The Morality of survival? This is one area of survivalism that few people ever touch upon. It isn't so much a question of whether it is "right" to survive - we all have the right to defend and facilitate our continued individual existence - but at what cost? The morality of survival concerns the method(s) chosen to ensure and sustain survival and the effect it has upon others.
In a catastrophic situation, how far are you willing to go to ensure your survival? To what extremes are you willing to subject yourself, your family, your friends, and strangers for this right of continued existence? To what degree are you willing to apply or deny (towards others) what we commonly refer to as "humanity" - which is the quality or state of being human & humane, marked by compassion, empathy, sympathy and consideration for others?
I am reminded of an old "Twilight Zone" or "Outer Limits" episode in which a neighborhood man built a secure shelter in his basement. His friends and neighbors knew he'd built it, and most of them actually ridiculed him for it. Then one night the worst came to pass - the Emergency Broadcast System announced that nuclear missiles were enroute and would obliterate the town in less than an hour. The man was prepared, but his friends and neighbors were not. They flocked to his home and begged, pleaded and threatened to tear the shelter apart if they were not let in. Bad things happened. People died. Others were betrayed. The shelter and the lives of all involved were ruined. And the missiles never came. Apparently, some visiting aliens were simply conducting an experiment on mankind's ability to remain human & humane in periods of great stress.
Now, we may never have to deal with curious alien lifeforms conducting judgemental psychological experiments on us (except, perhaps, for T.V. advertisers & political speech writers), but the scenario illustrates a very serious aspect of survivalism. Survivalists are a very small percentage of any technological population. Technology has cushioned and sustained us for so long that few have any idea of the enormity of suffering and despair that awaits us should this technology suddenly fail for any length of time. If it happens, there will be thousands of unprepared "neighbors" for every survivalist out there. How we think and act during such a crisis will reveal the degree to which mankind is entitled to the self defined term "Humanity."
Survival preparations must incorporate a plan of action regarding those unfortunates who have never given survival or self-reliance a second thought. Simply stockpiling food, water, medicine, fuel and firearms is not going to be enough. Even planning a remote retreat in the event of an extended survival situation will not be enough. Sooner or later you will have to deal with unprepared refugees, be they friends & neighbors or total strangers.
For short-term emergencies, the course of action is plain enough - you help as many people as possible, as much as possible, until the emergency is over, and then rebuild your supplies. Short-term emergencies are generally localized in nature and outside help is forthcoming. It's in your best interest to do as much as possible to alleviate the situation - or plan on finding a new town to live in after things settle down. Apathetic displays and hoarding just isn't neighborly, and you'll find yourself a pariah if you don't help out. Being a hermit and remaining at an arms distance is fine as long as the power is on and everyone has a McDonald's to go to. Barricading yourself behind fortified walls with all the essentials while your neighbors are hungry, homeless, or needing medical attention simply won't work.
Our nation has suffered several serious localized emergencies over the last few years, and this gives us a window into what to expect. The Oakland earthquake, the MidWest floods, the Northeast Blizzards, and the Southern hurricanes all set the stage for proper and improper action. Eventually, these emergencies were over and things got back to normal. In many cases, the citizens of these communities were drawn closer by their concerted actions to help each other. There were other reports, however, of violence, greed, larceny, looting and hoarding. Some low life types even tried to make a buck off of other people's misery! Imagine what would happen if these short-term emergencies became frequent, extended, and widespread. Imagine what would happen if these emergencies became nationwide or global. Imagine what would happen if transportation, communication, and outside relief were not forthcoming - and would not be forthcoming.
Impossible, you say? Perhaps. Yet, over the last decade or so we have been witness to a strange (but confirmable) increase in natural disasters. Volcanic activity, earthquakes, weather anomolies, floods & droughts, new & resistant diseases, wildfires and crop failures - even hoardes of locusts! Who can say what will befall us next, with what frequency and severity? In the last year or so several films have been released regarding comet impacts with the earth. The latest theory is that a comet impact was responsible for eradicating the dinosaurs and paving the way for human expansion. If it happened once, who can say that it will not happen again? And then there is the Y2K problem.
