Talk:Survivalism/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 13 July 2017. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

Potential

good potential here...survivalism tends to attract neo nazis, millenialists, etc.--PalMD^{-Si Quaeris Peninsulam Amoenam Circumspice!} 22:34, 14 August 2007 (CDT)

Flamebait

I assume you're referring to the Niven/Pournelle book? I always figured that part was a bow to the typical attitudes of survivalists, though the same team outlined the logical reasons behind keeping women at home in times of strife in The Mote in God's Eye...

I dunno. I'm not sure it's really pertinent to the article to be discussing whether or not a book's authors are sexist. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 10:30, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

• You may be right. I'm somewhat on the fence as to its relevance myself, and I wrote it. I think at least part of it has to do with the fact that right-wing survivalists almost always seem to go hand-in-hand with "traditional" "family" values. In fact, if you're familiar with the John Titor story, the backstory behind that was a right-wing survivalist's wet dream. (And Titor, though more performance art than literature, definitely falls into the category of survivalist SF.) EVDebs 12:42, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

There are some practical considerations in a survivalist situation which would dictate a return to traditional gender roles. Basically, men are more expendable. So they do all the dangerous jobs, and women stay and home and pump out babies (in a subsistence agriculture economy, the more kids you have, the better your chances of survival are because lots of them will die anyway and those that survive will be useful on the farm). But the right-wing survivalists often also subscribe to the traditional model for religious or ideological reasons which have also driven them to be survivalists. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 01:40, 21 October 2008 (EDT)

Well put, I think... ;) ħuman 01:43, 21 October 2008 (EDT)

Militias

"Survivalism is most common among the militia movement within the United States." Not sure about this one. Most of the militia movement were survivalists, but wasn't that movement mostly a flash in the pan in 1993-1995? Different woo comes and goes but survivalism seems to always be around. It might have been an accurate statement if this were 1995. Secret Squirrel 23:49, 28 February 2009 (EST)

Quality of article

I find it ironic that an article on a rationalist/skeptic site contains implied ad hominem attacks (in the Origins section) and numerous unsourced statements throughout. Surely we can do better.^{— Unsigned, by: 69.47.132.126 / talk / contribs}

Surely you could help as opposed to just bitching about it. P-Foster (talk) 13:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Gold and silver after the apocalypse

What use would they be? You can't eat them, use them in tools etc etc: a box of non-safety matches/flint has more 'value.' ^{— Unsigned, by: 86.135.183.34 / talk / contribs}

They seems to think that they will become mediums of exchange after (insert disaster here) Тy^Talk. 22:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

It's an appeal to tradition -- read the goldbug sites, one of the most common phrases is "gold has been used as an inherent store of value for thousands of years." Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 22:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

'Come the Apocalypse' taking over your local garden centres (tools, seeds, plants, assorted useful chemicals, protective clothing etc) and hardware store (tools, chemicals, lighter fuel/matches etc) makes more sense than 'taking over the central bank/jewellers's shops.' When you have eaten all the nettles and insects, what is the gold value of a mouthful of cress? 82.44.143.26 (talk) 18:02, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

At the dawn of civilization people would indeed barter but you eventually need a consistent trustworthy medium of exchange to expand trade. That was originally gold and the ancient Lydians who were able to make uniform high quality coins became wealthy because their currency was trusted. As the bugs will tell you, a currency should be of high unit value, portable, easily divisible and difficult to destroy. Gold filled those criteria and silver became a sub unit because it was not so rare but otherwise filled the criteria. Current gold and silver coins have known precious metal content and will therefore have some intrinsic worth. Gold will still be wanted at some stage. Paper money is only useful when it is trusted to hold it's value, governments like to inflate debts away. In a period of high inflation paper money will be worthless, just look what happened in Germany, argentina and Zimbabwe. Of course if there is a literal apocalypse with people dying in the streets then food and guns will be in demand. Clickbot (talk) 18:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

There are two phases to 'after the apocalypse' (though will depend in part upon the nature of the event). Immediate post-apocalypse, when survival is the priority, and 'the new system establishing itself and evolving into something else.'

Whatever happens, having control of 'categories of items listed above and basing your group in the local agricultural and technical colleges (so having access to the information in the libraries and whatever persons with practical knowledge associated therewith who have survived) and a quantity of food-produceable land and (reasonably drinkable) water is the most practical way of establishing yourself/your group (especially if you can cultivate enough 'wilyness' to negotiate with them with the guns - 'Yes, you can shoot us and take the food - but #you# will then have to faff around reading the books and cultivating the land - and them over there only want 8% of our resources in exchange for the same quantities of resources...').

Wikia survivalism

It may not survive long but [1] may be of interest. 171.33.222.26 (talk) 15:01, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Still there. 82.44.143.26 (talk) 18:05, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

... but inactive. 31.51.114.125 (talk) 22:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC)