Posted on 01/05/2010 8:58:34 AM PST by Kartographer
What have past acts of destruction taught us about what will happen to mankind after the apocalypse? Is it inevitable that disaster will someday strike America on an unprecedented level? How has history prepared us? History's most dramatic events--Hiroshima, 9/11, Hurricane Katrina and others--are examined and analyzed with hard data gathered from their massive aftereffects. The disappearance of water and food supplies, the effects of deteriorated sanitation and health care on the remaining population, and the increased use of violence as a means of survival--all illustrate how societies have responded and survived.
I have tried to forewarn family members of the potential for disaster and get mostly blank stares, being accused of being racist or quick shifts by them to mindless drivel like discussion of American Idol. Unfortunately most of my wife’s family will be roadkill in the coming events. Mostly libtards and way too focused on keeping status quo to understand they are first targets. I have told them they are in error if they think police, fire, hospitals and basic utilities will be there for their safety and protection when hell breaks loose.
The USDA has been keeping and developing seed banks for a long period of time, as well as intentionally breeding grains optimized to thrive in different environments.
This already paid off, when it was realized that the vast majority of the world’s grain exports came from only four countries, and the lack of food security was making the rest of the world nervous. So the USDA started to provide some of these hardier grains to other nations, to take some of the pressure off.
It is noteworthy that this created neither gratitude, nor efforts to improve themselves, but resentment when the contractor for much of this seed grain, as well as fertilizer and pesticide, Monsanto, suggested that these nations should start to buy these specialized grains, instead of every year being given them for free.
But on a more positive note, now both the US, and some other nations, are creating genome repositories that, over time, are hoped to be able to prevent species extinction, and also maintain “heritage” diversity if their numbers drop too low.
My guess is that 80% or more of people will be caught totally flat-footed and unprepared if and when something catastrophic happens.
If you read “One Second After”, which is a pretty good piece of fact-based fiction, you can project over 90% casualties in the civilian population within a year of a catastrophic failure of social and technological infrastructure.
The military, the determined and the prepared survive, as do a certain percentage of the barbarians.
Also, if you have supplies those who don't will be knocking on your door soon enough (basically just like the world/our country right now i.e. Dems expecting handouts from the rich). So guns and ammo will be needed but that most likely won't be enough.
This sounds like Monsanto are the good guys, providing a great service for the good of mankind and just want to be paid a little for their service. This could not be further from the truth. Monsanto is systematically genetically modifying and patenting as many seeds as they can, and getting laws put into place to require farmers to buy new seeds from them every year instead of planting from seeds from last years crop. They are trying to take over the food supply and their GMO foods are not in our best interest. They are destroying some farmers financially and legally, for example a farmers crops get cross pollinated by pollen blown in the wind from a neighboring farm and Mansanto lawyers require them to pay fines for growing their foods without buying the seeds and they often lose their farms because they cannot afford the legal fees. Monsanto is about power more so than the healthcare reform is!
Well, yes and yes. But there is some important background, here.
“...and getting laws put into place to require farmers to buy new seeds from them every year instead of planting from seeds from last years crop...”
This began with the “free seed” idea. Monsanto gave farmers superior seed for their crops. This gave them much high yields than local seed, and made the farmers a lot of money. So when Monsanto tried to sell them the same seed, they decided to reuse seed from their previous crop, so they wouldn’t have to pay. But this only works for a season or two, before you need fresh seed.
Then Monsanto invented Roundup herbicide. Another huge boost to crop productivity and far lower labor costs. Again it was heavily subsidized, so farmers paid little and made more money.
Then Monsanto invented seed grain that produced plants that were immune to Roundup, so an entire crop could be bulk sprayed. And the farmers were willing to pay for this seed, once, to save them a ton of labor costs, and make lots more money. But then they decided to reuse that grain perpetually, instead of buying any more at all. Their yields were so high that they could produce less, but still make lots of money, and not pay Monsanto for anything.
So Monsanto, getting rather frustrated with this, invented “terminator” grains that were far better than anything on the market, but could only be reused once, because the “grandchildren” grain was sterile.
And boy howdy, did the farmers bitch about that. It was “unfair” and “stealing” from them, even though some farmers *did* buy terminator grain, because it was so much better, and soon dominated the market. So the farmers that didn’t tried to have it outlawed by their national governments.
Then, after all that, Monsanto invents GM crops. Monsanto no longer wants to give anything away, so if a farmer wants to buy their GM crops, they have to follow Monsanto’s rules. This means no more trying to get something for nothing, no sharing or replanting seed, and cash up front.
Monsanto has to go GM, because it can do with it in the lab what would have taken decades through selective breeding. And while I agree that they should have no claim to the pollen of their plants invading non-GM crops, I will note that this claim has been upheld from Canada through South America, by a bunch of judges, many of whom are not sympathetic to Monsanto in any way.
The Rule of Law will quickly - and I mean virtually overnight - be supplanted by the Rule of the Jungle. How long will that take? Oh, about as long as it takes for supermarkets to be stripped of their inventory.
Most of us are used to full shelves all the time, everywhere. It’ll be a real shocker when that suddenly is no longer true.
Great reply!
Only comment is that making food that will tolerate greater ammounts of toxins sprayed on them is not really “better” for human consumption even though yeild is much better. Also in the making of GMO products, the genes that are spliced in usually readily splice and likewise will likely inadvertantly splice into our genes with consumption, which may or may not affect us, we just dont know, and will likely someday have an affect on our children or grandchildren as they will get modified genes. This is not a gamble that I am willing to take, so I dont eat them.
Actually, you probably do, but don’t know it. GM pollen spreads as rapidly as a pulmonary disease, at least in season. I believe some was introduced in central Mexico, and quickly spread all over the country. By now, it is probably ubiquitous, fractionally turning up in most of our crops.
I guess I was being too optimistic, hoping there were more people that realize the need for preparedness. Sad. People just don't realize just how thin a sheet of ice our whole just-in-time, globalized, inter-dependent economic system is built upon.
For later.
As my dad always says “hope for the best and prepare for the worst”. I would like to think I am prepared but you just don’t know how bad things could be. Not to mention, I could have a safw fourtified house, with all the supplies in the world and I would still leave it to track down my Mom, Dad, and Sis to make sure they are okay.
I do also think in case of a breakdown one needs to ensure the move IMMEDIATELY out of the city, and also out of suburbia. If you sub urban home is your store and safe house, you are finished! The moment the other homes start to go hungry they will head to yours. At first to ask for some spare provisions, politely. Then with forceful 'imploring' for some 'equitable distribution' of what you have. Later on in rabid hoardes trying to get a meal for a dying child. NO AMOUNT OF GUNS will help you at that point ...unless you have magically replenishing Claymore mines! The safe house must be out of the city, and out of suburbia. To be honest, a city would probably be safer than suburbia. Too many families with kids in suburbia ...kids that can go hungry and become ill, and parents that can turn 'rabid'....
Helping out a neighbor in such a situation would only mark your home as a veritable target. You would be endangering your family.
When I moved back to my home country of Kenya, the first thing I did 6 months before the election is to show loved ones Zombie movies. Why? Because when society breaks down, as happened for over a month in Kenya, it looks like somethingfrom a B movie. Look at Rwanda ...a worst case scenario. And like any zombie movie, unless you have relocated to a safer place, all that guns will do is delay the inevitable until the sheer numbers overwhelm you. The rackng sound of a shotgun will do jacksh!t to 20 families on the verge of despair, and even the meekest lady will walk into gunfire if her child is starving and emaciated. You'll run out of rounds, and for those with thousands of rounds, not be able to reload fast enough ...not to mention your attackers may be armed too! However, if you, your family, and your supplies are in a remote easily defendable place, then those guns become golden. Better than gold even, since you can protect the place.
However, if you are in sub urbia, then you're screwed unless your ENTIRE neighborhood thinks like you, has stocked provisions like you, and is armed to the teeth against EXTERNAL attack (for they will come). Apart from that, suburbia is suicide
Wise man, your dad. Words to heed.
I can't write all I'd like to say in response to your earlier question, but in short as a Christian my response would be to say, family first, others second. If we can help others, we should try to. I am fortunate in that I live in an area that many if not most would already consider a bug-out location, and all my family is within a couple of miles so we could close ranks if need be within hours.
Our homestead is on a rural road that forms a 2 mile loop. All my neighbors I am in good relationships with. If the worst happened, we would immediately block both ends of the loop and prevent anyone from entering unless they could get by our guardposts. Hopefully by the time "they" decide to come for us with overwhelming numbers or force, it's all over but the shouting. I feel for those living in the cities and suburbs if such conditions arise.
An important issue IMO is to have trusting relationships with your immediate neighbors, because working together you will all more likely survive the circumstances than if it's just you and your family alone.
If you haven't seen the 2008 movie Defiance, you ought to rent it and watch it. It's a true story about how hundreds of Jews survived the WWII holocaust by relying on each other in the middle of the forests (in Poland I believe). I had no idea anything like it had occurred. I found it an inspirational yet very moving movie that raised serious life issues.
This is a difficult question and one I have wrestled with over the years. Here's how I handled the serious moral question you've posed.
Of course I started out making sure I was making all the preparations I could for me and my family. Then we got involved in the local Neighborhood Watch.
From there we reached out to a few like minded people in the neighborhood. Over the last few years we've been able to build a small cadre of 'preppers'.
We're all set for a while, and we'll be able to help those in our circle who really can't help themselves. We've kind of factored them into the equation so to speak.
Now anybody who comes around trying to take from us, well we have another set of plans for them.
Our circumstances are similar. Although i found it somewhat disturbing that last night’s “After Armageddon” portrayed a mostly inept LA California family sittign on their butts for what? 16 weeks before they decided it was time to leave. No ready kits, no weapons and not much sense to go with it.
And when they finally do decide to head out, where do they want to go? Idaho, for crying out loud. When we saw that, the missus and I looked at each other and said,”well, there goes the neighborhood.” Sheeesh. Couldn’t they have picked somewhere else?
But having said that, the rest of it was pretty well thought out - the contraction of law and order to a regional or township scope - the hard work that it would take to get by - the fact that without modern medicine, things like a small untreated cut can kill you.
That last one caused us to re-evaluate our medical supply situation. Interesting thing is that a lot of what’s good for horses is good for you, too. And cheaper. Get to know your local large animal vet.
You’re in good circumstances, it seems. We have a similar arrangement, although there are few neighbors about whom I’ve got my doubts. And then there are a couple about whom I have no doubts whatsoever.
Most of them are good folk, though, and we’ve given planning and consideration to ‘doubling up’ when that becomes necessary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.