The severity and impact of the Y2k problem, at the moment, is anybody's guess. It could be a flash-in-the-pan, minor annoyance - or it could conceivable bring the world's technological societies to a grinding halt in a matter of months. We just don't know, and there are too many conflicting reports as to what may happen in the next 2 years. What we can count on, however, is that the Y2k problem will initiate any number of minor emergencies on a global scale. These minor emergencies, in concert with each other, have the dire potential for stimulating ever greater emergencies. The world is filled with dissatisfied factions of society. If it is assumed that the world's superpower nations are no longer in a position to intervene locally, who can say what advantage might be taken by these factions? And who can say where that may lead?
We are indeed living in interesting times, and if the world goes to hell-in-a-handbasket, how are you going to react? Survival communities, networks, and associations are beginning to become more prevalent. Over the last ten years militia groups have formed all over the nation. Most of these groups have no clear design beyond the use of force in paramilitary fashion - and a great many of them are little more than bands of hatemongers led by anarchistic morons with a hunger for power and money. These people feed on chaos, destruction and despair. They hunger for it, they wish for it, they want it - and in the event of a societal collapse they will do everything in their power to destroy it completely so that they may create their own little kingdoms of fear. It wouldn't take much to set these groups loose. A month without power, disrupted food supplies and a disorganized government response. Chaos is a perfect breeding ground for tyranical democracy. A desperate majority of heavily dependent civilians will latch on to any group promising a return to some semblance of normality and security, provided they have the power to assert and maintain their self-assumed authority. With very little effort and the smallest amount of intelligent action, heavily armed gangs and militia units could easily find themselves the new provisional government in their areas.
Now let us suppose that the worst has come to pass. The world is in upheaval, but you and your fellow survivalists have managed to escape to your retreat site where you are relatively comfortable and prepared for hard times. Gangs and militias have taken over the cities, despite a declaration of martial law by the government. Military installations and their immediate surrounding communities are the only government strongholds, and they are being overwhelmed by the millions of refugees flocking to these areas. You can expect no help from the government in the near future, but you have a secure site and adequate supplies for some time. You're in a fairly remote site which is easily defended, and you have enough people to maintain your position for a year or more. And then the refugees start showing up at your doorstep. What are you going to do?
These refugees are carrying everything they own (if anything) on their backs. They are hungry and sick and requiring medical attention. They've lost their homes and their livelihoods, and many have lost their families. Most of them have little or nothing to add to the group, but they all want and need your help. Some of them even resent you for having had the good sense to prepare for bad times. What are you going to do with these people? What are you going to do with the people that follow them as word gets out that your group exists? Where do you draw the line and what is the decision process? Do you send them packing? What if they have kids and old folks with them that you know will not survive if you don't help them? Do you give them a meal and medical aid, and then send them packing? Do you invite them to stay? What if they won't leave? What if they demand that you help them? And if you send them away, do you think they are going to forget all about you and not talk about your group, it's location, size and defenses - and make up whatever tales their imagination allows regarding the supplies you may or may not be keeping to yourselves?
All survival groups plan for the immediate survival of their members. Most have some plan for continued existence which entails crop farming and rebuilding some aspects of technology and civilization - but these things take time. Few groups ever consider the consequences of helpless refugees. Most are prepared for violent attempts to overtake the retreat and justify the use of force in their defense. But how do you keep these desperate helpless masses from becoming the force you need to defend against?
It's a difficult question. You either incorporate them into the group - forcefully, if necessary - or send them packing, or eliminate them. This last is definitely a bad option guaranteed to splinter your group and result in your own demise. Sending them packing means there will be a resentful individual out among the rest of a desperate population. This is guaranteed to send more refugees your way and continued efforts to turn them away must eventually require the use of force. Perhaps even deadly force. Sitting in front of your computer with the heat or air conditioning on, sipping your favorite beverage, and munching from a bag of chips, it may be easy to say, "So what?"
It won't be that easy when you're faced with the reality of the situation.
