Showing posts with label survival blog. Show all posts
Showing posts with label survival blog. Show all posts

July 26, 2008

Scott Thill on Survivalists (we get the last laugh !!)

Massive Economic Disaster Seems Possible -- Will Survivalists Get the Last Laugh?

By Scott Thill, AlterNet
Posted on July 26, 2008, Printed on July 26, 2008
http://www.alternet.org/story/92706/

They used to be paranoid preparation nuts who built bomb shelters for a place to duck and cover during nuclear dustups with communist heathens, but their tangled roots go back to the Great Depression for a reason. If you want to get sociological about it, survivalism started out as a response to economic catastrophe. And now, with a cratering stock market, a housing meltdown that has devalued everything in sight, and skyrocketing prices for food, gas and pretty much everything else, survivalists are preparing for -- and are prepared for -- the rerun. In fact, they may be the only people in America feeling good about the prospects of a major crash.

And the interesting thing about the once-fringe movement at this moment in history is that survivalism has now gone green -- at least in theory.

From peak oil and food crises all the way to catastrophic payback from that bitch Mother Earth, there are more reasons to hide than ever. Conventional society as we know it is already undergoing some disastrous transformations. Ask anyone ducking fires in California, floods in the Midwest or bullets in Baghdad. Maybe it didn't make sense to run for the hills, stockpile water and food, grow your own vegetables and drugs, or unplug from consumerism back when America's budget surplus still existed, its armies weren't burning up all the nation's revenue and its infrastructure wasn't being outsourced to a globalized work force.

But those days are gone, daddy, gone.

What's coming up is weirder. Author, social critic and overall hilarious dude James Kunstler tackled that weirdness, otherwise known as an incoming post-oil dystopia, in his recent novel, World Made by Hand, which has since become one of a handful of survivalist classics. And as Kunstler sees it, whether you are talking about gun nuts or green pioneers, at least you are talking.

"At least they're aware that we've entered the early innings of what could easily become a very disruptive period of our history," the Clusterfuck Nation columnist explains. "Most of them are responding constructively rather than just defensively. They're much more interested in gardening and animal husbandry than firearms."

Not that the gun nuts have gone away. Their ranks have just diversified.

"The gun nuts have been on the scene longer than the peak oil argument has been in play," he adds. "They were initially preoccupied with Big Government and its accompanying narrative fantasy of fascist oppression, which is why they adopted a fascist tone themselves. But peak-oil survivalists are different from the Ruby Ridge generation. They don't think that a bolt-hole in the woods is a very promising strategy. We have no idea at this point what the level of social cohesion or disorder may be, but if the rural areas, especially the agricultural centers, become too lawless for farming, then we'll be in pretty severe trouble because there will be nothing for us to eat."

That's not on the to-do list of author and SurvivalBlog owner James Rawles, who has been getting asked more and more questions by a mainstream press finally waking to the consequences of disaster capitalism, climate crisis and the hyperreal dream of bottomless consumption. He has fielded questions from the New York Times, and he has taken an online beating from conscientious pubs like Grist, but he hasn't gone Hollywood. The times, which are a-changin', have caught up to him.

"There is greater interest in preparedness these days because the fragility of our economy, lengthening chains of supply and the complexity of the technological infrastructure have become apparent to a broader cross section of the populace," Rawles wrote to me via e-mail (but only after asking how many unique monthly visitors AlterNet commanded). "All parties concerned may not realize it, but the left-of-center greens calling for local economies and encouraging farmers markets have a tremendous amount in common with John Birchers decrying globalist bankers and gun owners complaining about their constitutional rights. At the core, for all of them, is the recognition that big, entrenched, centralized power structures are not the answer. They are, in fact, the problem."

Fair enough. But that broad brush fails to recognize the complexities of the very community it is purporting to try to establish. Indeed, difference is what survivalists seem to be running from, whether it is historically the difference between blacks and whites, secularists and true believers, or simply the haves and have-nots. It is that latter crowd that the survivalists seem most worried about. Their separation from society at large is arguably a retreat from community rather than a striving toward it.

