What is Survivalism? --> Survivalismo

Conservacionismo, Antidesarrollismo, cuestionamiento de la tecnología, naturismo, alternativas al sistema industrial capitalista, cambio climático...
Responder
Avatar de Usuario
Xell
Mensajes: 2520
Registrado: 18 Ene 2002, 01:00
Ubicación: movilizada

What is Survivalism? --> Survivalismo

Mensaje por Xell » 19 Feb 2004, 20:02

Extraído de: http://www.rmsg.us/megsed/6th.htm


What is Survivalism?

Survivalism is a philosophy - a way of life – and it is as varied in its methodology as the worlds’ religious or political theories. The primary goal of survivalism, by any method chosen, is to increase the odds for the continued existence of its followers, when faced with a threatening situation. Contrary to popular opinion, it is not an "activist" tautology. Most survivalists are reserved and quiet individuals who have lost faith in society’s ability to protect its own, and who have taken steps to lessen their dependence upon society for aid in an emergency situation.

Survivalists realize that modern society is a long and twisted chain of interdependency. Each link of this societal chain is dependent upon every other link to maintain its integrity. At various points within this chain are links that provide the rest of the chain with food, shelter, power, water, communications, transportation, and medical and physical protection. Should one or more links fail, those placed before and after the broken link(s) may find themselves without these necessary resources. Should enough of these links be suddenly broken, the entire chain may collapse.

Survivalists attempt to reinforce the chain of society by strengthening their own links. They do this by actively learning and practicing the necessary skills to provide or obtain the basic necessities of life for themselves, their families and their friends. They learn to build and maintain their own homes, provide their own clothes, find, store and purify their own water, establish and maintain their own communications and transportation. They learn to grow, hunt or gather their own food and how to process and store it. They learn to produce, maintain and distribute their own power. They learn to maintain their health through diet and exercise, and how to avoid or handle basic injuries and illnesses. And yes, they learn to defend themselves from aggressors when there is no one else there to protect them.

Survivalism does not necessarily concentrate on global catastrophe or the collapse of civilization. The profile of a "true" survivalist is someone who is concerned with planning for and avoiding the pitfalls and dangers of daily life and short-term emergencies and disasters of a local and temporary nature. In fact, since the frequency and likelihood of personal and local emergencies are more common, these situations are of primary concern.

Long term and widespread disasters are of concern to the survivalist, but they are extremely difficult to plan for. The individual (or single family) often does not possess the resources – either financially, materially, or intellectually – to efficiently plan for a long term, widespread disaster. This is where survival groups enter the picture.

Survival groups are formed to pool the resources of individual survivalists. They are generally formed of like minded individuals interested in a particular theory, or method, which they believe will be the most effective, in the event of an extended catastrophe. Survivalist theories can be broken down into several broad categories based upon a.) Primary survival techniques employed and, b.) Perceived threats. Each of these categories can be sub-classified by the members’ political beliefs, religious beliefs, environmental concerns, and even racial biases.

Broad Based Categories:
Primary survival techniques:


Low Impact, Back to Nature groups
Primitive Skills Groups
Hi-Tech Groups
Paramilitary (Survive by Force) Groups
Positive Action/Combined Skills Groups

Low Impact, Back-To-Nature Groups:
These groups believe that living in harmony with their natural surroundings is the best method for survival. About half of them are peaceful, extremely friendly and unobtrusive folks willing to share their knowledge of "one-ness with the planet" without seeming the least bit pushy. Most, but not all, are vegetarian types, with a great deal of insight on plant cultivation & usage, veterinary skills, foraging, and the geology of the planet. They often include a surprising number of individuals who are highly skilled in botany, geology, organic & inorganic chemistry, meteorology, natural, holistic and homeopathic medicine, and other scientific disciplines.

The other half, however, can include extremist groups of the pseudo-survivalist label. Pseudo-survivalists are generally the only types mentioned by the media. They are not actually survivalists at all, and are only valuable to the media for their entertainment and shock value. These groups are usually ill-prepared for operations outside of modern society. They include the 60-70’s type "hippie communes," the polygamous partner (read: free sex) groups, the New Age religious retreats, and the more aggressive (and often militant) anti-technology "save the earth" groups. While they may be well organized as a group, the only thing they have in common with true survivalist groups is the label they’ve been given by the media.

These groups operate under a separate set of philosophies that have little to do with survival or survivalism. They wish to live outside the laws of society and/or seek to create their own. They are often concerned with building membership solely for the purpose of withdrawing from society, draining their members’ bank accounts, establishing new "profound" religions, or butting heads with the current political philosophies. They are usually anarchistic and nearly all have a flamboyant presentation. Most of them have established an "infallible" figurehead council or leader directing every aspect of their membership’s lives. They make for interesting news, but they are not survivalists.

Primitive Skills Groups:
These groups believe that developing non-technological (though often quite technical) skills are the only way to ensure survival in a prolonged catastrophe. They are often "purists" and sometimes of a particular religious sect, such as the Quakers and the Amish. Normally, they do not claim that the Primitive Skills method is the best, the preferable, or the only method, but that it is the only reliable method for survival. They believe that technology will be difficult to maintain or re-establish in an extended survival scenario. The primitive skills of generations past – using only their hands and what they can find or make for themselves from the surrounding countryside – they believe, will always be available to anyone with the drive to learn the skills. These groups are similar to the "Back to Nature" groups in their avoidance of technology and technological materials in their methods. Many of these groups have amassed centuries of valuable information and techniques for survival in the absence of technology, including natural mechanics (hydro & wind power using simple energy transfer devices), herbal medicine, and basic primitive chemistries.

The drawbacks of this survival theory stem primarily from the purist point of view. Many of them have romanticized their method without immersion in its reality. They often fail to realize that, while this method is undoubtedly valid and of great value, the pre-technological era was a nightmare of disease, shortened life spans, and constant hardship for the common man. The primitive lifestyle cannot efficiently support a large group of people and often requires a nomadic existence. Careful cultivation of the local flora and fauna must also be exercised at all times, and while one group may indeed practice this technique, those survivors who do not follow their philosophy can easily denude their environment in a matter of days or weeks.

The Amish, Pennsylvania Dutch, and Quakers have created long-lasting and highly successful primitive technology communities. This is an excellent example of proper management of resources for primitive living. Unfortunately, most folks do not have the desire or ability to "go primitive" every hour of every day of their lives. Nor do they have the discipline it takes. These religious communities survive because they are founded in their religious beliefs, and because they do not, at this time, face any direct threats from aggressive opposition. Since they do not have an organized defensive capability, I do not expect these communities will last long, on their own, in the event of a catastrophe severe enough to force the breakdown of civilization.

The Primitive Skills group also has their fringe elements of anti-technology activists and eco-terrorists.

Hi-Tech Groups:
These groups rely on advanced technological systems to sustain them in the event of catastrophe. They use computers and various independent energy generating systems, short-wave communications, mini-labs and medical facilities, microwaves and freezers, alternative fuel vehicles and production plants, and heavily constructed shelters with air filters and elaborate locking mechanisms. They stand an excellent chance (better than most) of surviving the immediate effects of a major catastrophe in a superior & relatively comfortable lifestyle.

The drawbacks of this mindset are many, beginning with the cost factor. This type of survival approach is unattainable to the common man. It takes an enormous financial contribution to set up, stock, and maintain this system. To do it correctly, all components must be available initially and immediately – for this system relies on the total integration of technological systems performing in harmony. Remove one or more system, and the entire system begins to self-destruct. This means you must begin with a basic, yet complete, system and continually upgrade as the project progresses.

Because of the initial financial requirements, this system is rarely used outside of governments, government officials, the military, the very wealthy - and large religious organizations. This system also requires either secrecy or a large security force/system capable of repelling all manner of aggressive and desperate opposition. Because of the integration of systems, this group must stockpile or have the capacity to manufacture every conceivable component of the systems they utilize. Unless civilization is restored in a fairly short period of time, this system is bound to eventually degrade until it is no longer a viable survival solution.

The weakest link in the system remains, however, the personnel involved. This technique is the most attractive to those least prepared to survive on their own. They are the technologically dependent. Whoever controls the technology will have the ability to control all others in the group. This is the perfect recipe for tyranny. You either perform exactly as demanded, or face certain death (by your lack of survival skills) upon banishment from the group. This is a pretty persuasive argument and could lead to some very unsavory situations.

These groups also contain the most arrogant, suspicious and paranoid members of any group save, perhaps, for the paramilitary groups. They also attract the laziest and least physically fit members who depend upon the technology to sustain them. Unfortunately, they have a great capacity to attract the most intelligent scientists and technologists, as well.

Lest anyone debase survivalism and survival groups automatically, they should know that this type of group is the very type your Senators, Congressmen, bureaucrats and officials belong to.

Paramilitary (Survive-By-Force) Groups:
These groups are not, in fact, survival groups at all. They are aggressive forces completely dependent upon each other - and on the ability of other survivors to sustain them. They are neither independent in thought nor in action, but rather a successive chain of "leaders" and "followers" who refuse to accept responsibility for their actions by the simple expedient of "following orders." Their leaders are completely dependent upon their followers commitment to carrying out their orders, and their followers are completely dependent on their leaders ability to track down and successfully implement a plan of attack against other, true, survivors.

Few of these groups have the ability or desire to survive on their own. They invest their efforts in little more than guns, bunkers, and military training. Oh, yes – and uniforms. They are fraught with egotistical, paranoid, antisocial individuals from all walks of life and often display deep seated hatreds for certain races, religions, or political theories. The majority of members are ill-trained, ill-educated, underachievers who can be satisfied with a meal, a uniform, and some semblance of rank conferring power over others.

These groups will be the greatest threat to the post-catastrophe world. I suspect that 20-50% of their initial followers will desert the group in the months immediately following a major catastrophe. These "deserters" will be the semi-independent hopeful few who were mislead (by themselves, of course) into joining the group for reasons of security through superior firepower. The dregs that remain, however, will be the most brutal, aggressive, and desperate bunch to ever roam the countryside – and they will be well armed. With powerful, persuasive and moderately intelligent leadership, this remaining group could wreak havoc among other survivors.

These groups are not survivalists, they are predators. Many of the groups actually hope for a catastrophe to take place – and some may even be actively involved in creating their own catastrophes. They are borderline terrorists held in check only by the civilized majority and current military and police forces. Given the chance, they will run rampantly and violently to their own extinction – taking anyone in their way with them. The are the absolute antithesis of survivalism and the survivalist theories.

Positive Action/Combined Skills Groups:
This type of group seeks to combine the best of all theories, and is the most difficult to form – not because of financial concerns or individual skills, but because of the inability of the members to accept the basic philosophies of the others. This type of group, once formed, probably stands the best chance of extended survival, as it covers the broadest range of circumstances and the skills needed to overcome them.

This group integrates primitive skills and back-to-nature members with those who have the knowledge and ability to build and sustain a more technologically advanced existence. It combines the pacifist elements with a protective corps of defense specialists, and requires a great (and difficult) degree of logical acceptance, integration, specialization and commitment among all its members. It demands that each member recognizes the value of the others to the group, and that each performs to the best of their abilities (in their specialized skills) while accepting the contribution of others to the security of the group as a whole.

The "positive action" aspect of this type of group refers to the individual members commitment to help out in whatever manner needed – regardless of their specialized skills. Survival is a labor-intensive endeavor, and each member must be willing to lend a hand - or a strong back and shoulder – wherever & whenever needed. In this day and age, these types of individuals are not easy to find.

However, having formed such a group and successfully integrated its members, this group stands the very best chance of surviving and rebuilding some semblance of civilization. They combine all of the elements necessary to forge on without having to relearn the basics of modern life and suffer through a "Dark Ages" progression to technology. If large enough, intelligent enough, and sufficiently motivated, they could conceivably build (in time) a far better world than the one we live in now. They could integrate the best of modern technology and science with the best of "natural" living – discarding the destructive and wasteful technologies & lifestyles for what they are.

Perceived Threats:
Daily threats: Power Outages, Medical emergencies, Lost individuals, Crashes & derailments, Mugging, robberies & car jacking, Gangs & drugs, Lost employment & disability recovery, etc.

Local/Widespread Natural Disaster
Famine & Disease
Terrorism & terrorist activities
Government/Economic Collapse & Civil Unrest
Global Warfare/Catastrophe
Class/Race/Religious War and/or Government Tyranny
The Apocalypse, Invasion from Outer Space, Etc.
The above list is not comprehensive or all-inclusive. These are simply the more visible threats and popular reasons for joining the survivalist movement. Granted, some of them are a bit far-fetched, but who are we to say what will or will not happen? Survivalists do not discount a threat simply because it is improbable, they access the level of probability and do what they can to plan accordingly.

Survivalists are a minority in a world that has accepted majority rule. That those who have a majority of dollars, pounds, rubles, francs, lire, shekels, etcetera, usually represent the "majority", is completely beside the point. Someone else controls the destiny of the world. We can only attempt to control our own destinies within our environment. Should civilization stumble and fall, the prepared survivalists will be the only ones capable of making Mankind’s last stand.

