Dear Mr. Rawles,
I have become increasing concerned that many survivalists do not take
longer term survival seriously and in many case appear to give it no
consideration at all. They seem to be more concerned with stocking
their retreats and being able to hold out against all until things
return to normal.
The majority of what has been written about survival originates from
the USA but there is literally none of this information that considers
the longer term. By longer term I mean after surviving the initial
disaster, whatever the cause. I am also talking about an event that
completely rules out the possibility of a return to the way we are
now and something that affects a significant section of the world’s
population.
To simply survive would be to revert to a state of savagery genuine
survivalists must avoid. The rational idea of survival is to make the
transition from our civilisation to the next with as much benefit to
one’s self and posterity as preparation can insure. It should
also be to ensure that future generations do not just exist but have
as reasonable quality of live as possible.
Whilst we should preserve as much of the modern technology as we can
we must remember that if an item uses more energy than our home power
plant can supply, or more importantly, if it will require replacement
parts later on, forget it. This does not mean that we should not use
all that we may have at our disposal, even if for only a short time.
Use it wisely and use it to
get us to a future without it. May be that future will be a little
better with our planning and forethought.
When a civilization goes splat, the technologies that supported it
tend to go with it. This is particularly true of systems that are based
on highly interdependent technologies such as ours today. We
are the generation that landed a man on the moon and yet we will not
have the
skill to make an iron spear head. Our reliance on technology
has robbed us of the simplest, most basic skills. We have to look ahead
to the time when we do not have the convenience of modern civilisation.
There's no doubt in my mind that when the crunch comes we're going
to regress very quickly.
Much that has been written on survival is useful into the long term
but much of that written also assumes that things will get back to
normal. Survivalists seem loath to discuss or even contemplate that
things will not ‘get back to normal’.
The real survivors will be the ones who come through what will follow
the collapse. Those of us who come through and there may not be many
of us, will be left to face the aftermath and it will be more terrible
than we can imagine.
You got to your well-stocked retreat replete with manuals, plans and
procedures, and you survived. Now, what are you going to do?
This is not a moot question; this should be the true objective of your
preparedness efforts. One must prepare for the "afterward" as
thoughtfully and thoroughly as preparing for survival.
This is where you must also assess your post-survival requirements
so that you and your family can not only survive but also prosper.
This effort will also impact all the goodies you can buy and the skills
and knowledge you need. It may also affect how you plan your short
term survival. It will also have a very definite effect on future generations.
As an example, you have a wood stove for heating your retreat. If there
is no source of gasoline and oil, how are you going to cut the firewood
you need? Ever use an axe and bow saw to cut a season's worth of firewood?
What about food when the "Year's Food Supply" is gone? What
about your water supply? Your assessment must provide for the recommended
skills, plans, procedures, equipment, and spare parts to these and
a host of other "afterward" issues and questions. And where
are is all this going to come from?
To do this properly requires a well thought out approach and process
that leads to an integrated preparedness plan with the specific objective
of surviving and prospering afterwards.
There is a lot of information available on various parts of the preparedness
equation but it must be integrated into the whole equation of your
preparedness based on the threats with the prime objective of living
well beyond bad times.
Too many today who call themselves survivalists look no further
than preparing to get through the initial stages of any crisis. In
most cases this may well be sufficient. But is it a question of the
misplaced
faith and expectations that are commonly placed on technology. One
problem with placing too much faith in technology is that nature will
always provide an event greater than the specified design criteria,
at some point in the future. That "some time" could be tomorrow.
Another problem with technology is that it sometimes fails-after all,
it is designed by
human beings and mistakes can be made in design, materials, or construction
or even in the operation of any system by those same human beings.
Is it not time that survivalist discussed more concerning longer term
survival rather than concentrating on short term subjects that although
valid and needed to help get us into the longer term are themselves
going to be of no use once we reach the long term. Yours truly, - Norman.