"I'd say that survivalism is indeed a celebration of community," Rawles asserts. "It is the embodiment of America's traditional can-do spirit of self-reliance that settled the frontier."

But that's also a generalization, especially when one considers that the word "settled" is a coded reduction for a "near-genocidal wipeout of the frontier's native populations," most if not all of whom were perfecting a survivalist ethic by maximizing their skill sets and living in symbiosis with the land that provided them what they needed in food, tools and medicine. In fact, those settlements would have been hard-pressed to exist without what Rawles earlier described as a "centralized power structure," known as the expansionist United States government and its military, paving the road forward. Each self-reliant mythology carries within it grains of complicity in the community at large, which is a fancy way of saying there's nowhere to run, baby, nowhere to hide.

This is especially true today in our hyperreal, hyperconsuming 21st century, where survivalism has become more of a gadget fantasy than an earnest grasp for community.

"It seems a natural human impulse that we are hard-wired to follow as circumstances require," Kunstler says, "although it is constrained by social and cultural conditioning. To some degree, in our consumer culture, survivalism is related to the gear fetishism you see in popular magazines that purport to be about sporting adventures, but are really about acquiring snazzy equipment. America in 2008 has become a cartoon culture of Hollywood violence that promotes grandiose power fantasies of hyper-individualism and vigilante justice. Add guns and economic hardship, and spice it up with ethnic grievances, and the recipe is not very appetizing."

This future cultural, environmental and geopolitical miasma is where the survivalist and the mainstream converge in agreement. Both camps, pardon the pun, are convinced that we're screwed down the road.

"The next Great Depression will be a tremendous leveler," Rawles prophesies. "If anything, life in the 22nd century will more closely resemble the 19th century than the 20th century. Sadly, the 21st century will probably be remembered as the time of the Great Die-Off."

"I don't consider it a total wipeout," Kunstler counters. "It's a very big change, but people are resilient and resourceful. Look, imagine if you were a person who had survived the Second World War in Europe, and you were walking around Berlin in the spring of 1946, a year after the end of the war. A once-magnificent city has been reduced to rubble. Your culture is lying in ashes. Yet, people pick up and rebuild."

That is, if they're sticking together. If they're scattered and fending for themselves, and taking armed retreat defense tips from SurvivalBlog, that makes rebuilding a bit more complicated. Which, in the end, is where survivalism is most ambiguous. Is it a growing population of forward-looking realists who are smartly preparing for the die-off brought on by climate crisis and economic collapse, so they can pick up themselves and their people, and rebuild with that "can-do" spirit, as Rawles calls it? Or are they simply gadget-fascinated fundamentalists afraid of change and challenge, so afraid that they'd rather hide and hoard than join the fight?

The jury is still out. But, according to Rawles, it will soon have its diversity mirrored by survivalism's changing demographic.

"I think that in the next couple of decades," he explains, "we will witness the formation of some remarkable intentional communities that will feature some unlikely bedfellows: anarchists and Ayn Rand readers, Mennonites and gun enthusiasts, Luddites and techno-geeks, fundamentalist Christians and Gaia worshippers, tree huggers and horse wranglers. We welcome them all. Because the threats are clearly manifold: peak oil, derivatives meltdowns, pandemics, food shortages, market collapses, terrorism, state-sponsored global war and more. In a situation this precarious, I believe that it is remarkably naive to think that mere geographical isolation will be sufficient to shelter communities from the predation of evildoers."

Scott Thill runs the online mag Morphizm.com. His writing has appeared on Salon, XLR8R, All Music Guide, Wired and others.