In my opinion, the amount of energy and vehement diatribe aimed at belittling and debasing survivalists and survivalism is directly proportionate to the need for survivalism to continue. Our current society appears to be in the throes of a delusional belief that, as long as we refuse to recognize a threat and act accordingly, the threat will refuse to impose itself upon us. Well I, for one, will not cross a street without looking both ways, and tend to dodge large falling objects. It seems pretty simple to me…

Meg.
4 May 1998
Última edición por Xell el 04 Abr 2014, 23:58, editado 1 vez en total.

Avatar de Usuario
Xell
Mensajes: 2520
Registrado: 18 Ene 2002, 01:00
Ubicación: movilizada

SURVIVALISM GETS A BAD RAP!

Mensaje por Xell » 19 Feb 2004, 20:11

Extraído de: http://www.rmsg.us/megsed/4th.htm

SURVIVALISM GETS A BAD RAP!

These days, anyone professing an interest in "survivalism" does so at their own risk. Odd looks, scoffing remarks, and suspicion bordering on hysteria are the mildest reactions one might expect. Mention survivalism and some folks will automatically equate it with terrorists, paramilitary groups, white racists & separatists, religious occultism and UniBomber madmen - all intent on destroying "civilization as we know it."

It doesn't help much that the Internet News Groups associated with survivalism are often frequented by individuals filling these descriptions. Nor does it help to see pages of firearms ads and "anarchist cookbooks" for sale in the popular Survival Magazines. But the internet is an open forum - anyone can sign on and join any group, spewing whatever flavor of madness they prefer. There's no way to stop them. And the magazines have a business to run. Advertising covers the majority of operating expenses and a simple disclaimer at the beginning of the classifieds removes the magazines' "association" with the contents/items listed.

The true survivalist is nothing more than an individual, family, or group who believe that self-reliance equates with security. They are highly independent, self-motivated, self-reliant, self-responsible and innovative persons who would rather do things for themselves (or at the very least, know how to do things for themselves) than depend on others for the things they need. Less than a hundred years ago, the majority of people in this nation might have fallen into this category - and considered it a matter of pride and necessity. Back then, "we take care of our own" was the credo of the common man and it was a considerable defeat to have to accept charity, ask for credit, or apply for a loan (outside of business ventures).

But the times have changed, and with them, the societal view. The average household and business today is in hock up to their necks. Nearly everyone has or wants a credit card, seeks loans for cars and homes and "personal loans." Charity is a state sponsored and administrated program delivering indiscriminate and outlandish sums to millions of healthy, capable and unappreciative individuals who make no effort to make it on their own. We depend on others to grow, kill, process, package, deliver - and even cook our food. We depend on others for our heat and power and water. We depend on others to build our homes and to fix them when something goes wrong. We depend on others to build and maintain our cars and roads - and blame them when something goes wrong. We depend on others for our safety, our security, our very lives. And when these things are taken away from us, we scream in rage, protest the indignities thrust upon us, demand compensation (from others), demand retribution (from others), demand "justice" (from others). And then, we slink off to whatever corner we can find to lick our wounds and moan about how things "just aren't fair." Modern society in a nutshell.

The saddest part of it all is that most people consider this to be "normal." When things are good, they are very good - so why worry about tomorrow? Why worry about things that "probably won't happen to me?" And if it does, there will always be somebody else to blame, and some government agency - or lawsuit - to set things right again.

The modern survivalist is a throwback to a lost era of independence. It is this very act of independence that is repugnant to today's common man. It is a slap in the face of every person who would rather get things "the easy way." It is an unspoken condemnation of their way of life, revealing the helplessness and dependence of the average man on his neighbors. Americans like to think of themselves as robust individualists, strong and independent. The survivalist paradigm bursts this bubble of euphoric faith, and hence, is a clear threat to the "American way of Life."

Non survivalists resent the knowledge that they cannot exist outside the scope of their benefactors. They fear that, should life revert to an age of true independence, they will actually have to work for their own existence - and they haven't a clue how to begin. Nor would they want to. Those of us who grew up during the cold war have all heard a friend or acquaintance mutter the fatalistic phrase: "I wouldn't want to survive a nuclear war." Now that the threat of nuclear war has all but past, the phrase has been reapplied to global catastrophes, economic collapse, etc. The simple fact is, most folks would rather die than work towards their own survival - and they certainly don't care to learn how to be self-sufficient when they can flip a switch, turn a faucet, pick up a phone, or run to the corner store for anything they might need or desire.

But somewhere in the well guarded recesses of each and every human being lives a primal man, trained by centuries of self-preservation and instinct for survival, that scoffs at and vexes them. They know that the modern lifestyle they lead is against their very nature, and they hate and fear that aspect of themselves. This, in turn, leads to a deep seated fear of, prejudice against, and even persecution of anyone who might remind them that, in the end, they have only themselves to rely on. These people cannot accept the survivalist way of life without re-examining, and perhaps abandoning, their own.

The advantages of modern society are many and great, but the perils of modern society are far greater than anything ever faced by mankind before. With the simple, but extended, loss of power, communication, and transportation, an easy three-fifths of mankind would cease to exist in a matter of months. What ever catastrophe resulted in this loss would claim a small percentage of the population. Then violence, disease, famine and exposure would lay their claims. Those who could not adapt, would not survive. It isn't too hard to think of any number of situations which could result in such catastrophes. Nature herself, both in space and on earth, is getting ever more violent. Terrorism is on the rise, government inefficiency and duplicity continues upon its historical path, worldwide economies are out of control and nobody really knows what's holding them together. And then there's the Y2K thing...

In my opinion, survivalism is the only logical, sane, and attainable hope for the future of the species. Without survivalists, the only survivors of a major catastrophe would be the politicians and their servants - and everybody knows that a politician is a completely different animal! (That's a JOKE, people! Get over it!) Survivalists keep the core traits alive that have allowed mankind to conquer the planet. Survivalist-type people will be the first to colonize new planets, if we ever get off our duffs and decide to do so. Survivalists are not only the embodiment of the past, they are the best hope for the future. Survivalists are never fatalists. Survivalists never give up hope and they never stop trying. A survivalist knows that setbacks are inevitable, yet conquerable, and knows that success and survival only goes to those with the will to succeed and the will to survive. Survivalists are the dreamers and the discoverers, the inventors and the innovators, the builders and developers. Survivalists are the very foundation of all societies, past, present and future. Without survivalists, there would be no society to ridicule and disdain them.

'Nuff said.

meg.

Avatar de Usuario
Xell
Mensajes: 2520
Registrado: 18 Ene 2002, 01:00
Ubicación: movilizada

WHAT IS A SURVIVALIST?

