Go it alone, or found a community?

Simple question really: in an ideal world (if you knew likeminded people, had a bailout spot that could support a large group, etc) would you prefer to bail out alone, or would you prefer to organize a survival group that could found a community to survive a "civilization ending" type Sit X?

Personally, I'm a go it alone type, a very very few friends and family excepted.

The division of labor advantages, human contact, etc just don't outweigh the added health issues, politics, and the increased need to manage resources (as my particular area is desert, so game and useful vegitation isn't concentrated enough for more than a few people in any given area.

But there are considerable advantages to having a survival community if the circumstances are right.
So what would your preference be? Do any of you actually have a good sized group (say 12+) who you know you will be sticking with in a bailout situation?

Well, since its a civilization ending sit X id have to say found a community. There needs to be cooperation between people, many forget that the mass of the population has forgotten basic survival instincts, and developed new ones instead such as:

-Look out for #1.
-Dont trust anyone.
-If your not first your last.

Corny I know, but I lived in the city for a couple months, and I was trampled on for being nice. As well, im kind of a push over with the type of people that are goin somewhere and no one can stop em attitude.

People would have to learn how to work together, most importantly trust each other. Money wouldnt mean squat in the end of civilization. In my area, (outskirts of a rural town) there are over 15 families living in the area on farms. They all know how to live off the land, and a few of them already have wind power installed. Lots of wild game all around the area that we hunt in the fall every year.

I know that if it was ending civilization with a tyranical government, id go'er alone. A large group of people would attract attention, Im talking like 10 families here.

I dont like established survival groups per se, problems is you end up with people trying to become dominant, or controlling, you allways get factions forming, generally it wont work. Survivalists by their very nature are single mionded and strong willed individuals, but.... in many cases to do have families and very close friends to worry about. So my ideal is that the survivalist family simply lives in an area already inhabited by other survivalists ( Idaho in the US, Durham and northumberland in the UK ) and builds up a good neighbour policy will the others in the area.

I think we won't have a choice at some point but to band together for survival and for protection. Because of the way I think things will go, unfortunately, the cities will be the worst place to live and safest places will be rural communities, but that being said, I would not want to be someplace off totally by myself with just my family and then have a marauding mob of thieves with evil intentions descend upon us and we're way out in the middle of nowhere with no one to help us fight them off. So, I think smaller, rural type communities will be more likely to band together, to be willing to have a plan in place to defend each other, to have regular meetings (say, the townhall or the local school) to have emergency plans in place, and would be closer to each other in the sense of being willing to look out for each other knowing it could your own family who needs help the next time. If one is in the desert, it might be easier in some ways to be alone with your own but most people would probably need to live where they could grow a sustainable garden, etc. I have always been an independent type myself and in some ways it is hard to have to put up with others but if there is a unifying purpose, like survival, I would hope pettiness would fall to the wayside for the common good of the group. Protection in numbers I guess is what I am aiming to say here.

Bailing out and going it alone with just immediate family is absolutely last option for me. Knowing my area and its resources/drawbacks will be invaluable IMO. Forming a group pre sit x is also a non starter - I think its impossible to judge how others will react or where their loyalties will lie in an emergency, especially without prior knowledge of the type of emergency.

I think awareness of the people around you is paramount. You need to know your neighbours, friends and work colleagues, their skills and weaknesses, their family connections and likelihood of them sticking around if times get tough.

Most importantly, know yourself. Know if you are a natural leader, if others will come to you and follow your advice and guidance. Know if you have the strength mentally to make difficult choices, organise people and ration suplies, and if you don't have those abilities, look for and try to educate someone close to you who does.

Cheers

reply to post by Northern Raider


I have to completely agree with you on this. The larger a community gets, the more governmental or militaristic it becomes. There is just too much of a chance for factioning and rivalry, even jealousy, for large communal survival camps to work. If you did found them in a militaristic manner, then you have to worry regularly about rebellion, since you have just created that very thing everyone was running from in the first place.

I would most certainly join with my family. Invite a few friends to break up the monotony, but keep it small. Since my family is already very large and nearly 5 generations strong, we wouldnt have much room for too many outsiders if we all got together in a Sit X scenario.

Originally posted by DivineGypsy9
I think we won't have a choice at some point but to band together for survival and for protection. Because of the way I think things will go, unfortunately, the cities will be the worst place to live and safest places will be rural communities, but that being said, I would not want to be someplace off totally by myself with just my family and then have a marauding mob of thieves with evil intentions descend upon us and we're way out in the middle of nowhere with no one to help us fight them off. So, I think smaller, rural type communities will be more likely to band together, to be willing to have a plan in place to defend each other, to have regular meetings (say, the townhall or the local school) to have emergency plans in place, and would be closer to each other in the sense of being willing to look out for each other knowing it could your own family who needs help the next time. If one is in the desert, it might be easier in some ways to be alone with your own but most people would probably need to live where they could grow a sustainable garden, etc. I have always been an independent type myself and in some ways it is hard to have to put up with others but if there is a unifying purpose, like survival, I would hope pettiness would fall to the wayside for the common good of the group. Protection in numbers I guess is what I am aiming to say here.

Thats why I picked Co Durham with its heavy attitude to self reliance, everyone appears to have an allotment, plus green houses, chucks and bunnies, the social harmony that radiates out from the allotment holders is amazing. plus the area has plenty of wood, open cast coal, sea coal and other minerals, a falling population, fresh clean water that is generally gravity fed to the homes,loads of wild animals such as bunnies, chucks, pigs, deer etc, good schools, low traffic density, easy going cops , loads of bug out locations, and is rarely sucesseptable to flooding, theres lots of small holders, home steaders, traditional crafters like smiths and leather workers, and of course some survivalists

What we need more than anything is good neighbours to help out when needed, rather than cults, clubs, gangs or communes.

