Why? Why not?

As promised last week, I’ve got another list to go over.  This one will, I think, take some slightly more in-depth analysis than most.  Also, as it’s a long one, I plan on taking several weeks to go over it all (probably not all sequentially, depending on my mood and world events).

The original is to be found here, and it covers 35 reasons people don’t or won’t prep.  I’ve heard most if not all of the reasons at one time or another. While I believe prepping is something that everyone can and should do to a certain extent (even if only a minor extent–“any” is better than “none”), I’m not certain I can buy into all of the reasoning.  The original author seems to be situated on the “hard, fast collapse” side of the spectrum.  Not all the way over, but certainly firmly on that side.

Without further introduction, here are the first five reasons, and my analysis of both said reasons and the original analysis:

1.  Oh come on, it is never going to happen, my area is safe, I am safe.

The original author and I agree here: this excuse is pure naïveté.  I don’t care where you are, you’re somewhere that something *can* happen, and eventually will.  Flood, drought, tornado, earthquake, hurricane, blizzard, tidal wave, landslide, volcano, fire, terrorism, alien attack…  Nowhere is always 100% safe.  Sure, many places are much safer than others.  But prepping doesn’t (shouldn’t?) stem from a belief that such things *will* happen; rather, it should be a rational decision that when/if something *does* happen, you’ll be ready for it.

2.  I am convinced that everything is recoverable and my area will get back to normal quickly.

I disagree here with both the given excuse, and with the author’s rebuttal.  Everything is recoverable to a certain extent, and the “normal” that we return to may not be the “normal” that existed before an event.  (Again, I’m looking at a Long Collapse.  I believe most calamities will be relatively local; the cumulative effect over time is what’s going to take things down.)  Contrary to the author’s statement, however, we *have* had “severe and widespread” events that require long, expensive recovery.  Hurricane Sandy, just last year, was such an event: $68 billion in recovery, affecting at least 7 countries and 24 U.S. states, and millions of people.  Yes, there are worse possible disasters waiting (the San Andreas faultline, solar EMP, or any flavor of Fukushima–and has anybody else been watching Mt. Fuji, lately?), but in the global scheme of things, they’re all (except maybe the EMP) relatively local.

3.  No matter how horrible it is, help will eventually come, I just have to wait it out.

This one strikes me oddly…  In some respects, it’s exactly why someone should prep–to make sure they can “wait it out”.  If our reasoning for #2 is sound, and disasters are primarily local, then someone will be along eventually–and having the necessary supplies will facilitate survival until that time.  (Or, depending on the nature of the emergency, they will facilitate escape from the emergency–or even survival until you can get back & clean things up at home.)

4.  Even if something happens, there are plenty of food and supplies for everyone in my city.

I’ve got to agree with the author, here–the local food supply probably isn’t as robust as the “Average Joe” thinks.  The common wisdom is that no major city is more than three days from starvation; if the electrical grid goes, it’s possible that three days is a generous estimate for some.  Having a three-day “backup” (a BoB, or 72-hour kit, or the like) will at least extend your pantry by that much.  But then, if you’ve prepped, you’ve probably got much more food than that, as well as the means to cook it.  Another major issue will be water–even in a localized emergency, it may be days or longer before clean drinking water is coming out of the taps….

5.  My state government, my community, my neighbors will not abandon me and let me starve.

Depending on your prepping philosophy, you’re better-off relying on your neighbors and community than you are on the government (if you’re worried about a Fast Collapse, the government may not be there to help at all…).  In a major emergency, however, you’ve still got to be able to survive the first couple of days before everything gets settled down and the community can organize for mutual survival.   Here again, a 72-hour kit can be a literal lifesaver.  In the bigger picture, though, wouldn’t you rather be one of the neighbors keeping others from starving?  Bigger preps, longer-term thinking, more food storage…

That’ll about do it for this week.  Have I missed much with these?  I’ll try to tackle the next set of reasons/excuses next week.

Advertisements

About leftwingsurvivalist

I'm a survivalist and prepper with a difference!
This entry was posted in Collapse, Community, Critical Thought, Food, Lists, Planning, Survival Questions and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s