Mensaje por Xell » 19 Feb 2004, 20:33

WHAT IS A SURVIVALIST? by Kurt Saxon, 1980

Extraído de: http://www.textfiles.com/survival/whatsurv


When a person embarks on a course of action, whether it be a
profession, hobby, belief, or whatever, a label is needed. Some
people don't like labels but they are necessary for advertising and
identification.
The term "Survivalist" is fast becoming a household word. It
is mentioned constantly on television, in newspapers, magazines and
radio. Although just about everyone has come across it, few really
know what it means. The term evolved from the general phrase "back
to the lander". That was used mainly by ecologists and
conservationists alarmed at the growing pollution affecting the
quality of life.
The January 1970 issue of MOTHER EARTH NEWS printed a comment
by Gary Snyder on pollution. "The human race for the last century
has allowed its production and dissemination of wastes, by-products
and various chemical substances to become excessive. Pollution is
directly harming the eco-system. It is also ruining the
environment in every direct way for humanity itself."
In the same issue, reprinting from CAVALIER, an article
titled "How to Make It Your Way", they suggested escaping to
communes. "So the air is full of crud and the water tastes funny
and the nine-to-five is a drag. You're tired of the subway, dog
crap in the streets, bumper-to-bumper traffic and plastic TV
dinners. Maybe the communes--with all that fresh air, sunshine,
love and homebaked bread--are really into something."
The communes didn't work out very well. There was an overall
likemindedness but the lack of discipline and practical skills
doomed most such projects from the start. Also, too many who
joined communes simply wanted a secure refuge where they could
smoke their dope in peace.
THE MOTHER EARTH NEWS had a great impact on the Urban Dropout
movement from the time of its first publication in January 1970.
They made millions aware of the possibility of finding a more
pleasant environment and creating a more secure and fulfilling
lifestyle.
In the early '70's Don Stevens, who sells books on
self-sufficiency out of Washington state, popularized the term
"retreater". The term obviously indicated one who had prepared a
retreat in the boondocks to go to when city living became
intolerable.
There is nothing wrong with the term "retreater" when used in
its proper context. But it is a buzz word to certain types. I
just heard what might have been a joke about a general who had an
auto accident because he ignored a "Yield" sign. "Yield" was a
buzz word to him.
"Retreater" was acceptable to pacifist drop-outs of the MOTHER
EARTH NEWS school of thought. But to the more aggressive person it
had strong connotations of cowardice.
I certainly didn't like it, since my scenario of the near
future calls for aggressive measures to protect mine from all
comers. A poem says "I'll build my house by the side of the road
and watch the rest of the world go by." That attitude is fine for
"retreaters" but what happens when part of the world turns in to
loot that house by the side of the road?
The pacifist drop-outs and other non-involved persons simply
leave the cities with no fanfare. They don't feel the need for a
label because their move is not any form of protest. Also, they
don't seem aware that the people they simply don't care to live
near may well be a danger to them in the future as marauders.
Unlike the back-to-the-landers, the ecologists, the retreaters
and such, survivalists are not non-involved pacifists. They are
not necessarily eager to kill, either. They are simply aware that
civilization is cracking up and see the possible need for desperate
measures to come through with a whole skin.
The social unrest of the '60's gave a great but delayed
impetus to the Survivalist movement. As discontent manifested in
urban rioting, clashes between militant rightists and leftists,
assassinations, etc., the government threatened gun confiscation.
Millions grew afraid of their government and felt trapped and
helpless. As their children were bussed to black neighborhoods, as
their streets became increasingly dangerous and the quality of life
lowered, they began wanting out.
The weapons oriented magazines urged protest on all levels.
They also detailed to their readers the government threats as well
as the overall urban dissolution.
Some of them used the term "retreater" when suggesting that
their readers drop out. But gun-oriented types were more likely to
sit tight than leave under the stigma of "retreater". I am not
suggesting that anyone put off leaving because of the term. It is
just that they took a militant stand rather than retreat.
In late 1975 when starting THE SURVIVOR, I coined the term
"Survivalist" and used it in the first issue published in January
of 1976. In THE SURVIVOR I have been urging decent people to
abandon urban blight and take their loved ones to a safer
environment.
My term has been catching on and now those offended by
"retreater" are quite satisfied to call themselves Survivalists and
move out. It has turned out to be a word anyone can accept as a
label if they want one.
Even so, the media is generally down on urban dropouts so they
have been giving Survivalists a bad name. As you know, the media
is part and parcel of the Urban Establishment. It follows that
anyone unwilling to stay in the cities and support the
Establishment and its hordes of dependents is some kind of a kook.
A while back, Boyd Matson, of the TODAY SHOW, called with the
idea of interviewing me. When he found I didn't wear a camouflage
jacket, a beret and carry a burp gun he backed off.
Some time later I saw the segment he made to describe
Survivalists. There was a flock of about a dozen turkeys wearing
camouflage jackets and drilling with rifles in the Oregon woods.
I didn't know them but I could tell they were urban clerical
types fantasizing playing soldier. They said they had a cache of
food and weapons they would go to when the collapse came. In the
event that they could get to their cache they would find that
roughing it might be a little harder than they thought. Also, with
such a Mickey Mouse setup they would run out of supplies in no
time. Then they would turn into the same kind of predators they
claimed to be armed against.
Do not be surprised when you see Survivalists portrayed as
idiots and fear-crazed kooks. The sorriest was the Lou Grant
segment titled "The Survivalists." They had a nut in that show
who, during a California flood, stole a roll of plastic at
gunpoint. He had his kids armed and waving their weapons at anyone
who came around. He also used a phrase from one of my editorials,
"Those who prepare to survive deserve to survive."
So they had my material and used it to make Survivalists look
stupid and dangerous. They don't all do that but don't be
disturbed when you see such depictions.
Although everybody uses it today, I figure since I made it up
I can also make up its definition. I certainly didn't mean it to be
used to describe predators.
My definition of a Survivalist is a self-reliant person who
trusts himself and his abilities more than he trusts the
Establishment. Insofar as the Establishment is deteriorating, the
Survivalist prepares to leave it.
There are some who call themselves Urban Survivalists but I
consider that a contradiction in terms. To hole up in an apartment
and expect to survive mobs of starving rioters is silly. Imagine
utilities cut off or blown up. Add police and National Guardsmen
fighting urban guerrillas, firemen letting whole blocks burn and
all exits being cut off.
A real Survivalist would move out of the urban area to a small
town while there is still time. I can't see how a Survivalist
could live in a city in the first place.
So if you consider yourself a Survivalist and want to tell
your unborn grandchildren about it, get out of the city. Move to a
small town and become part of the community.
When the worst is over you might have seen some turmoil and
even driven away some urban marauders. But you and yours will
survive with dignity and with no regrets. That is what a real
Survivalist is.