The only "moral" and viable solution is to incorporate them into the group. This isn't as simple a solution as it sounds. Your survival group consists of hand-picked folks with a similar purpose and foundation of beliefs and ideas. The refugees who show up at your door obviously will not share your point of view, in the majority of cases, or they wouldn't be refugees. Circumstances may have forced some of them to come around to your point of view, to some extent, but you can be sure that the majority of them will just want to live and expect you to provide them with a way to do so. These people are going to be problems in more ways than one.
Our society has bred a class of individuals that expect to be taken care of. They don't know how to work and they don't want to know how to work - they just want to be taken care of. Many of these people will show up at your doorstep, demand to be taken in, and then balk and want to leave the moment you put them to work for the sustenance you are providing them. You can't let them leave. If you let them leave, they will find more of their kind and return in force, and attempt to take what you have for themselves. They'll take it all, use it up, and blame you for not having more. And chances are, they'll kill you to get it. Your life and your work and your preparations have no meaning to them.
This is the best argument for locating your retreat site in the most inhospitable, difficult to reach area still conducive to supplying the natural resources for continued survival. If your site is difficult to find and reach, you'll have less difficult refugees to deal with. Like it or not, you're going to have to "hide" from the collapsing society until natural selection alleviates the problem. None of us has the resources to save the world, especially when the majority of the world isn't prepared to work at saving itself.
Intellectually I know that you cannot afford to turn a refugee away and expect that to be the end of it. Personally, I haven't the stomach to turn someone away who truly cannot help themself - whether it's their own fault or not. But once these people are taken care of, they must be taught - or forced - to contribute their share to the rest of the group. Since you cannot afford to turn them away or let them go, you need to reduce the probability of refugees finding your site. You will also need to prepare for the likelihood of refugees with surpluses of food, water, shelter, medical supplies - and security personnel. The refugees who do stumble upon your site will need to be voluntarily trained - or detained and forced to contribute.
This might appear harsh and amoral, but it is my opinion that anyone capable of reaching a remote location and remaining intact has the potential to become a self-reliant individual without too much coercion. The more a person learns to do for themself, the better they feel about themself and the more they want to learn. Ordinarily, starting them along this process - even by force - is all it takes to convert a useless and selfish consumer into a valuable, responsible, self-respecting producer. I believe this is the moral high ground in an extremely difficult situation. I further believe that this is the only solution to the refugee problem for a survival group hoping to exist on limited resources.
The detainment of "involuntary members" need not be overly cruel or harsh - merely determined and stern. It isn't necessary to lord over them with whips and keep them in chains, but they should be kept in a secured and guarded location until they come around. Clean, warm facilities, enforced exercise and mandatory self-reliance classes (based on ability and progress) should be provided. As their physical and survival abilities increase, you should notice a pronounced shift in their attitudes. Sooner or later they will come to the realization that, despite being forced, what you are teaching them is for their own good - and actually is helping them feel better about themselves and their situation. Frequent reports on the situation in the outside world and how other unprepared citizens are faring may help reduce their resentment and desire to "escape." Treating them with common courtesy and respect throughout their training and using the least amount of force necessary to compel compliance (while maintaning a visible excess of available force), will aid in the reduction of belligerent attitudes and aggressiveness.
All of this may seem a bit much, but what we are discussing here is survival in a catastrophe which is doing it's best to eradicate civilization from the face of the earth. With the collapse of societal norms, certain measures must be taken to ensure survival. The measures discussed in this article, after much thought, are indeed harsh - but in a realistic frame of mind, the least of several much greater evils. For those recalcitrant individuals who absolutely refuse to better themselves, I would suggest a high security confinement and minimal rations. Eventually the world will stabilize and your group will strengthen and these nutcases can be released to sink or swim on their own - preferably somewhere far away from you. Hopefully this type of individual will not present themselves with any frequency.
To aid in reducing large numbers of refugees, careful consideration must be made in the selection of survival sites. As mentioned earlier, the site should be remote and difficult to reach, preferably in an area which is considered inhospitable by the general population. The problem with this is that you must also be able to ensure that you and your fellow members are able to reach the site and that, once there, sufficient resources are available at or near the site to facilitate your survival.
