It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How many city dwellers would obey and support the government during martial law or SHTF?

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Many people here on ATS talk about bugging out of the city if things get crazy and very few seem to be OK with FEMA camps or taking orders during martial law. What I'd like to know is how many of a city's residents will bug-out, fight back, or go with the program, or who might even be in total support of government to the point of violence?

The reason I ask this is because I've been defending a post in another website where I basically bash the city I grew up in for tearing down schools to put up cheap houses. I also bash city life in general and ask why anyone would live there. About half the people made jokes about it or made a constructive remark. About a quarter agreed with my post or made more extreme comments about how bad that city has gotten. Another quarter got very defensive and either spouted propaganda, made insults toward me or threatened me with physical violence, all in defense of their city. These overly defensive people wanted me to shut-up even though they were on my post and didn't have to follow it. They could have made an opposing post, but wouldn't. Why would they take this so personally?

This got me thinking about how a person could not really care about their town, or even hate it, and yet defend it tooth and nail out of some kind of twisted loyalty. Sure you might have grown-up and gone to school there, but that city isn't the same as it was 30 or 40 years ago, or even 10 years ago. Many people in my old neighborhood have left years ago like I did. I just wonder what motivates the hard core city lovers who never left and would they be the lap dogs of the government if the SHTF.
edit on 18-4-2012 by MichiganSwampBuck because: Fixed a Typo




posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   
First you can count out the looters. They'll be doing the grab and run dance. That's mainly big cities, I'm talking about here. The non-looters will be more compliant to being herded up under the guise of *for your own safety*.

When it comes to small towns, rural areas, that's where I think you'll find the *my town* protectors.

JMOHO....Des



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   
I believe some of the city lovers are thinking that it is THEIR city and that their neighbors, or the houses on their street IS the city. They probably believe that their values, or the values they think they share with their neighbors, are the same values of the city's political body or of the businesses in the area.

I'm not sure they would feel that way if the city decided to target them and fine them or take them to court over something trivial they do in their city. What if they found out that their school or even their whole subdivision was built on a toxic brown zone? What would it take to remove the blinders that make them so loyal to the city?



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by MichiganSwampBuck
 


As many sheeple as now comply with the body scanners and groping TSA agents at airports.

Most people will comply, most people in America have absolutely no guts and are willing to hand over all their rights and do exactly what they are told.

Go to the airport.
Go to any major street corner, public building, etc and look at the cameras, (should have been one in the oval office when Bill and Monica were going at it).

I don't know if it's the chemtrails, in the water, the soil, the food or food additives but the average American will line up silently and board the trains exactly like the Jews did during the Holocaust.

Comply and obey, do not question authority, do not protest, do what you are told, be good little worker drones, be afraid and stand silent.................and you will end up in a brave new world.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
I'm with ya man, I left the city for the countryside unwillingly as a teenager. I thought I would be missing out on the "city social life", but I could not love being away from everything more!

Being on the outside looking in, I realized just how much my life would have been affected by a societal breakdown. I would rather have complete control over my life instead of depending on the system, and being reduced to nothing, if that system ever failed.

They can have their chaos in the cities. I'll enjoy the peace and calmness of nature.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
I went to college at my local community college and then to a university in downtown Detroit. I've met a number of what I call urban-downtown lurkers who never ventured out of the metro area and seemed to have a phobia about rural areas. Some people are just natural city dwellers. A pity them for not experiencing the real world outside the city.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Something else to consider is the tribal instinct of defending your home turf. It's similar to loyalty people have for the home team. I think that is a big part of it.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I think a lot would depend on why the S is Hing TF. If it was because of some natural disaster like say a large earthquake, volcano, or asteroid impact, then I believe the city folk would be more inclined to accept Federal aid and even martial law depending on the severity. If it was because of some made up or artificial incident, then I believe there would be problems between the government and the people.

Also, the amount of time that martial law is in effect would affect the relationship between the government and the people, especially if the timeline for the lifting of martial law is not well defined.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by LevelHeaded
I think a lot would depend on why the S is Hing TF. If it was because of some natural disaster like say a large earthquake, volcano, or asteroid impact, then I believe the city folk would be more inclined to accept Federal aid and even martial law depending on the severity. If it was because of some made up or artificial incident, then I believe there would be problems between the government and the people.

Also, the amount of time that martial law is in effect would affect the relationship between the government and the people, especially if the timeline for the lifting of martial law is not well defined.


I agree LevelHeaded, there are a number of factors and scenarios to consider. Some people can't get out but want to, some have already left, some who moved to the outskirts might bug-out, some would like to fight back but cave in at a superior occupying force. A natural disaster would make a FEMA camp seem like the best option to most city dwellers.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
I don't know if it's the chemtrails, in the water, the soil, the food or food additives but the average American will line up silently and board the trains exactly like the Jews did during the Holocaust.


The Jews did it back then, and they didn't have chemtrails, flouridated water, or GM food.

People talk about the will to survive or the desire for freedom being part of the human spirit, but the truth is that it doesn't occur in more than 10% of humans at the absolute most. It never has.

