Talk:Survivalism/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Health aspects of Survivalism

I was redirected here from the bug out bag article, and ultimately from another internet forum.

I'm trying to understand what appears (to me) to be chronic obesity, diabetes or otherwise general poor health within this movement. The dominant players here seem to be very obese, middle-aged men with 100+ pound backpacks, lots of guns, and all kinds of "stuff" they intend to carry and haul off into the woods in the event of a disaster.

I'm sorry, but I don't really think this kind of "strategy" is viable.

Many years ago when I was in the army, we jumped out of planes with similar poundage, but I promise you, you're not going to go running through the woods with this kind of load for any kind of distance. And we were kids in our late teens to late twenties, in the peak shape of our lives. Special Operations do this type of stuff, but this is the exception (they train constantly with these types of equipment loads all the time).

It just seems if one wants to "survive" something, they should get their health taken care of before buying all sorts of guns and Gucci gear.

None of this shit will matter if you can't even run 1/4 mile. Just MHO.24.233.173.138 (talk) 16:52, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyvio concerns?

The contents of this article appeared to me at first sight to have been cut/pasted from Preppers & Survivalists: A Beginner's Guide By Dave Bronsky, 2016. However, it now looks more as if that publication may been constructed from content first place here. (I note that one reviewer on Amazon even commented that the book read more like a wikipedia article than a useful handbook).

Would editors care to comment on my concerns, especially @Braincricket: who copyedited this article back in 2012? I was all set to flag or delete offending paragraphs for WP:COPYVIO, which might well have upset a few folk. But if we can get clarity on this, maybe the article Talk page itself could benefit from a {{backwardscopy}} template to avoid another editor stumbling across the article, as I did, and possibly drawing a wrong conclusion. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:14, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Source problems

It seems that almost everything from the 'Common preparations' section down is either totally unsourced, or relies on primary sources, which often constitutes WP:OR. This needs to be fixed to get the article up to WP quality. It is a shame because the first half of the article isn't too bad. Ashmoo (talk) 12:02, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Actually, on a proper read through the whole article, I see the first half suffers from the same problems. The while article reads like a personal essay. Ashmoo (talk) 12:22, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Survivalism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Rational

No matter the reason for people becomng ' preppers', their aims are reasonable.

Is it reasonable to be unprepared for difficult times?

Who is attempting to ridicule 'preppers' and what is their motive? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.105.54 (talk) 00:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Survivalist scenarios and outlooks

This whole section is stupid. It reads like a list of character classes taken from a roleplaying game, or 4chan.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.44.192 (talk • contribs) 02:26, 26 November 2011

I agree- survivalists subscribing to a specific event are speculating as much as this section is speculating on survivalists in general. The section relies heavily on the same outdated references that are rambling conspiracy theories without representation from mainstream survivalists. Slgold01 (talk) 23:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Split article

Im no expert in this subject; kind of new actually. But I have traditionally viewed "survivalism" in more of a man-vs-nature sort of context. Wilderness survival, and the like. Lost at sea survivalism. The term conjures in my mind the endeavor to survive in the short term, but also to return to civilized society as soon as possible. The assumption is that a civilized society is still there to get to. In my mind this is fundamentally different from "prepping" for disaster, collapse, or unrest on the one hand, from which eventual recovery is expected, or even on the other hand achieving long term independence and self-sufficiency on a homestead. There is a lot to be said about all of these disparate notions and Im unsure why they all link to the same article. Perhaps we should stick culinary arts in this article as well, since after all every time I cook food Im "surviving" another day. The equivocation is all just a bit dishonest, I think. CogitoErgoCogitoSum (talk) 23:52, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Cratienphobia?

Approximately how large a fraction of American Survivalists are cratienphobics? What I mean is them living in fear of an evil, nearly all-powerful government. There certainly are governments which can be considered evil, we use to call them “dictatorships”. However, American cratienphobics have unwarranted fears of their own Federal government. These imagine it to do thing which not even the worst of dictatorships can do.

1.129.105.54 (talk) 00:48, 14 January 2019 (UTC)Woodrow Wilson stated that his allowance of the Federal Reserve would lead to the destruction of the US government.

2015-01-03 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.114.158.174 (talk) 20:51, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

But I think you miss the point. Being self-sufficient, independent, able to survive the wilderness, prepared for natural disaster or even a home disaster, criminal attack, or even prepared for unrest caused by war or economic collapse, is in no way irrational fear of anything. Few preppers, and none that I know, do it for fear of government. In fact most preppers are some of the most patriotic people Ive ever seen, probably far more so than those who mock them for prepping. I dont believe you actually read the article because if you did you might know how little government plays a role as a primary or even secondary motivator. CogitoErgoCogitoSum (talk) 00:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

US Focus

This article seems entirely focused on American survivalism, with minimal representation of survivalism outside of America. The sections about survivalist beliefs seem entirely US focused, and the section on survivalism outside of the United States is small with few details. We should expand the international section and try to make the beliefs section less US centric. Alienmandosaur (talk) 16:06, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

"REPRESENTATION". Yep, and the article doesnt cover survivalism for asians, blacks, the morbidly obese, or lgbt people either. Whats your point? Surviving is surviving. It doesnt matter the color of your skin, who you like to bed, or what country you live in. By all means, contribute to the article if you think getting food or water in your belly after a collapse of society is a fundamentally different prospect in your country. The article covers history, peoples motivations, and broadly enumerates survival needs, primarily. Little to no effort is put into the specifics of local ecology, methodologies, local law or customs, so I really dont see how its a US-centric article except that the movement originated in the West and that the article is written in English. CogitoErgoCogitoSum (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Should cover various modes of supply chain failure leading to technological collapse

See e.g. https://collapseos.org/civ.html and https://collapseos.org/why.html ★NealMcB★ (talk) 04:05, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps more useful as references: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/oureconomy/deep-adaptation-opens-necessary-conversation-about-breakdown-civilisation/ and some of the related references in Collapsology ★NealMcB★ (talk) 15:39, 6 August 2021 (UTC)