From the link above "Survialism: For peak oilers and ecotopians too?"

Looks like some in the community are finally waking up to human nature and the fact that its not going to be pretty on the way down. Bout time.

Fast crash=Somalia
Slow crash=Argentina

Got bullets?

The bottom line here is this: The Peak Oil movement has got to acknowledge that people under the circumstances of a fast crash are not necessarily going to be nice. Personally, I have met many other professional people around the country, who flatly admit, “I’m not worried about anything. Besides, if anything happens I’ve got a gun, so I’ll have food”. In addition, based on the message traffic on the internet previously mentioned, there are already people with their own plans to ‘go shopping,’ so to speak, at the expense of pre-announced, unarmed ecotopian communities, as one discussion board post has already stated. As someone who was forced to live in California’s foster care system during a previous period of fossil fuel scarcity (late 1970s), I am reminded that people will resort to whatever means to economically (or physically) survive, especially if that means exploiting the weaker members in that society.
.............

Being unarmed, and simply trusting everyone around you, when they happen to be struggling with their own survival, is not necessarily a good idea. Even in a slow crash, we will experience more crime in the form of break-ins, robberies, assaults, murders, etc. As Dmitry Orlov himself has stated in one interview conducted earlier this year, there were many people who simply disappeared during the societal decline following the collapse of the Soviet Union, who were likely murdered. These deaths were “hardly ever investigated, much less solved” (Orlov).

This is part of the madness of crowds as exemplified by the trampling to death of the Wal Mart employee yesterday. No doubt he was wearing a happy face. And they were just intent on getting a good deal on an HDTV. Imagine if they had been starving and there wasn't enough food on the shelves to go around.

On the other hand, arming oneself is no solution either. Once the shit hits the fan, we're all screwed regardless of whether or not we're armed. That just means you get to engage in a gun fight before dying.

"This is part of the madness of crowds as exemplified by the trampling to death of the Wal Mart employee yesterday."

This poor man should become the poster boy for Peak Everything. Perhaps someone could establish a Peak-related award in his name.

In pleasant ole South Florida over the last week there have been two violent late night armed robberies of customers and staff at Dunkin' Donuts.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl-flbdunkin1129sbnov29,...

An 84-year-old World War II veteran lost his teeth and most of his jaw because one of the robbers in the Delray Beach incident fired a shotgun into his face even though he had complied with demands.

A 56-year-old Vietnamese immigrant who was shot in the back at the Tamarac shop may never walk again.

An unsuspecting motorist in Delray Beach flashed his headlights at the robbers as they ran in the street. In return, one fired a bullet into the car windshield, wounding the driver in the face.

Tomorrow I get "fitted" for a pocket carry 9mm pistol (maybe 45ACP) - yes I am a CCW. Good to go with the home defense weaponry. I wish it was not so...

Pete

and for the house get a 12 guage pump action shot gun.

CCW
?? card carrying wacko ??

On the other hand, arming oneself is no solution either. Once the shit hits the fan, we're all screwed regardless of whether or not we're armed. That just means you get to engage in a gun fight before dying.

tstreet
I'm not going to give up my life that easy, but if you do...well its your choice. Being armed isn't intended to be a long term solution to anything, it may only would keep you alive another day. However, you can thank alot of men with guns for your freedom to post here. There is no solution, everything ends eventually..ask the Romans.

Being personally armed may only assure that I "get to engage in a gunfight before dying", but if it keeps me and my wife from being tortured and raped before execution, then I'll take dying in a gunfight any day. If its a fast collapse, anyone who actually got to practice with their arms won't be an easy target and the "neighborhood watch" will shoot on site. Those who "spray and pray"at 200 yards will be easy money for the average hunting rifle.

Face it, we're all going to die no matter what, but would you rather do it on your "boots on" or begging for mercy on your knees?

The entire 'survivalist' take on peak oil is just another consumer fad. Run out and buy ... guns, ammo, water purification, etc. etc. etc.

Happy Holiday shopping!

First of all, the central government of the United States will never willingly cede authority in any part of the country to anyone, particularly home- grown militants. Authority and police power are the last things that any government loses, even after everthing else is gone. Currently, you can look at Zimbabwe and Haiti as examples. The people have nothing ... but the governments have thugs.

Countries that have had recent economic collapses are many; Mexico, Russia/USSR, Thailand, Indonesia, Peru, Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Cuba ... these place and Europe too have crime and many have crime gangs and drug gangs but there is civil society even if there is a shortage of consumer goods and other niceties. The police have machine guns. There are soldiers in the streets. But then ... this is also true in Italy.