I remember back when I ran CTF games in World of Warcraft; the Alliance would throw literally everything they could at us. Every trick in the book. Epic weaponry, the best armor, and every offensive or defensive enchant in the game. You name it. We still won, when logic said that it should have been impossible for us to do so...but we only did because we wanted it more. No other reason.

Contemporary humanity isn't as passive and compliant as most of us are, because of any of the additives that we've been given. It's just us.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 01:42 AM
link   
TBH if it happened here in London, I would hold out as long as I could with my family but if I had to I would go on some "book of eli" type mission, without the killing, blindness and following chick.. But lifes quite different here. Overpopulated and run down, so forcing people into camps would probably be harder than they think. I definately wouldn't check myself into one though. Just to get medicated up and implanted with chips... No thanks..



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   
The single biggest problem, to add another point however, is not passivity.

The problem is that people insist on believing that governments have their best interests at heart; and the main reason why, is because believing that even to the point of death, is easier than even trying to be self-responsible.

The majority of the population are not adults. They're really children. They might be in adult bodies, but they are not really adults. For their entire lives, they are always someone else's responsibility. Most people would genuinely prefer to die, than be put into a situation where they need to survive as a result of their own efforts. They just don't believe that they can do it.



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


I'd like to know what the percentages would be, even if we are guessing.

So petrus, would you say that 80 - 90 percent would go with the program more less willingly? With 5 - 10 percent resisting and 5 - 10 percent assisting?

Does anyone want to throw some figures out there?



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by MichiganSwampBuck
 


I'm not actually sure it's about the city itself, I would be inclined to believe they are weak-minded nationalists who trust their government no matter what. I think they're the kinds of people who believe their government is out to protect their interests, and if you brought up any historical facts to prove them incorrect they'll conveniently ignore it.

Basically, they're the same as religious people who blindly accept and follow, without questioning. I think it's been proven that there are leaders and followers, and in my opinion those who believe in organized religion are inclined to be followers, never questioning, and that this can translate to government too.

It would be interesting to see some statistical data on the subject, but I believe it's probable that the military has a higher number of those who believe in God (and therefore more willing to follow orders without questioning their morality) than atheists.

As for me, I'm undecided about whether I would stand and fight or bug out. It depends on the circumstances of the event.

My primary thoughts are for the safety of my family and friends, and that would dictate my actions depending on the scenario. But it's safe to say that I would not be trusting my government, national or local.

That's not because I necessarily believe they don't have the interests of the people in the forefront of their minds (which they consistently don't) but because I view them all as incompetent.

When the riots happened last year I was watching the news constantly waiting to see if my area was being affected. Luckily it wasn't that bad here. But I was preparing to leave if I had to.
I was born in London (before moving as a child), and seeing the city being attacked from the inside like that was hard to watch. If I had been living there I would have been teaming up with the neighbors to protect our property on the first night, and persuading them that we should all leave the following day. The police were shown to be worse than useless in that event, and our country really was hours away from needing military on the streets of our cities.

If the military arrived on my street to respond to something like this, I would be out of here in a heartbeat to find a small village for a few weeks or months. Sitting back and waiting for it to get worse would not be an option, but I know a lot of others who would do exactly that. Not through pride of their city, but just through ignorance at how these things unfold and how they escalate.

Most people in our countries don't believe that these things are possible. They don't understand history, they don't realize that nations in the grip of war and dictatorship now were once relatively free (to differing degrees over history). Why is it so hard to imagine what could happen on our own doorstep?



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   
70%, possibly higher. Unfortunately propaganda and lack of awareness is ripe with the majority of the population. However no one can predict the future and the uncertainty will be something that will worry those in power. It is quite possible that something large scale such as martial law will be a kind of catalyst that will awaken more people by forced attention to the present. This is why even though we have plenty of lemmings (the majority in fact) TPTB will use that as a last resort because of the chance of it backfiring.

Look at 9/11, which did more to awaken people than it did to increase support for war. Support for war, mostly due to shock and awe and media propaganda, fooled most for a little while, but exponentially exposed millions of people to the possibly that something isn't right within our government which lead to the seeking of alternative news. This is why another false flag attack of that magnitude has not happened on our soil, because the elite are aware that it is a massive risk, while a stepping stone approach is less riskier and more productive in their eyes, butthe con of that approach is that it takes years (sometimes decades) rather than a few months or a year or two.

edit on 23-4-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-4-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by MichiganSwampBuck
 



I would fight tooth and nail against what's wrong. I would not go to a camp...I would only go along martial law out of civility...but..they cross the line... ( hahahaha which they do...) fooorrGetaboutIT!!

SF



posted on Apr, 23 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
I looked over the posted replies in my "city bashing" post I described in the OP and came up with some percentages.

40% of respondents were fond of their city or somewhat defensive about it.

25% basically joked about it.

25% were extremely defensive of their city, making personal attacks and threats of violence.

10% hated their city and were glade they left it.

That was a small sampling only from anyone who bother to respond to my post on that forum on that social network.




top topics



 
5

log in

join