________________________________________________________

Avatar de Usuario
Xell
Mensajes: 2520
Registrado: 18 Ene 2002, 01:00
Ubicación: movilizada

Mensaje por Xell » 08 Mar 2005, 10:03

WE ARE SURVIVALISTS
He who fails to prepare for the night, fails to prepare for the dawn.

http://www.textfiles.com/survival/lfiweare.prn

I am a survivalalist and by nature a survivalist is an OPTIMIST. I do not
have one pessimistic bone in my body. If what I just said sounds odd to you
then you are not yet a survivalist and you do not understand the modern
survivalist at all. It has been very difficult to communicate to the public
and the mass communications media, the concept of an optimistic, hopeful
survivalist.
A fireman is a fireman, not because he believes everything will burn, but
because he believes much can be saved. Doctors don't believe in death, they
believe in life, and a survivalist is not a survivalist becuase he beleives
everything must be destroyed and everyone must die, he beleives that life and
freedom can be saved, if people of good will are prepared. A fireman does not
start fires, a doctor does not make disease and a survivalist does not make
disaster.
Crime, disease, war, revolution, fire, flood, periodic financial collapse
and famine are the results of nature and the nature of man and unfortunately
are not within the power of anyone on this earth to prevent.
We all know that the sun will set each day, leaving us in darkness and we
all know that warm summers give way to cold winters and that we can do nothing
to keep the sun from setting ot the cold winds from coming, does this make us
pessimistic? I think not! So then why is the survivalist called a pessimist
when he makes ready to face events that are just as much part of history and
nature as the sunset and changing of the seasons.
Another misconception is that survivalists are predicting world disaster.
On the contrary, we seem to be the OPTIMISTIC MINORITY that is predicting
world survival. We are hard pressed to find any well recommended historians,
economists, political scientists, sociologists or military strategists that
can come up with a scenario that gives even a fifty-fifty chance of avioding a
large scale catastrophe, yet we survivalist dare to be OPTIMISTIC about the
future. We survivalists do not need to predict the probability of disater
anymore than we need to predict the sun setting.
Those who critize survivalists, are like men who refuse to look at a
calendar, in the hope that through self-imposed ignorance they can keep from
aging another year.
"You survivalists will be disappointed if we don't have a world cataclysm",
here is another accusation that is pure B.S. and I could not think of a milder
phrase to describe it. We survivalists have loved ones we don't want to see
hurt or killed, we have homes we don't want to see destroyed, we are not fools
to think that just because we are suvrvivalists a world cataclysm would be fun
for us or the we would not experiance danger, loss, hunger, injury, cold or
even despair and death.
We have spent time and money to improve our chances for survival and
recovery from disaster, but we would have a great celebration if some day we
could be assured that we had wasted our time. No, we will not be disappointed
if there is no disaster to survive, anymore than the Red Cross is disappointed
when there are no floods and storms or the man who buys an insurance policy is
disappointed when his house fails to burn down.
It may be said that the survivalist would much prefer the pleasant (but
unlikely) surprise of being wrong to the (probable) deadly rude awakening that
the nonsurvivalist will face if he is wrong.

So, you see the survivalist can not lose because his survival prepartions
will be of value regardless of what the future has in store. In time of
crisis, those who have not prepared to turn to each other, will turn on each
other.
It is most regrettable indeed, that many people consider survivalists as a
threat and regard them with suspicion and even hostility. This attitude is
logically indefensible and is rooted in the nonsurvivalists own sense of fear
and guilt. Subconsciously, the nonsurvivalist may hate the survivalist for
reminding him of how fragile his lifestyle is. Now, let's get the facts
turned around right. THE MOST DANGEROUS PEOPLE IN AMERICA TODAY ARE THE
NONSURVIVALists. Every person who has not made provisions for surviving
without food, water, fuel and other essential needs from the outside, is a
mortal danger to his neighbors.
What will a man do when he and his family are freezing, hungry, thirsty,
sick and starving? He may ask or beg his neighbors for help, but when they
have no extra fuel, food, water or medicine to give, will he just go back home
to die with his wife and kids? What do you think? We survivalists who stock
up on food and other supplies, now do a favor to society because what we now
buy is replaced on the shelves so there will be that much more available in an
emergency. We survivalists won't be looting and killing for food. We won't be
a burden on the medical facilities or a danger to the police. Since we will
be able to turn to each other, we will not need to turn on anyone and we may
be able to help at least some.
Survival preparation should be regarded as a social obligation, one that
every individual owes to his family and community and his nation. The
nonsurvivalist is simply a poor and irresponsible citizen.
So the reality is, that survivalists are optimistic, self-reliant
individuals, who cannot help but see the imperitive of preparing for the worst
possible events, while hoping sincerely, that they won't happen. Today's
survivalist is an asset to his community and to the world and should be proud to be called SURVIVALIST.

LIVE FREE BOX 1743, HARVEY,IL 60426

Avatar de Usuario
Xell
Mensajes: 2520
Registrado: 18 Ene 2002, 01:00
Ubicación: movilizada

Re: What is Survivalism?

Mensaje por Xell » 04 Abr 2014, 23:57

Desempolvo el tema. Aquí se puede encontrar un índice de viejos textos (en inglés): http://www.textfiles.com/survival/

Y la entrada en wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivalism
- Si quieres tener una visión del futuro, imagina una bota pisoteando un rostro humano... para siempre.

Avatar de Usuario
genay
Mensajes: 307
Registrado: 27 May 2012, 16:28

Re: What is Survivalism? --> Survivalismo

Mensaje por genay » 08 Abr 2014, 23:38

Para los que tenemos poca idea de ingles lo tenemos crudo :lol:
A veces sentimos que lo que hacemos es tan solo una gota en el mar, pero el mar sería menos si le faltara esa gota.

Avatar de Usuario
Xell
Mensajes: 2520
Registrado: 18 Ene 2002, 01:00
Ubicación: movilizada

Re: What is Survivalism? --> Survivalismo

Mensaje por Xell » 08 Abr 2014, 23:57

Puedes usar un traductor automático para mirar qué te interesa, que como no son muy buenos, luego se puede preguntar dudas

https://translate.google.es/
- Si quieres tener una visión del futuro, imagina una bota pisoteando un rostro humano... para siempre.

Avatar de Usuario
Xell
Mensajes: 2520
Registrado: 18 Ene 2002, 01:00
Ubicación: movilizada

Re: What is Survivalism? --> Survivalismo

Mensaje por Xell » 09 Abr 2014, 00:03

Traducción automática del primer texto:

¿Qué es el Survivalismo ?

El Survivalismo (la traducción literal de Survival sería Supervivenvia) es una filosofía - una forma de vida - y es tan variado en su metodología como teorías religiosas o políticas de los mundos . El objetivo principal de survivalismo , por cualquier método que se elija , es aumentar las probabilidades de la existencia continuada de sus seguidores, cuando se enfrentan a una situación amenazante . Contrariamente a la opinión popular, no es una tautología "activista" . La mayoría de supervivencialistas son reservados y tranquilos individuos que han perdido la fe en la capacidad de la sociedad para proteger su propia , y que han tomado medidas para reducir su dependencia de la sociedad para la ayuda en una situación de emergencia .