© 2008 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/92706/

March 17, 2008

survival toolkit" Some survival blog items

America's Mountain of Debt: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Collectively, Americans have accumulated a mountain of public and private debt in the past 20 years. The essential nature of all debts is that they someday must be repaid. Debts can be broken down into three categories:
The Good. This is debt with low fixed interest rates, secured by tangible assets that have value that exceeds the amount of the loan. Everything is copasetic as long as the borrowers have a steady cash flow and can make their payments
The Bad. This is debt that is either insufficiently secured, or that has a nasty contractual surprise waiting, such as an adjustable interest rate reset date, or a balloon payment date.
The Ugly. This is the call loan. It can be called at any time, for any reason.
An interesting thing happens when an economy heads into a deep recession. Credit tightens, and assets begin to lose value. The quality of debt drops. Employees get laid off in large numbers and installment credit delinquencies and then defaults soar. In very rough terms the following plays out:
Good Debt starts to resemble Bad Debt,
Bad Debt starts to resemble Ugly Debt, and
Ugly Debt becomes Hideously Ugly Debt.
Hedge fund managers are in some ways like high states poker players. The risks are large, but so are their potential rewards. Well-managed hedge funds make gobs of money in good economic times, when there are stable--or at least trend-predictable--interest rates. They apply leverage, often as much as a 30-to-1 ratio, to make their profits. They make most of their money by borrowing short but lending long. Again, this works fine in good economic times with stable interest rates. But when interest rates fluctuate wildly, hedge funds can run into trouble. Periods with an inverted yield curve can be the most perilous.
The collapse of the subprime mortgage bubble signaled an end to a decade of debt-driven good times. Almost overnight, liquidity dried up.
Now we are entering some very scary times. Bankers are getting margin calls. The only way that they can meet those call demands is to call in loans that they have made. So, at present, the bankers are making margin calls of their own: They are calling their loans made to hedge funds (among other borrowers). This is putting many hedge funds in an impossible situation. Many hedge funds will collapse.
There is an old saying on Wall Street: "A one million dollar debt keeps the borrower up at night, worrying. But a one hundred million dollar debt keeps the lender up at night, worrying."
Exceptional times like these will result in some huge write-downs and write-offs. The only good news is that many assets will lose a lot of value. Everything from vintage cars to vintage wines, to grand estates will drop precipitously in price. Desperate for cash, the holders of those assets will be offering them at fire sale prices at the bottom of the market. If you are one of the few people with extra cash in your pocket, you will be able to pick up some tremendous bargains. (OBTW, the firm J.P. Morgan just did exactly that. They just inked a deal to buy troubled Bear Stearns for 2 cents on the dollar from its value of just one week ago.)

Letter Re: Galloping Bulk Food Prices

James,
Just a quick report on what I've learned about buying bulk grains and beans.
We have a local bulk food depot. I called to place an order. The guy checked with his wholesaler for prices, then called me back. He was aghast. He said everything was up around 25% since he had placed his last order two weeks ago. And up about 100% since the first of the year. The reason, the wholesaler reported, was demand from folks stocking up. The wholesaler was sold out of many items. Then I called an Amish bulk food store about an hour and a half away. Same story. (Yeah, I wondered about the Amish answering a telephone, too. Apparently the rules are flexible.)
Well, finding the prices a bit high, even for 50-pound bags (like 61 cents a pound for red wheat, 93 cents a pound for black beans, 53 cents a pound for white rice), I decided to check out the local "budget" supermarkets. Surprise, surprise. They were less expensive. Sometimes by a lot. For example, Sav-A-Lot had black beans for 70 cents a pound. ALDI had long grain white rice for 39 cents a pound. A further surprise, even Kroger's beat the bulk food prices. Of course, these things may change when the supermarket's wholesalers have to replace their stocks.
I' sure things vary from region to region, even city to city. But, as always, caveat emptor. One shouldn't assume that sources that should be cheaper actually are. And prices are unlikely to be any cheaper in our lifetimes than they are this afternoon. Best wishes, - Dr. Jack

Letter Re: Surplus Ambulances as BOVs

Mr. Rawles
I am a long time lurker on your site and would first like to thank you for all you do. I learn much from your site and finally read a topic I have some knowledge of. I operate a large ambulance service (75 units) and read the article about using ambulances as BOVs. I thought I might make a few observations.

It is true that the truck type ambulance have factory 4WD. However the majority of van type units have good aftermarket conversions. Most are done by Quimby. In fact I would only purchase a van type 4x4 from them. One down side to the truck type unit is that rescue squads are notorious for building a unit well above GVW. This causes all sorts of brake and suspension problems in the long term.