Second, even if all imports of petroleum are cut off, the US produces both vast amounts of native power (gas, crude, hydro, nuclear, ethanol, coal as well as alternatives) and food. The problems are shifting the management of demand from serving the consumer paradise to other priorities. This might have to be done very quickly. Nevertheless, it is a long distance between distribution problems and a complete social breakdown.

Getting autos off the roads and eliminating industrial livestock and 'convenience processing' from the food chain - which consumes great amounts of both food and energy - would have the US swimming in foodstuffs and would free up enough power to keep lights on and communications intact. Distribution would likely have snags, but the National Guard, state and local police departments and other agencies would certainly be pressed into service to insure that all places in the country had food available. Providing services is the main task of government; FEMA failed after Katrina, this does not mean that the government lacked resources or will fail in all subsequent emergencies. FEMA had the resources to cope with the Katrina aftermath but that agency was mismanaged. The US still (and will have) great resources and somebody in Washington will figure out how to direct them properly, even if the current (and incoming) cast of clowns cannot.

Third, it is unlikely the US political system would break down. This country's political traditions are strong; America one of the longest continuously- running governments on Earth. It has endured wars, depressions, storms, earthquakes as well as incompetents and ruinous political managers. This does not mean that a particular administration within that system would not be replaced after a 'great emergency', but that a new government would arise and it would have the same sort of form as our current government. One thing that would likely happen is more intense public participation.

The 'Million Angry Instantly Poor Man' March. Mebbe two million ...

Finally, the big issue ... as I see it ... the transcending peak oil issue is a matter of buying time. The easiest way to buy time is to get rid of the automobiles and the hamburgers. I know, I know ... 'I love my car' ... 'I love my Big Macs'. I have an answer for that; two stiff middle fingers directed toward the fools who refuse to make any sacrifices for the world and the country that they live in! Walk/bus/train to work with a sleeping bag and sleep at the jobsite or office or store or factory and reverse the process back home on weekends. Become a vegetarian. I know this program works because I've done it and continue to do it!

If everyone does these things the country buys a hundred years to get the technology/ecology/population/economic issues straightened out. Or not ... at least there would be this chance.

I can see where you're coming from. But...

The entire 'survivalist' take on peak oil is just another consumer fad.

It very well may be the last consumer fad. The days of dirt cheap weaponry, tools, and outdoors gear are almost over. Soon these things will be outside the reach of most Americans - probably permanently. In other words, buy now, or forever hold your peace.

Countries that have had recent economic collapses are many; Mexico, Russia/USSR, Thailand, Indonesia, Peru, Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Cuba ... these place and Europe too have crime and many have crime gangs and drug gangs but there is civil society even if there is a shortage of consumer goods and other niceties.

The crucial difference this time around is that the collapse will be global.

In your examples, there were rich, industrialized Western nations to either (a) arm the military to keep order; (b) invest in the collapsed economy and provide a source of revenue for the government; (c) a combination of of a and b. In any case, intentions were the same: keep the collapsing country from descending into complete chaos so as to continue pillaging and exploiting their resources.

In a global collapse, there is nobody to turn to.Some governments will be able to keep their head above water for a while, but eventually, supplies, resources, and capital will simply run out.

Providing services is the main task of government; FEMA failed after Katrina, this does not mean that the government lacked resources or will fail in all subsequent emergencies...and somebody in Washington will figure out how to direct them properly, even if the current (and incoming) cast of clowns cannot.

Here we will have to agree to disagree. I cannot fathom how a person could so flippantly place the health and well-being of their family in the hands of a government - a government that has repeatedly shown utter disdain for its populace. The trillion dollar banking bailouts, while our health care system lies in shambles, only being the most recent example.

Third, it is unlikely the US political system would break down. This country's political traditions are strong; America one of the longest continuously- running governments on Earth.

America's indigenous population was nearly wiped off the face of the planet. Therefore, for the past 300 years, the nation has had virtually unlimited access to natural resources. The economy also got a great kickstart through the kidnapping and enslavement of millions of Africans.

The bottom line is that America's economic pie has been steadily growing from the get-go. So it's not surprising that the government has survived. But it suddenly becomes an altogether different story when the economic pie starts to shrink.

Also, America's root aren't as deep you make them out to be. The average life span of civilization is 421 years. The United States has only been around for 229 years, and is about to slam into the perfect storm: arguably the most formidable confluence of challenges in human history.

If everyone does these things the country buys a hundred years to get the technology/ecology/population/economic issues straightened out.

If...

Take a look at newspaper. Do you see ANY sign whatsoever that this nation is getting serious about addressing our energy problem in a realistic manner? I sure don't.