Survivalists se dan cuenta de que la sociedad moderna es una larga y retorcida cadena de interdependencia . Cada eslabón de esta cadena de la sociedad depende de cada dos conexiones para mantener su integridad . En varios puntos dentro de esta cadena son enlaces que proporcionan el resto de la cadena con la alimentación, la vivienda , la energía , el agua, las comunicaciones , el transporte y la protección médica y física. En caso de que uno o más enlaces de fallar, los colocados antes y después del enlace roto ( s ) pueden encontrarse sin estos recursos necesarios. Suficiente de estos vínculos deben romperse de repente , toda la cadena puede colapsar.

Survivalists intentan reforzar la cadena de la sociedad mediante el fortalecimiento de sus propios enlaces . Lo hacen mediante el aprendizaje activo y la práctica de las habilidades necesarias para proporcionar u obtener las necesidades básicas de la vida para sí mismos , sus familias y sus amigos. Ellos aprenden a construir y mantener sus propios hogares , proporcionar su propia ropa, encontrar , almacenar y purificar su propia agua, establecer y mantener sus propias comunicaciones y el transporte . Ellos aprenden a cultivar , cazar o recolectar sus propios alimentos y la forma de procesar y almacenarla. Aprenden a producir, mantener y distribuir su propio poder. Aprenden a mantener su salud a través de dieta y ejercicio, y cómo evitar o manejar las lesiones básicas y enfermedades. Y sí , aprenden a defenderse de los agresores cuando no hay nadie allí para protegerlos.

Survivalism no se concentra necesariamente en una catástrofe global o el colapso de la civilización. El perfil de un "verdadero" de supervivencia es alguien que se ocupa de la planificación y evitar las trampas y los peligros de la vida cotidiana y las emergencias y desastres de carácter local y temporal a corto plazo. De hecho , ya que la frecuencia y la probabilidad de emergencias personales y locales son más comunes, estas situaciones son de interés primordial .

Desastres generalizados a largo plazo y son de interés para la supervivencia , pero son extremadamente difíciles de planear . El individuo (o una sola familia ) a menudo no disponen de los recursos - ya sea financieramente , materialmente o intelectualmente - para planificar de manera eficiente por un largo plazo , el desastre generalizado. Aquí es donde los grupos de supervivencia entran en escena .

Grupos de supervivencia se forman para poner en común los recursos de supervivencialistas individuales. En general se forman de individuos afines interesados ​​en una teoría en particular , o el método , que creen que será la más efectiva , en el caso de una catástrofe extendida . Superviviente teorías pueden dividirse en varias categorías basadas en a. ) Técnicas primarias de supervivencia empleadas y , b. ) Las amenazas percibidas . Cada una de estas categorías se pueden sub - clasificarse por las creencias de los miembros políticos , creencias religiosas, las preocupaciones ambientales, y los prejuicios raciales aún .

Categorías de amplia base :
Técnicas de supervivencia primarios:

Bajo Impacto , Volver a los grupos de la naturaleza
Primitive Habilidades Grupos
Hi-Tech Grupos
Paramilitares ( de sobrevivir la Fuerza ) Grupos
Acción positiva / habilidades combinadas Grupos

Bajo Impacto , Back- To- Naturaleza Grupos :
Estos grupos creen que la vida en armonía con su entorno natural es el mejor método para la supervivencia. Alrededor de la mitad de ellos son personas pacíficas , muy amables y discretos dispuestos a compartir su conocimiento de la " unicidad con el planeta " sin que parezca lo más mínimo poco agobiante . La mayoría, pero no todos, son tipos vegetarianos , con una gran cantidad de información sobre el cultivo de la planta y el uso, habilidades veterinarios , forraje, y la geología del planeta. A menudo incluyen un sorprendente número de personas que están altamente capacitados en la botánica , la geología, la química orgánica y inorgánica, la meteorología, la medicina natural, holística y homeopática , y otras disciplinas científicas.

La otra mitad , sin embargo , se puede incluir a los grupos extremistas de la etiqueta pseudo supervivencia . Pseudo- supervivencialistas son generalmente los únicos tipos mencionados por los medios de comunicación. No son en realidad supervivencialistas en absoluto, y sólo son valiosas para los medios de comunicación para su entretenimiento y valor de choque . Estos grupos suelen estar mal preparados para las operaciones fuera de la sociedad moderna. Ellos incluyen el tipo del 60-70 " comunas hippies , " el socio polígamo (léase: el sexo libre ) grupos , los retiros espirituales de la Nueva Era , y el más agresivo (ya menudo militante ) anti-tecnología grupos " salvar la tierra " . Si bien pueden estar bien organizados como grupo, la única cosa que tienen en común con los verdaderos grupos supervivencialistas es la etiqueta que se les ha dado por los medios de comunicación.

Estos grupos operan bajo un conjunto separado de las filosofías que tienen poco que ver con la supervivencia o survivalismo . Desean vivir fuera de las leyes de la sociedad y / o tratar de crear su propia cuenta. A menudo tienen que ver con la construcción de la membresía con el único fin de retirarse de la sociedad , drenando las cuentas bancarias de sus miembros , el establecimiento de nuevas religiones "profundas " , o tienen fricciones con las filosofías políticas actuales. Por lo general son anárquicos y casi todos tienen una presentación extravagante . La mayoría de ellos han establecido un consejo o líder mascarón de proa "infalible " dirigir todos los aspectos de la vida de su membresía. Hacen de noticias interesantes , pero no son supervivencialistas .

Primitive Habilidades Grupos:
Estos grupos creen que el desarrollo no tecnológica (aunque a menudo muy técnicos) habilidades son la única manera de asegurar la supervivencia en una catástrofe prolongada. A menudo son "puristas" y, a veces de una secta religiosa en particular , como los cuáqueros y los amish . Normalmente, los autores no afirman que el método Habilidades primitivo es lo mejor, lo preferible , o el único método , sino que es el único método fiable para la supervivencia. Ellos creen que la tecnología será difícil de mantener o restablecer en un escenario de supervivencia prolongada. Las habilidades primitivas de las generaciones pasadas - usando sólo sus manos y lo que pueden encontrar o hacer por sí mismos de la campiña de los alrededores - ellos creen , siempre estarán a disposición de cualquier persona con la unidad para aprender las habilidades . Estos grupos son similares a la " vuelta a la naturaleza " grupos en su evasión de la tecnología y los materiales tecnológicos en sus métodos. Muchos de estos grupos han acumulado siglos de valiosa información y técnicas de supervivencia en ausencia de la tecnología, incluyendo la mecánica natural ( hidroeléctrica y energía eólica utilizando dispositivos de transferencia de energía simples ) , hierbas medicinales y químicas básicas primitivas .