As for durability you may be surprised but the van type units have a longer service life as well as a lower cost of operation. They are usually lighter and have far more payload than the truck type. One big concern of a truck type ambulance is that the module is designed for remount. Now from a factory they are built well but at remount time all bets are off. They can truly be done by a shade tree mechanic and the electrical problems can be a nightmare. The van units will almost always come with the factory wiring and since they are all one unit the cabinets and structure seem to hold up better.

Excluding 4WD units, if I was getting one as a BOV, I would consider a van type Ford E350 built between 1990 and 1994 with the non-direct inject, non turbo engine. These units can easily go 400,000 plus miles. Consider keeping [one or more] glow plugs, a fuel pump, an extra set of injectors, and a crank position sensor as spare parts. These units are small, durable and easy-to-maneuver vehicles that handle well get acceptable mileage and are easy to obtain parts for.

One other thing to consider. How to paint the unit. In a true pre-TEOTWAWKI Get Out of Dodge situation having a vehicle that can appear similar to an emergency vehicle may not be a bad thing. With a van unit you could even have a magnetic sign with some sort of logo that could be added and removed at will. I can tell you an ambulance is rarely stopped or harassed. It is not unusual for them to go long distances and both LEOs and the public see out-of-area units all the time so it does not arouse a lot of suspicion. Of course you would have to check state and local laws.

Hope this gives some insight into ambulances. It is true they can often be found at low prices with low mileage and could make a great BOV, if selected carefully. - RB

Debate on Pending Legislation Reveals the Depth of Debasement of Our Currency and Coinage

The US House of Representatives is currently debating HR 5512, (the "Coin Modernization and Taxpayer Savings Act of 2008") legislation that would further debase our coinage. According to a article in The Chicago Tribune titled Change for a Penny?, pennies will soon be made of steel instead of zinc. Although the bill leaves it up to the Treasury, presumably, five cent pieces would be made of zinc instead of their current alloy of copper and nickel. I've warned SurvivalBlog readers that this was coming, and that they should start saving nickels. Coincidentally, reader RBS sent us a link to an article about how Zimbabwe's corrupt government is introducing a new 10 Million dollar bill. In Zimbabwe, all coins have long since been removed from circulation. The following is an excerpt of Congressman Ron Paul's statement on this bill, speaking before the Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology. on March 11, 2008:

"Mr. Chairman, I oppose HR 5512 because it is unconstitutional to delegate the determination of the metal content of our coinage to the Secretary of the Treasury. Under Article I Section 8 of the Constitution, the Congress is given the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof. It is a shame that Congress has already unconstitutionally delegated its coinage authority to the Treasury Department, but that is no reason to further delegate our power and essentially abdicate Congressional oversight as the passing of HR 5512 would do.

Oversight by members of Congress, who have an incentive to listen to their constituents,ensures openness and transparency. This bill would eliminate that process and delegate it to unelected bureaucrats. The Secretary of the Treasury would be given sole discretion to alter the metal content of coins, or even to create non-metal coins. Given the history of Congressional delegation and subsequent lax oversight on issues as important as the conflict in Iraq, it would be naive to believe that Congress would exercise any more oversight over an issue as unimportant to most members as the composition of coins.

While I sympathize with the aim of Section 4 of this bill to save taxpayer dollars by minting steel pennies, it is disappointing that our currency has been so greatly devalued as to make this step necessary. At the time of the penny's introduction, it actually had some purchasing power. Based on the price of gold, what one penny would have purchased in 1909requires 47 cents today. It is no wonder then that few people nowadays would stoop to pick up any coin smaller than a quarter.

Congress' unconstitutional delegation of monetary policy to the Federal Reserve and its reluctance to exercise oversight in that arena have led to a massive devaluation of the dollar. If we fail to end this devaluation, we will undoubtedly hold future hearings as the metal value of our coins continues to outstrip the face value.

HR5512 is a sad commentary on how far we have fallen, not just since the days of the Founders, but only in the last 75 to 100 years. We could not maintain the gold standard nor the silver standard. We could not maintain the copper standard, and now we cannot even maintain the zinc standard. Paper money inevitably breeds inflation and destroys the value of the currency. That is the reason that this proposal is before us today."

ShareThis