there for years :-):-)
the other day I myself found a can of stew that was 12 years old. Opened it ( outside ) still smelled and looked ok but I threw it anyway. ( I'm crazy not nuts).

[Hardhead]

It might be worthwhile to keep 5 gallons of dried beans and rice around. From what I understand, most grocery stores would be bare in 3 days without resupply. With no electricity, most stored frozen food would probably start going bad after 3 days as well.

[ClassicalBGP]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Have noticed several posters stating they are somewhat prepared with quantities of food stored . That's good ( don't forget the water )
just remember to cycle that food so none of it is so old that its not any good anymore.
We all have cans of food on the boat that has been there for years :-):-)
the other day I myself found a can of stew that was 12 years old. Opened it ( outside ) still smelled and looked ok but I threw it anyway. ( I'm crazy not nuts).

Water is very important in AZ. But, that is covered as well. I do not live in a city (city water is not piped in), so we have a well and storage tank.

I am not a 1000 cans of beans or MRE kind of person. I tend to buy stuff that the family likes to eat. Each December we go through the closet and anything expiring the next year we pull and replace. We eat some, the rest goes to food banks before the holidays, we try not to waste anything.

I have never considered myself a "prepper," because that terms carries a certain stigma with it. But, more of a boy scout -- "be prepared".

12 years? I would pass as well.

[Mike OReilly]

The point I was making citing the Newfoundland response to 9/11 is that most people tend to come together to support each other — even strangers — when faced with a serious crisis.

Many peppers (and a few comments here) focus on the need for protection from the roving bad guys. There will be these idiots, but most of humanity will respond humanly, even to strangers.

What may be enlightening is to consider examples where people responded poorly to SHTF scenarios. What made them different?

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

What may be enlightening is to consider examples where people responded poorly to SHTF scenarios. What made them different?

that would seem to be quite a bit easier to gauge than one would think .

How they react to a shtf situation it seems has a lot to do with what the regional societal norm seems to have been prior to the incident.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by newhaul

that would seem to be quite a bit easier to gauge than one would think .

How they react to a shtf situation it seems has a lot to do with what the regional societal norm seems to have been prior to the incident.

Agreed. I bet if we looked at levels of what researchers generally call “social capital” we might find interesting correlations between how various peoples react to SHTF scenarios.

Here’s one site with a treasure trove of data:

https://ourworldindata.org/trust

[crankysailor]

Originally Posted by newhaul

that would seem to be quite a bit easier to gauge than one would think .



How they react to a shtf situation it seems has a lot to do with what the regional societal norm seems to have been prior to the incident.

exactly.. everyone knows Canadians are nice folk [emoji51].. and Newfoundland is not the most densely populated part of Canada either..So it is easy for folks to be nice to each other..it is what you do every day!

Things got real ugly real fast after Katrina cause well...sorry but a lot of people in the area already deal with situations that would qualify as SHTF for someone from Newfoundland (I am really trying so hard to avoid saying Newfie :-) on an everyday basis.. where people would shoot you for the change in your wallet, what do you think would happen when survival is at stake?

So, do I believe there are groups of humans that are decent and regular nice folk willing to help each other in hard times? of course. But when the SHTF..and I mean really hit the fan..when the last life raft is being launched, people will punch, kick and scream to be on it, even if it means the death of a neighbor. And if there is just not enough water to survive for everyone, you are not going to sacrifice your child going thirsty so that the neighbor can have a sip. It is just survival instinct.

[Sojourner]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Agreed, but basic bread that is pretty darn easy, and still very yummy. In a SHTF scenario, I doubt anyone is going to turn up their nose on any bread, crusty or not .

Yasss.... when I lived out of the VW bus in former yugoslavia for a while, I made indian chappati bread almost every day. Literally nothing but flour, water and a little salt, knead it for 5 min, roll flat pancake shapes, and cook in a dry frying pan for a few minutes on med flame. Delicious, pretty low fat for bread, goes with anything. Works great on the boat too....

Also, Mike, when the shtf, i think imma sail in your direction. Pretty much every time you post anything, I'm sitting here with my cats in my lap and coffee in hand, nodding in agreement.....

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by crankysailor

exactly.. everyone knows Canadians are nice folk [emoji51].. and Newfoundland is not the most densely populated part of Canada either..So it is easy for folks to be nice to each other..it is what you do every day!

Things got real ugly real fast after Katrina cause well...sorry but a lot of people in the area already deal with situations that would qualify as SHTF for someone from Newfoundland (I am really trying so hard to avoid saying Newfie :-) on an everyday basis.. where people would shoot you for the change in your wallet, what do you think would happen when survival is at stake?

But why? What is it about some areas that make them more — humane? I suspect it has something to do with a sense of community; of being connected to your neighbours.

It’s not just population density, although I completely agree that resource stress is a prime driver of human misery and conflict. And sure, when the last seats are being handed out in the ultimate lifeboat, the nicest people may turn ugly. But there’s a wide gulf between the Titanic sinking out from underneath people, and other broad community SHTF crisis.

Katrina is the major dark example that comes to mind. Contrast that to the more common story of people helping people in times of crisis. And not just Newfoundlanders, or Canadians . It happens everywhere, all the time. It’s the (more) common story of humanity.

But how do we get from Newfoundlanders to New Orleaners (to put it simply)? Access to resources for sure. Population density is a major factor, but lots of communities around the world live with resource stresses, in remote and isolated areas, and yet they do not all result in the Katrina stories.

Originally Posted by Sojourner

Yasss.... when I lived out of the VW bus in former yugoslavia for a while, I made indian chappati bread almost every day. Literally nothing but flour, water and a little salt, knead it for 5 min, roll flat pancake shapes, and cook in a dry frying pan for a few minutes on med flame. Delicious, pretty low fat for bread, goes with anything. Works great on the boat too....

Mmmmm, sounds delicious. I used to make a lot of pan breads when canoe tripping. Now that I’m living the life of Reilly () on my luxurious sailboat, I have easy access to a full oven, so rarely do them. But you’ve got me thinking about it again. I’ll have to get the old recipes out .

Originally Posted by Sojourner

Also, Mike, when the shtf, i think imma sail in your direction. Pretty much every time you post anything, I'm sitting here with my cats in my lap and coffee in hand, nodding in agreement.....

I’m petting my cat, sipping my coffee, and agreeing with you .

[GordMay]

It seems that there are several fundamental and distinctly different categories of SHTF scenarios*, the consequences of which, will each prompt differing responses, each (in turn) begetting unique repercussions.
* ie:
Short-term surviving an immediate threat (Titanic scenario)
Evacuating a local emergency (Ca wildfire scenario)
Escaping a regional catastrophe (African refugees)
Surviving a global cataclysm (for which I have no example)

We should be mindful of the large and significant differences between acute & chronic threats, refugees & evacuees, and of insiders & outsiders. How we react, and how others (in turn) react to us, should be informed by some anticipation of the repercussions.