In a global collapse, there is nobody to turn to.Some governments will be able to keep their head above water for a while, but eventually, supplies, resources, and capital will simply run out.

The problems (and this has to do with post- WWII economies failing) have tended to arise not from outside influences ENTERING into a country like Peru or Argentina, but rather outside capital LEAVING from the country in question. What happens next was that the government is discredited and the ruling party either stripped from office or forced out of the country, as was the case with Peru.

I don't know what's going to happen. I can see Obama and the 'Obama Collection of Powerful White Men' getting on a plane for a long vacation in Aruba while seething multitudes march on the Capital and the White House banging on pots and pans! I can also see the soldiers and police standing around on the sidewalk and watching ... or charging the crowds with tear gas and other weapons.

In this world, civilization is always an inch away from chaos.

The experience of European powers and their colonies was such that maintaining them was far more costly than letting them go. Even without warfare, the distance management and monetary friction effects along with corruption problems made colonies (or former colonies such as Indonesia) extraordinarily expensive. Social stability in a place like Indonesia after the currency crash and panic in 1998 came not from outside developed countries generally, but from within.

Sources of social stability are regional and local governments, culture, customs, family structures, religion, local trade patterns and influence of authority figures such as teachers, police officers and other 'services' providers. These people and institutions won't disappear, even if there is no money.

At the local level, arming oneself won't be that costly, even far into the future ... unless you want to use armored vehicles or helicopters. Firearms will wind up being 'just one more trade good' in the flea- market economy!

Violence as a whole may not increase as the peak oil situation progresses. Mobility will be way down and isn't mobility itself, as provided by the use of an automobile, one of the key ingredients of crimes? Without mobility most opportunities to commit a crime are really not available.

Furthermore, why would anyone use violence as opposed to flattery, bartering, etc. to get what they want when violence takes more work and is personally risky and gives one a bad conscience to boot? Many many people all over the world are very good people who will face their own starvation rather than lower their moral standards.

Without really good access to health care, committing violence (and facing the risk of injury) will be like committing suicide. Even a small cut could become infected and without a doctor nearby, this could be fatal.

Mobility, is why they will steal your car first.

There are fewer bad people in the world than good people. But they are more numerous than you can imagine. The jails and prisons are full, there are many felons on probation, there are more criminals who have not been arrested yet than all the prisoners and probationers combined. When times get tough will we be able to maintain our prisons? We certainly won't be able to build more unless we go back to the type used in World War II.

The largest percentage of felons are convicted of drug crimes. Drugs work for them as long as they have a place to spend the money they make from drugs. When there are few places to spend money, they will switch from drugs to theft. That theft will focus on goods they can barter, just like the pawnshop system.

Criminals run in families. Ask anyone involved in the prison system. They will tell you is not uncommon to have two or even three generations incarcerated at the same time or in the same year. Crime, like prostitution will never go away. It is a defect of the human species.

The good people will be heros. The bad people will take advantage of them.

When the system breaks down drugs aren't given up - they are used more from Argentina to Afghanistan, and result in some of the cruellest crimes.

Gotta say that this claim:

However, you can thank alot of men with guns for your freedom to post here.

is utterly ridiculous. The only threat to my freedom to post here has been the various activities of TPTB--the Bush administration in particular--to shut down free speech in this country.

Maybe you're referring to the American revolution. Perhaps I could grant you that, if the same guns weren't used to commit genocide upon the indigenous people who lived here prior to the "revolution."

Agreed. Most of the US population finally got their freedom from someone who was willing to go to jail for it. Women especially ought not thank a soldier for your freedom, thank a protestor instead.

Who does the "protestor" thank?

Him/Herself, or the person/event that inspired them to act.

Had we more activists whose patriotism was based in the ideas enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, we may not have gotten into this mess.

Cheers

A soldier who kept the forces at bay who would have just shot the protester. Notice how the Chinese deal with the Tibetans. BANG, BOOM...repeat as necessary.

Not to forget Burma/ Myanmar, the Darfur region of Sudan or the killing fields of Congo?

You really think you wouldn't be speaking German, Japanese or Russian?

Wow talk about a self deception. Good luck when reality finally hits you in the behind.

I think you have to separate the Nation State's political independence from the individual's civil liberties. Soldiers are useful for the former but often harmful to the latter. Civil liberties are protected when used and defended...mostly by lawyers and preachers and ordinary folks.

What you see as self-deception and naivete, may just be a different perspective.

Umm, Can't remember the last German, Japanese, or Russian invasions of the US.