Once a suitable location is selected the group must decide whether or not to develop the site. A preexisting, prepared, site has far greater potential for survival, yet also provides the opportunity for discovery by non-members. An established site should be kept low-keyed and all efforts should be taken to dispel curiosity about the goings on at the site. It should be disguised as a working farm or ranch, or perhaps a resort or dude ranch. DO NOT ADVERTISE IT AS A SURVIVAL RETREAT!!!
Forget the no trespassing signs and barbed wire fences, as this will only attract unwanted attention and alienate you from your neighbors. Keep the traffic to and from the site in conformity with whatever cover you are using for the site, and make sure that anyone visiting or living on the site acts and dresses and speaks like they belong there. Avoid camouflage and open displays of firearms, and purchase your major supplies in moderate amounts in towns that are not local to the site. Be sure to utilize the local area businesses as you would if you were any other resident. The lack of patronism in small towns is as obvious as overdoing it.
In selecting your site, take note of all routes to and from the site - including fire trails, utility roads, forest service roads, major waterways, hiking and 4x4 trails, and railways. Take further notice of any bridges and tunnels leading into the area. All of these ingresses will need to be covered and patrolled or blocked off in the event of a major catastrophe.
Keep in mind that the catastrophe had better be extremely threatening before altering these pathways in any manner. But bridges and tunnels can be collapsed or otherwise made unpassable if necessary, thus reducing the influx of unwanted refugees. Keep a stock of quarantine signs on hand for such fun-loving diseases like hantavirus, cholera, plague, and anthrax. A red sign with a skull & crossbones stating "Now entering Anthrax Quarantine Zone - Medical Personnel Only, by order of the Center for Infectious Diseases" placed at trailheads, and a few dead birds and assorted small mammals scattered along the trail is an effective deterrent for most individuals.
An appropriate site need not be developed, however. Having located a decent site with all the necessary elements and resources, you might simply designate the area to your members as the rendezvous point in the event of a major catastrophe. Renting out secured storage space near the rendezvous point and storing your survival goods in boxes marked "old books & papers" or "baby clothes & toys" (and making sure that the rental clerk notices the markings) or as any other relatively worthless goods, is a fairly cheap but efficient method of ensuring that your supplies will be there when you bug out.
Your site should have surface & subsurface water supplies, arable land, and a variety of wild game and flora. Caves and old mine shafts make good temporary shelter, provided there aren't bears or volatile and toxic gases already inhabiting them. These should be explored and mapped by experienced spelunkers and/or mining engineers before they are needed. Dangerous areas should be marked and blocked off. The animals and plants in the area should be catalogued and researched for beneficial usage and the weather patterns and seasonal shifts should be studied for future reference. Likewise, potential salvage locations should be highlighted on a small scale (detailed) local map covering 30-50 miles in each direction from your site. If all hell breaks loose, these sites are likely to be abandoned and raw materials may be salvaged from them to produce the things your group may need.
Never situate your site near a major crossroads, a large waterway, downriver from a dam or series of dams, in an avalanche zone, on an earthquake fault, beneath commercial flight paths, or nearer than 30 miles from the outer boundary of a major city (500,000+). Keep in mind, also, tornado and hurricane pathways, flood plains and average rainfall (or snowfall) levels, and proximity to military bases and potential military targets. You might also consider the prevalent wind patterns over any potential military targets. The world still has an awful lot of NBC weapons out there and plenty of people just weird enough to use them.
You might also undertake a detailed, but low-keyed, search of any other "survival," militia, and religious groups operating in the area. If there are other groups in the area, you will have to determine whether or not you will be able to coexist effectively. Sometimes the best place is somewhere else, regardless of how ideal the natural location you've found may be. The bad groups have a weird affinity for bragging about themselves and often advertise or recruit members openly. Spend some time in your selected area and keep your eyes and ears peeled, while keeping your mouth shut. Be friendly and mildly conversational without appearing inquisitive or overly curious. You'll be suprised at how much you can learn about a town by simply sitting over coffee in a cafe or a beer in the town pub, and listening to the locals discuss daily events.
In the end, we can only prepare as best we can for an unknown event. With any luck, all of our preparations will be as ridiculous as the non-survivalists profess. Hopefully neither of us will ever have to find out.
meg.
04 June 1998