[edit on 27-11-2008 by Northern Raider]

A good size group has obvious advantages, but it depends on what people it is made up of. People who are likely to panic or become depressed could do a lot of damage to morale, and you could find yourself supporting the whole group instead of the group supporting each other.

The last thing you want is 10 or so people saying "what are we going to do, what are we going to do?", instead of 10 people sitting down calmly and concentrating on the solution rather than the question.

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
A good size group has obvious advantages, but it depends on what people it is made up of. People who are likely to panic or become depressed could do a lot of damage to morale, and you could find yourself supporting the whole group instead of the group supporting each other.

The last thing you want is 10 or so people saying "what are we going to do, what are we going to do?", instead of 10 people sitting down calmly and concentrating on the solution rather than the question.

Your post has much merit and is worth debating further, One group I know of in England has some truly well skilled and inteligent members, they often as individuals contact me or others like me about various issues, Yet they have allowed their "Leader" to be the sole point of contact for them and he has decided to take upon himself the role of who he allows to interect with his members, They are just starting to realise that the chap is keeping at arms length anyone he feels may challenge his authority, I find that kinda sad.

My partner and I have decided to go at it alone. We just don't trust people. We do however trust each other explicitly. We also feel it is easier to travel and stay hidden.

I am a very empathetic person. I want to help people. To pass people by and not help will be a challenge for me. Luckily he can be a cold hearted bastard (and my cuddle bunny) so his personality will keep me from thinking with my heart.

Long term we have no intrest in joining a community and all that it may imply as far as politics, militaristic agendas and power plays are concerened.

We are well prepared to take care of ourselves, anyone else can take a long walk off a short pier.

If something should happen to him however I'd join him on that long dark road - I don't want to be a female alone in a sitx world.

Another idea.
Small groups, 2 to 6 people or individual families forming a community of 3 to 8 groups. Each group has shelter, land, tools, animals and so on. They can fend for themselves. They set up in locations that are separate but close enough to trade, visit, share large assets -like butchering a large cow- and they can support each other if outsiders get pushy.
You've got self reliance and community as well.

Personally, the best way to go is with your family and any extended family that live nearby. The last thing I would do is bimble around all over the countryside looking for family members or others to form a group.

I am fortunate enough to live in a place that could quite easily become isolated from the rest of the UK. In my immediate and nearby extended family there are at least 5 of us that are 'survival' aware and we only live a few miles apart. I could probably 'round-up' 12 members within a very short while. Other members of the family in my location would take a bit longer to contact.

reply to post by The Vagabond


Either could work so much depends on what Situation X is that I am reluctant to give a definitive answers . To be honest chances are myself and my friends and family would lack the skills necessary to last in the long term . Although we would live a hell of a lot longer then those who are of the school of thought that they should stockpile everything and remain in a single bunker .

Groups are the best way to go. Strength in numbers. But the size of the group depends on who you can really trust and the type of terrain your in. Where i live, i could easily hide a group of 50 people. My immediate group consist's of 17 family members and about 30 friends and their families.

One problem with going it alone with only a small group of people is that you wont have have any eyes and ears in a reconnaissance role . Even if your not taking up arms accurate information about everything and anything is Gold .

Cheers xpert11 .

Originally posted by xpert11
reply to post by The Vagabond

 

Either could work so much depends on what Situation X is that I am reluctant to give a definitive answers . To be honest chances are myself and my friends and family would lack the skills necessary to last in the long term . Although we would live a hell of a lot longer then those who are of the school of thought that they should stockpile everything and remain in a single bunker .

So long as you outlast the millions of unprepared and panic striken sheeple milling around waiting for the governmernt to save them you are onto a good thing, Its not only the disaster we need to survive but the panic driven anarchy that follows, Its a simple matter of planning, preparation, time and will power with a smattering of good luck.

Originally posted by Wotan
Personally, the best way to go is with your family and any extended family that live nearby. The last thing I would do is bimble around all over the countryside looking for family members or others to form a group.

I am fortunate enough to live in a place that could quite easily become isolated from the rest of the UK. In my immediate and nearby extended family there are at least 5 of us that are 'survival' aware and we only live a few miles apart. I could probably 'round-up' 12 members within a very short while. Other members of the family in my location would take a bit longer to contact.

You should tell your friends and family to meet you at a specific location when TSHTF. Even if they think you are a little nutty, which will be a good thing because they will not forget that way, and when it happens they'll know where to go. And that way it'll take you less time to go off grid.

I say remain on your own and live it out for a bit. Wait for all the ill-prepared and less vigilant to disappear... Then come out... Find a few like yourself. THEN band.

This subject is hard because we all have to agree that there is at least the posibility that the Government has hacks in survival networks. Alone at least; only the strong will be therre to band together after all is said and done.

Im a go it alone person too, i get forced to live in a world with others, that is my view.

I would rather just look after myself, just like my life would of been if it wasn't for scum, that think your life is theres, because they have power.

I am not a leader, and i am not the type who wants to follow a leader. Most people are sheep though, and they probably would want to be part of a group.

There are probably people reading this thread, saying there is something wrong with us who want to be loners, you can bet there is.

[edit on 11/29/2008 by andy1033]

The only thing wrong with loners is that we have been burned too many times by others. Kudos ANDY!!!