Except maybePearl Harbor, and even then, it seems difficult to imagine a tiny island nation subduing the US to the point where we would be speaking Japanese. Hell, the French beat the English, lived right next door, and still couldn't completely impose their language on the British. Ridiculous.

Now Chinese, that may be different.

The point of having a gun is for self abuse when the going get's too tough to get going.

Agreed. There is only one way to fight this, and that is politically. There has to be a movement that brings pressure on the existing parties, and that fights for realistic actions, and that above all fights against violence and all who would employ it or incite it. There needs to be plenty of arguing and discussion, maybe even some yelling, but no name-calling, no scapegoating, and above all no violence.

Parts of the survivalist movement have someting, even a lot, to contribute in terms of learning what's possible in the way of cheap living, living off the land, and so forth. But none of this works easily without a friendly gov't, or at least there are limits.

More than anything else, what's needed is to assure everyone of basic survival, food, housing, basic healthcare, a job. Desperation is what is so dangerous. It's not going to be a McMansion, no more SUVs or even a car, it's not going to be web design or marketing job. It may involve manual labor in a small town, learning agriculture, learning how to recycle junk from the industrial era, etc.

Once people know the direcion we must go, once the idea takes hold that we are each other's keeper, that we have to get through to a new post-industrial (ok, sort of) age together, then we'll be headed in the right direction. TPTB will in the meantime encourage us to think about shooting each other, hating each other. But once we go down that road, we are toast, and it will be long detour before getting on the track to a sane, rational, collective retrenchment.

It's ingrained in us Americans to be individualists. It worked, sort of, in our early history. No more. There is no more certain path to doom.

The trouble with collapse is that governments lose control and become desperate. And, as history shows, we have far more to fear from the Nation State than anyone else. I believe that the "survivalists" may well have underestimated future events and instead of a rag-tag undisciplined band of scavenging desperado's, they're more likely to see well disciplined troops sent to remove any threat to state power.

Politics will become the domain of desperate groups vying for the power of the State to secure their own survival. Don't look to the State or Politics for survival, in a case of life and death between the State and its citizens... the citizens will have to be the ones to perish. Better to just keep on the right side of the State, regardless of who controls it, and make our own arrangements for survival in a way that presents no threat.

I agree that the Nation State is the greatest threat to your liberty and life at present, but I think the Nation State will be under substantial pressure; hollow states, primary loyalties, bazaar of violence and all that.

Now your local warlord or hopped-up mayor...that might be a problem.

Once people know the direcion we must go, once the idea takes hold that we are each other's keeper...

, (emphasis added)

Dave,

Sorry but I have to disagree. I guess I'm too much into the Atlas Shrugged school of helping and I have no interest in being the "keeper" of every non-productive bum around. I'm also not interested in helping idiots who posit junk reality. I'm also not interested in helping people who will not take responsibility for their own survival.

The vast majority of the people in my boondocks area get it and we will, indeed, help each other. In fact, we have a somewhat formal plan. But, it is more like Jeff Vail's Rhizome community where the intent is for individual families to be self-reliant (I hate the word self-sufficient) while having the option of help from everyone else when necessary.

As far as society as a whole goes, I simply don't see "keeping" as realistic because of significant differences between individuals and groups.

Todd

I guess I'm too much into the Atlas Shrugged school of helping and I have no interest in being the "keeper" of every non-productive bum around. I'm also not interested in helping idiots who posit junk reality. I'm also not interested in helping people who will not take responsibility for their own survival.

+1, well put.

Much like BushII, Obama OR Biden is the last person I would trust my safety too.

If you aren't the "keeper" of the bums, that is, if you don't support them and their lazy lifestyles, then you must instead support:
1. The police, lawyers, civil servants, and prisons who clean up their crime
2. The taxes that pay for public welfare
3. The doctors who cure diseases which spread from unhygienic environments
4. The undertakers who dispose of their bodies
5. The lifestyles they engender with their children

And so on.

Any single human, on his or her own, is virtually useless. It is only when we work with each other that we accomplish things for mutual benefit.

For every "bum" out there, there's a person who was once just as lucky as we are, who fell on bad times and couldn't pull themselves up on their own.

Very soon, most people here are going to be bums. And the remaining lucky few with resources and opportunity will look down on these new bums, as the old lucky used to look down on the old bums.

It has a fractal self-similarity to it.

710,

You have a number of straw men, you conflate several things and, finally, you didn't really read what I said. Being one's brother's keeper is not the same thing as "working together."

Yes, a lot more people may turn into the bums category through no fault of their own. But, a lot are currently bums and have no intention of doing anything different. I'm perfectly willing to let them crash and burn. However, the new bums will have had an opportunity to prepare for their own survival. This could have been as simple as finding like-minded people and purchasing a retreat or learning how to grow their own food. Perhaps, they believed the MSM BS. I have no sympathy for this.