Los inconvenientes de esta teoría supervivencia provienen principalmente desde el punto de vista purista. Muchos de ellos han idealizado su método sin la inmersión en su realidad. A menudo no se dan cuenta que, si bien este método es sin duda válido y de gran valor , la era pre - tecnológica fue una pesadilla de la enfermedad , la esperanza de vida más cortos , y la penuria constante para el hombre común. El estilo de vida primitiva no puede apoyar de manera eficiente a un gran grupo de personas y con frecuencia requiere una existencia nómada . El cultivo cuidadoso de la flora y la fauna locales también se debe ejercer en todo momento, y mientras un grupo de hecho puede practicar esta técnica , los sobrevivientes que no siguen su filosofía puede despojar fácilmente su entorno en cuestión de días o semanas.

Los Amish , Pensilvania holandesa , y los cuáqueros han creado comunidades tecnológicas primitivas de larga duración y de gran éxito . Este es un excelente ejemplo de una gestión adecuada de los recursos para la vida primitiva. Desafortunadamente , la mayoría de la gente no tiene el deseo o la capacidad de " ir primitivo" cada hora de cada día de sus vidas. Tampoco tienen la disciplina que se necesita . Estas comunidades religiosas sobreviven porque se basan en sus creencias religiosas , y porque no, en este momento , se enfrentan a las amenazas directas de oposición agresiva. Ya que ellos no tienen una capacidad defensiva organizada, no espero estas comunidades durará mucho tiempo , por su cuenta, en caso de una catástrofe lo suficientemente graves como para forzar la ruptura de la civilización.

El grupo de Habilidades Primitivo también tiene sus elementos marginales de activistas anti- tecnológicos y eco-terroristas .

Hi-Tech Grupos:
Estos grupos se basan en sistemas tecnológicos avanzados para sostenerlos en caso de catástrofe. Ellos usan las computadoras y diversos sistemas de generación de energía independientes , las comunicaciones de onda corta , mini- laboratorios y centros médicos, microondas y congeladores, vehículos de combustible alternativo y plantas de producción, y los refugios construidos en gran medida con los filtros de aire y los mecanismos de cierre elaboradas. Se destacan una excelente oportunidad (mejor que la mayoría) de sobrevivir a los efectos inmediatos de una catástrofe importante en un estilo de vida superior y relativamente cómoda .

Los inconvenientes de esta forma de pensar son muchos, empezando por el factor de costo . Este tipo de enfoque de la supervivencia es inalcanzable para el hombre común . Se necesita una enorme contribución financiera de configurar, de valores, y mantener este sistema. Para hacerlo correctamente , todos los componentes deben estar disponibles inicialmente y de inmediato - de este sistema se basa en la integración total de los sistemas tecnológicos que realizan en armonía. Retire uno o más sistemas , y todo el sistema comienza a autodestruirse . Esto significa que debe comenzar con una básica pero completa , sistema y actualizar continuamente el progreso del proyecto .

Debido a los requisitos financieros iniciales , este sistema se utiliza muy poco fuera de los gobiernos , funcionarios de gobierno , los militares, los muy ricos - y las grandes organizaciones religiosas. Este sistema también requiere ya sea secreto o una gran fuerza de seguridad / sistema capaz de repeler todo tipo de oposición agresiva y desesperada. Debido a la integración de sistemas , este grupo debe almacenar o de tener la capacidad para la fabricación de cada componente concebible de los sistemas que utilizan . A menos que la civilización se restaura en un período relativamente corto de tiempo , este sistema está obligado a degradarse con el tiempo hasta que ya no es una solución viable de la supervivencia .

El eslabón más débil del sistema sigue siendo , sin embargo , el personal involucrado . Esta técnica es la más atractiva para los menos preparados para sobrevivir por su cuenta . Ellos son la dependencia tecnológica . Quien controla la tecnología tendrá la capacidad de controlar todos los otros en el grupo . Esta es la receta perfecta para la tiranía. O se realiza exactamente como lo exige , o se enfrentan a una muerte segura ( por su falta de habilidades de supervivencia ) en el destierro del grupo . Este es un argumento muy persuasivo y podría dar lugar a algunas situaciones muy desagradables .

Estos grupos también contienen los más arrogantes , sospechosos y paranoicos de cualquier grupo excepto, quizás, para los grupos paramilitares. También atraen a los miembros en buena forma física más perezosos y menos que dependen de la tecnología para mantenerlos. Por desgracia , tienen una gran capacidad para atraer a los científicos y tecnólogos más inteligentes , también.

Para que nadie rebajan grupos survivalism y supervivencia de forma automática , deben saber que este tipo de grupo es el mismo tipo a sus senadores , diputados, burócratas y funcionarios pertenecen.

Paramilitares ( Survive -By -Force ) Grupos:
Estos grupos no son , de hecho , los grupos de supervivencia en absoluto . Son fuerzas agresivas completamente dependiente de los demás - y sobre la capacidad de los otros sobrevivientes para mantenerlos. No son ni independientes en el pensamiento ni en acción, sino más bien una cadena sucesiva de "líderes" y "seguidores" que se niegan a aceptar la responsabilidad de sus acciones por el simple expediente de " siguiendo órdenes ". Sus líderes son completamente dependientes de su compromiso seguidores a llevar a cabo sus órdenes , y sus seguidores son completamente dependientes de su capacidad líderes de localizar y aplicar con éxito un plan de ataque contra otros , verdaderos , de los supervivientes .

Pocos de estos grupos tienen la capacidad o el deseo de sobrevivir por sí mismos . Ellos invierten sus esfuerzos en poco más de cañones , tanques , y entrenamiento militar. Oh, sí - y uniformes. Ellos están llenos de individuos egoístas , paranoides, antisociales de todos los ámbitos de la vida y, a menudo muestran profundos odios sentados para ciertas razas , religiones, o las teorías políticas . La mayoría de los miembros están mal entrenados , mal educados , bajo rendimiento que puede ser satisfecho con una comida, un uniforme y una apariencia de rango que confiere poder sobre los demás .

Estos grupos serán la mayor amenaza para el mundo posterior a la catástrofe. Sospecho que el 20-50% de sus seguidores iniciales abandonará el grupo en los meses inmediatamente después de una catástrofe mayor . Estos " desertores" será la esperanza de algunos semi - independiente que era errónea ( por sí mismos , por supuesto) a unirse al grupo por razones de seguridad a través de la potencia de fuego superior. Los posos que quedan , sin embargo , será el grupo más brutal , agresivo y desesperado para vagar siempre el campo - y ellos estarán bien armados. Con poderosa , persuasiva y moderadamente inteligente liderazgo, este grupo restante podría causar estragos entre los otros supervivientes .