Todd

An example of a strawman, please.

What is needed is cultural change away from unsustainability.
Survivalists are maybe the least likely group to bring about this change.

You obviously don't know too many in the various communities, most of us have gardens and are well aware of the world situation with regard to resources. In addition, we actually live with mother nature up close and personal.

Most of the farmers in Iowa could fall under your crazy "survialist" label. Got extra food? Got guns? Got bullets? Afraid of economic meltdown? Willing to take personal responsibility for your own welfare Check on all five.

If you aren't willing to protect your loved ones with your life, why should anyone else be willing to?

If you aren't willing to protect your loved ones with your life

It's there that I suspect the difference lies between your viewpoint and those who are very skeptical of survivalism. Firstly, if you put your hand on your heart can you honestly say you don't mean "If you aren't willing to protect your loved ones by taking the lives of others who you believe to deserve it"? (I don't doubt that you sincerely believe you'll only take the lives of those who in your opinion do deserve it, and indeed that's what you'll do. The point is the "in your opinion".) The only situation in which you lose your life is if you fail.

I'm mildly against large numbers of armed individuals who aren't part of, eg, a police force, and hence constantly monitored for erratic behaviour is because I have a very, very low opinion of human nature. Not that people are stupid, but they are emotional and excellent "self-justification machines" (ie, they have something they want to do and come up with clever reasons why it's the right thing to do). Having seen gun enthusiasts, eg, saying they'd like to take up a sniper position outside their marina and pick off anyone who they don't think meets their personal standards for owning a boat, I tend to think that the question is "is the half-life of a human being deciding they're gonna deal directly with people they disagree with long enough for the positive to outweigh the negative?" I haven't seen anything recently to persuade me, even in my own behaviour, that it is.

(The "mildly against" is that I suspect that, even in the UK, the boat has already sailed on the issue and too many people fondly fantasise about themselves as their local sheriff. I try and avoid getting into discussions about guns because I'd much rather be involved in more productive discussion. But the self-deception, IMO, in the quote above just annoyed me.)

embryonic,

My apologies for not responding sooner, been a little busy today. I hope this gets to you since its late.

I'm not sure if you are in the UK but from your opinion it sounds like it. Large semi-military police forces are more dangerous to a free society than any criminal in my mind. Eventually, the police BECOME the criminals, just look at the advanced state of corruption in Mexico. Recently in Juarez, they confiscated the arms of the police department and the murder rate went DOWN. Apparently, there is more than a little moonlighting going on. Every society has their lunatic fringe, but if you are unarmed there is absolutely nothing you can do about it when it meets you head on. Do you really want to get into a fist fight with someone on crack? You could break every bone in their body and they'd still kill you. I consider the idea of constant monitoring to be police state tactic. OK for the CIA types maybe, but definitely not for anyone else.

I have a very low opinion of human nature as well, as you said we are the ultimate in self justifying machines. That being said, one of the major problems with modern society is that we delegate everything that was part of daily life for our ancestors. Someone else grows our food, butchers our meat, heats our houses (NG), feeds our horses (oil) and provides for our well being ie security. If relocalization happens dramatically, and my guess is that it will, you are going to be responsible for yourself. If you want a hamburger, then you are going to help butcher the cow or no hamburger. Want a nice secure place to sleep at night, then you are going to pull guard duty and maybe shoot someone to keep your village secure. Everyone else isn't going to have time to worry about you. During Katrina the cops abandoned their posts to get their families out, which is fully understandable given the mess things were down there. Others joined the looters which gives you an idea of who might be "protecting" you.

In my mind, survialism gets a bad rap, its just the old boy scouts motto..."Be Prepared". Having arms and knowing how to use them is a matter of not being willing to outsource one of the most important things, your personal safety, to anyone else. Our ancestor's weren't willing to, so why should we be any different. Human nature hasn't changed one bit. I'd be lying if I said I've never heard things said or done by gun owners that made me uncomfortable, but I understand their rights are the same as mine. If they hurt someone or do something stupid, then they'll have plenty of time to think about it in jail. Otherwise they're just a harmless moron, like your boat club. They'll always be there, even in an ecovillage. Beware of what they can do with a kitchen knife or fertilizer, ok?

As one who has a concealed carry permit, in my mind, using a gun in self defense is the absolute last resort. Threaten me verbally and I will laugh at you. Show up with friends or pull a knife/gun then you'll be saying hello to the reaper with no regrets on my part. No self deception, I'm a veteran as well so I made this decision a long time ago. My getting a CCW permit was the result of watching "Gangland" on the History Channel one night. Now just imagine the cops going home to protect their families at night and these animals free to roam without fear. Yep, I'll be clinging to Big Ugly if things get really bad. Otherwise, Lil Ugly stays hidden under my shirt. You'll never know either :D If you live in the states, odds are that you are surrounded by people carrying guns and benefit indirectly by the crooks not knowing who is armed or not unless you live in Chicago or Detroit.

My guess is that the reason some of the activists disparage survialists is more cultural ie left/right thing. Biggest group of "survialists" is the Mormon church (stockpile) and of course the Boy Scouts(skills). Neither of these groups is in very good standing with the American Left. But the transition is going to be rough for all of us and if you take responsibility for yourself by in-sourcing as much as you can..... you'll be surprised where it leads you. Of course, thats a survialist tactic.

jrc, I expect you couldn't get much more "left" than I am,hell I'm so left I'm about to fall off the scale, and I am about as well set as you are, I see your preps as spot on. The "left" is not the gang that couldn't shoot straight. Hell, I might just be the guy next to you feeding you shells on the barricade. Grin.

Don in Maine

I second what Don in Maine said. I am so far left I couldn't even find anyone to vote for in Europe. But I believe in being as prepared as I can. I have a modest collection of firearms and I practice/use them regularly.

In the U.S., the public image of the left is mostly caricature...straw men built by the far right. Mostly left and right are irrelevancies foisted off on folks to keep them from seeing the real divisions: up and down. If you don't know which you are, you're down.

Don, it doesn't surpise me given that you're a Mainer. I grew up in Alfred (York County) and still have tons of friends in Wells. Of course, living up there you have to be independant by nature. I left at 17 when my recruiter lied enough to get me to sign.

Its sad that the 2nd amendment has become such a right and left issue, to me its always been about civil rights. People forget that Heston marched with MLK before he was president of the NRA and gun control was originally a political tactic of the KKK after the civil war. Isn't much fun to show up for a lynching and get shot. There is alot I can agree with the left on such as legalizing drugs, simply because I don't agree with the paramilitary tactics being used even though I have no desire to use any of them. There are alot of worthwhile causes from the environment to social justice. That being said, I have no faith in a politician who doesn't trust me, its a sign of bad intentions.

Lets just hope that we have a barricade to crouch behind! I'll feed you shells as well...:-D

Yep JRC,

The Argentine economic crisis provides a look into the future for all of us, even those who live in now safe neighborhoods.

"Lessons from Argentina's Economic Collapes"

http://www.powerswitch.org.uk/portal/index.php?option=com_content&task=v...

I live in an area with little crime in small town Mexico, where you can walk the streets anytime safely.

We know that things will change when the economic crisis hits here.

My wife and live on a road that is 8 kilometers long with only one entrance/exit. The Mexicans and gringos on the road are planning: a 24/7 guarded gate, means of communication/alarms between houses, cooperation with the police, training of our dogs to avoid rat poisoning, and means of self/mutual defense.

Cliff Wirth

My wife is from Mexico City and her family is from the Hills of Hidalgo. If it gets too bad in the states, we're planning on heading to Hidalgo with everything we can carry once the storm dies down. I love Mexico, great people but what a corrupt government. Too bad revolutions usually eat their children.

Given the corruption of the police down there, if the ballon goes up you might forget to call them. Reading the "Surviving in Argentina" blog has been very information on the slow collapse scenario, which really doesn't get enough credibility in the states. I guess they gave up on calling the police there.

I figure the first 6 months to a year will be the worst in any scenario, after that people begin to adapt or starve. Bad manners or an entitlement mentality will probably get you killed, as it has been throughout history. Might be a good thing given the behavior at Walmart in NY.

My wife is from Mexico City too, and I am trying to get her family out, as it will be a disaster. Hidalgo may not be too sustainable, see on http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/

Thanks CJ, I'll look into this a bit later tonight, I have house duties to do.

Went to the local gunshow today, it was about like that Wal Mart in NY, the line to get in was 20 people deep all day. Usually they are borderline empty considering the size of the halls.

Hey JRC,

Get in touch, I'm sure we and our wives have much in common.

CJ

You got it. I'll drop you a line.

That was a pretty intense article. I've lived in a developing country for most of my life but that Argentina article was still intense. I've lived through political violence but not economic collapse. I can imagine surviving without water and power but not for that long. Atleast after the argentinian collapse they had access to cheap chinese made stuff and petrol for their generators. What's a post peak world going to be like 40 years from now? When international trade will have slowed to a crawl. Reading articles from dieoff by jay hanson, it paints a pretty bleak picture of the future. Nuclear war seems inevitable to him and I have to admit his logic is hard to beat. Just hope that the logic which does beat it is John Michael Greer's version of the long descent.