Estos grupos no son supervivencialistas , son depredadores. Muchos de los grupos en realidad la esperanza de una catástrofe que tenga lugar - y algunos pueden incluso ser activamente involucrado en la creación de sus propias catástrofes. Son terroristas límite mantenidos en jaque únicamente por la mayoría civilizada y las fuerzas militares y policiales actuales. Dada la oportunidad , van a correr desenfrenadamente y violentamente a su propia extinción - teniendo a nadie en su camino con ellos. El son la antítesis absoluta de survivalismo y las teorías supervivencialistas .

Habilidades de Acción Positiva / Combinadas Grupos:
Este tipo de grupo busca combinar lo mejor de todas las teorías , y es el más difícil de la forma - no debido a preocupaciones financieras o las habilidades individuales, pero debido a la incapacidad de los miembros para aceptar las filosofías básicas de los demás. Este tipo de grupo , una vez formado , probablemente representa la mejor oportunidad de supervivencia prolongada, ya que cubre la más amplia gama de circunstancias y de las habilidades necesarias para superarlos .

Este grupo integra habilidades primitivas y de regreso a la naturaleza los miembros con los que tienen el conocimiento y la capacidad de construir y mantener una existencia más avanzados tecnológicamente. Combina los elementos pacifistas con un cuerpo de protección de especialistas en defensa , y requiere de un gran (y difícil) grado de aceptación lógica , la integración , la especialización y el compromiso entre todos sus miembros. Exige que cada miembro reconoce el valor de los otros en el grupo, y que cada uno realiza a la medida de sus posibilidades ( en sus habilidades especializadas ), mientras que la aceptación de la contribución de los demás a la seguridad del grupo en su conjunto.

La "acción positiva" aspecto de este tipo de grupo se refiere al compromiso de los miembros individuales a ayudar de cualquier manera que sea necesario - independientemente de sus conocimientos especializados. La supervivencia es una tarea laboriosa , y cada miembro debe estar dispuesto a echar una mano - o una espalda fuerte y el hombro - donde sea y cuando sea necesario. En este día y edad , este tipo de personas que no son fáciles de encontrar .

Sin embargo , después de haber formado un grupo de este tipo y con éxito integrado sus miembros , este grupo representa la mejor oportunidad de sobrevivir y reconstruir algo parecido a la civilización. Ellos combinan todos los elementos necesarios para forjar adelante sin tener que volver a aprender los fundamentos de la vida moderna y sufren a través de una progresión de " edades oscuras " a la tecnología. Si es suficientemente grande, lo suficientemente inteligente, y suficientemente motivado, que concebiblemente podrían construir ( en el tiempo) de un mundo mucho mejor que la que vivimos ahora . Podrían integrar lo mejor de la tecnología moderna y la ciencia con el mejor de la vida "natural " - descartando las tecnologías y estilos de vida destructivos y derrochadores como lo que son .

Amenazas percibidas:
Amenazas diarias: Apagones , emergencias médicas , personas perdidas , accidentes y descarrilamientos , asaltos, robos y secuestro de vehículo , las pandillas y las drogas, la recuperación del empleo y la discapacidad perdidos , etc

Desastres Naturales Local / generalizada
El hambre y enfermedad
Actividades de terrorismo y terroristas
Gobierno / Colapso Económico y disturbios civiles
Global Guerra / Catástrofe
Clase / Raza / Guerra Religiosa y / o de Gobierno de la tiranía
El Apocalipsis , invasión del espacio exterior , Etc.
La lista anterior no es exhaustiva o de todo incluido. Estos son simplemente las amenazas más visibles y las razones más populares para unirse al movimiento de supervivencia . Por supuesto, algunos de ellos son un poco exagerado , pero ¿quiénes somos nosotros para decir qué va o no va a pasar? Survivalists no descartan una amenaza simplemente porque es improbable, que acceda al nivel de probabilidad y hacen lo que pueden para planificar en consecuencia .

Supervivientes son una minoría en un mundo que ha aceptado la mayoría. Que los que tienen la mayoría de los dólares, libras , rublos , francos , liras , siclos , etcétera, por lo general representan a la "mayoría" , es completamente fuera de lugar . Alguien controla el destino del mundo . Sólo podemos tratar de controlar nuestro propio destino dentro de nuestro medio ambiente. En caso de tropiezo civilización y el otoño, los supervivencialistas preparados serán los únicos capaces de hacer la última resistencia de la humanidad .

En mi opinión, la cantidad de energía y vehemente diatriba dirigida a menospreciar y degradando supervivencialistas y survivalismo es directamente proporcional a la necesidad de survivalismo para continuar. Nuestra sociedad actual parece estar en medio de una creencia delirante de que , siempre y cuando nos negamos a reconocer una amenaza y actuar en consecuencia , la amenaza se negará a imponerse sobre nosotros. Bueno, yo , por mi parte, no cruzar la calle sin mirar a ambos lados , y tienden a esquivar las grandes caídas de objetos. Parece bastante simple para mí ...

Meg.
04 de mayo 1998
- Si quieres tener una visión del futuro, imagina una bota pisoteando un rostro humano... para siempre.

alden
Mensajes: 1
Registrado: 08 Oct 2014, 16:51

Re: What is Survivalism? --> Survivalismo

Mensaje por alden » 08 Oct 2014, 16:58

Tengo unos amigos viviendo en un pueblo de la sierra de Madrid, con un alquiler irrisorio que pagan a través de la venta de jabones artesanales a grupos de consumo. Además tienen una parcela para cultivar y gente del pueblo les deja otras parcelas para ello también. No se, veo mucho más positivo la idea de revivir la vida comunitaria de los pueblos y "anarquizarlos" en la medida de lo posible que irse a vivir al margen de todo.

Avatar de Usuario
boiffard
Mensajes: 1187
Registrado: 18 Sep 2014, 22:12

Re: What is Survivalism? --> Survivalismo

Mensaje por boiffard » 08 Oct 2014, 18:59

Muy interesante. Y bastante de acuerdo con todo esto, la verdad. Yo creo que en cierta medida todos deberíamos estar en modo apocalipsis inminente. Es que no sólo ya en caso de virus zombie o algo realmente apocalíptica. Con un peak oil o una crisis jodida de verdad, la próxima (pongamos que el dólar se la pega), un país como el nuestro basado en el sector servicios que trae la comida del otro lado del globo se va al carajo. Una ciudad como Madrid, que con su periferia tiene varios millones de habitantes, sufre una crisis humanitaria en cuestión de días. La comida no crece en el supermercado.

Responder