Norman, Peter Goodchild, and others (not Orlov) argue for a rapid crash:

http://www.countercurrents.org/po-norman181006.htm

http://www.countercurrents.org/peakoil.htm

Me too, it goes like this:

Alternatives will not even begin to fill the gap of declining oil supplies. And most alternatives yield electric power, but we need liquid fuels for tractors/combines, 18 wheel trucks, trains, ships, and mining equipment. The Energy Watch Group (funded by the German Parliament) concludes in a current report titled: “Peak Oil Could Trigger Meltdown of Society:”

"By 2020, and even more by 2030, global oil supply will be dramatically lower. This will create a supply gap which can hardly be closed by growing contributions from other fossil, nuclear or alternative energy sources in this time frame."

http://www.globaliamagazine.com/?id=482

We are facing the collapse of the highways that depend on diesel trucks for maintenance of bridges, cleaning culverts to avoid road washouts, snow plowing, roadbed and surface repair. When the highways fail, so will the power grid, as highways carry the parts, transformers, steel for pylons, and high tension cables, all from far away. With the highways out, there will be no food coming in from "outside," and without the power grid virtually nothing works, including home heating, pumping of gasoline and diesel, airports, communications, and automated systems.

Cliff Wirth

Yes, in a fast crash with lost incomes and no power and no local services, we will all have to learn how to camp out and raise food at home. [Assuming the banks/landlord companies hadn't already kicked everyone out of those homes.]

When police are no longer paid to protect the public or are overwhelmed and cannot respond, individuals will need to be armed again. But strength in numbers will win out over rugged individualism in a fast crash, so survivalists had better learn to share with whomever else is around...share survival skills, food, security duty, etc. Otherwise good luck when roaming paramilitary warlords finally arrive to loot and pillage your well-stocked homestead.

So what can a person do to prepare for peak oil when you're not allowed to own guns? such as here in Australia? Am I supposed to start living on a farm?

there are some powerful CO2 and air cylinder pellet rifles (not pistols) and deadly cross bows.

+1 on the crossbow and air rifles. The new air rifles are capable of outstanding accuracy and are at 1000fps (300mps). Skill with a normal bow is one I plan on aquiring in the next few months.....the ability to be silent is not to be underestimated. Besides, you can reuse your "hunting ammo", pretty sustainable in my book. Decent knife and a machete will work as well, atleast it does in Latin America. Good heavy wooden walking might work pretty well.

The only thing a gun buys you is distance from any attacker ie makes a 5ft woman equal to a 6'6" man in a fight at 10 paces.

Hey JRC,

Yep, and you can "reload" a normal bow pretty fast.

I got an Eagle 180 lb crossbow, simple, inexpensive, and prolly easy to copy/manufacture where I am.

Got any recommendations on air rifles?

Not a clue on specific models although I've seen some nice ones in various places. The good ones seem to start at $150 and have a single pump to fire. A guy at a local range recently had a $2000 on that supposedly would shoot 1in at 50 yards. I have a very long barreled 22 for this purpose if I need it, its alot cheaper...LOL.

Might want to check out the reviews at Cabelas (www.cabelas.com) before deciding on a model. Alot of guys I know, myself included, buy from online stores because the selection locally is pretty limited. Midway {www.midwayusa.com) is pretty good too.

When things get really bad, the key to survival is hidden storage. It does no good to accumulate food, water, medicine, weapons, ammunition etc., if one criminal can carry it all out in his truck.

Hidden storage requires a substantial investment. You need a lot of cubic feet and it can't be in your house. The best container for hidden storage is a steel storage container.

http://www.eagleleasing.com/containers/containers.html?gclid=CNv-_oH5mpc...

If you can't afford a new one, there are some used ones around that often only cost hundreds of dollars.

It must be waterproofed and buried below ground. A hatch should be installed in the roof on the container. This hatch must be incredibly well hidden. You will have to get creative if you expect it not to be discovered. You should only access the container to add or remove items during the night when the moon is covered by clouds. The darker the better. You also don't want others who you might team up with to know about your container. That could be a real problem later on.

Even though I said earlier you should not store supplies in your house, there is a need for a small storage container inside. This inside storage container should be well hidden and contain a modest amount of supplies. That and your kitchen shelves and closets will consist of your working stock. The hidden cache in your house is your decoy. It is obvious to a thief if you are living in some sort of self-sufficient environment that you must have a cache somewhere. A thief will not simply walk away. They will force you to give up what they believe you must have. Better to sacrifice 5% of your supplies than 100%.

A huge advantage to a large steel underground storage container, besides the ability to store an immense amount of personal supplies, is the ability to buy in bulk items that can be used to barter. However, no matter what else you do, you should give outsiders the appearance that you are barely getting by. For example, if you do have weapons that you carry or keep in your house, they should look like crap. The outward appearance does not affect the weapon's ability to work properly. It does indicate that you probably don't have more.

Bottom line, you have to think like a criminal in order to survive.

Hey PriorityX,

If no one knows, the stuff hidden in your house is ok, as no one knows to come knocking, and if they do, you can be ready.

The key is what to do after the collapse, that is how to survive.

There are lots of --- surviving peak oil --- websites

I shoot an old 1985 Feinwerkbau 124 match air rifle with a peep-sight. Very accurate out to about 50 meters. Most of my shots are between 20-30 meters and it is "bang, headshot" deadly at that range. Mostly for rabbits, squirrel, and pigeon, although we used it to euthanize a raccoon we trapped (ironically enough, in a Have-a-Heart trap).

VK,
Move to the US where you can be "safe" surrounded by like-minded well armed citizens. Make sure not to get too friendly with any neighbors as most homicides are committed by know associates.

Also make sure you don't shoot your kids sneaking into the home late at night. Also don't let your wife know where you keep those guns in case she thinks you have been unfaithful.

Neil, i'm just 22, not married yet and no kids. Just trying to figure out what lies in the future. I got family in the States so could move in with em.

Get an Education/learn a skill, get a job, find a nice girl, get married, raise a family, enjoy your life. These people are, mostly, er . . . extreme.

You hope.

VK, words from an old guy, disregard at will.(Gawd I'd love to be 22 again) Cultivate a sense of curiosity, and a sense of wonder. It will serve you well. No one here can really predict what the future brings, in many ways it brings something different to us all. We will all see what happens differently. I do firmly think we have a hand in how our future works out, where you live, what you do, how you think, are all factors that send you down one path or another. Perhaps the most important thing is to take personal responsibility for those choices, all of them. Walk lightly in the world. The old backpacker creed, let no one know you passed by here. That may be the greatest legacy.

Learn to use your hands, back, and mind. From this long time in this world, I'd say one of the most important things is to be open and ready and even willing for change. That's what you have to deal with, change you see and change you can't even imagine now but will have to face. Don't worry about it, deal with it as it comes and even try to use it to your advantage. It will happen, you can not stop it.

Understand you will make bad choices, horrible mistakes, we all have and will. Don't beat yourself up over them, learn from them, pick yourself up and go on. No matter what kind of constraints we see from outside influences, your future is always up to you and you alone. It is, after all, your life. Yours to use and live as you see fit.

I made the choice to go back to the woods, never looked back. No matter what happens, I have the wind in the trees and the stars at night. I like that. It fills me up. On the long end of it, it was very good for me, it may not be for others, but we each have to find our own answers.

As I've said here in the past, somedays the most important thing I do is pet the kitten.

Peace

Don in Maine

Excellent advice. Life is also pretty damn good when you can fall asleep with your arms wrapped around the one you love.

Peace be with you too, Don.

Many thanks for your kind words Don and I am indeed curious about many things, hence my reading addiction you could say :-) Sounds like you've lived quite an interesting life, out in the woods, under the stars.

I don't think anyone ever thought different. I suspect that it never enters the heads of the people equating guns with power that the in between the US armed forces, the militias, MS-13, crips et. al., the lone gunman is going to be just as much toast as the ecotopians. Probably more so because the ecotopians can buy off the gunslingers with the promise of future crops and productivity.

On a slightly more stable level, that was what happened in WWII in the UK. Unproductive farms were nationalised and the Ministry of Food ran them. Productive farms got a complement of conscientious objectors and Land Girls to replace conscripted personnel. Those with land may wish to have a quiet work with the G-2 on the nearest military facility about coming to arrangements regarding supplies and guards.

because the ecotopians can buy off the gunslingers with the promise of future crops and productivity

So you are willing to be a slave then? Good luck with that.

Yup. I'm too weak and too slow to slug it out with teenagers using machetes and half-bricks, can't do CQB gun stuff, but I can cook, clean, and help people feel good about themselves. In the absence of ready meals, deodorant and TV, I expect to be of some value, and therefore worth protecting.

i never really made the fast crash look nice. i have been trying to point out that a fast crash would be better because it would leave the world more intact resulting in after all the chaos a slightly better way of life for the survivors.