[ai-buttons]
Summary
➡ The text emphasizes the importance of preparation and privacy for survival in a crisis. It suggests setting clear boundaries and rules to maintain order, and stresses the need for everyone to contribute. It also highlights the need for careful selection of group members, considering their character and ability to contribute. Lastly, it encourages self-reliance and preparedness as key to thriving in difficult situations.
Transcript
Now, if you want to create contempt in the mind of a prepper, tell them that you’re coming to his house when the shit hits the fan. That’s a surefire way to enrage him. I kind of have a mixed point of view on this. Depending on how well off you are as a prepper, you’ll definitely want to consider human resources. But you want to do it in such a way that you’re not going to have politics arising. There’s a few things to consider. How much resources do you actually have is a big question. I would never put myself in a situation where I was going personally below a year.
So whatever surplus I have after a year is kind of resources I can play with. So in that sense, if some extended family members came on deck, as long as I could last a year, because that human resource is going to be beneficial, they might have a skill. They might be able to just be another body because, of course, security is going to be a big deal. So you’re going to want as many people around you who are supporting you as possible, right? So the more bodies, the better, essentially. There’s safety in numbers, as they say.
There has to be some sort of reciprocal exchange. If they’re offering something, be it just skills, expertise, another body, another labor, another person to keep watch. There’s a lot to say for somebody, even if they don’t have any skills, but they’re just somebody you can trust. That’s worth a lot. Any surplus of supplies that you have in excess of a one-year range for providing for your family should be used to provision a network that you will leverage for security and specialization of tasks. Shutting out everybody is not a good idea because, of course, there are going to be liabilities.
The more people you turn away who know that you have stuff, the more security risks you’re going to have. Family is always going to be the preferred people, I would admit. Not always, because sometimes your family are the people you work with. You spend a lot of time with people at work, probably more so than your extended family. So, in some respects, just because you don’t have an ephenal tie with a group doesn’t necessarily mean that you can’t integrate them into your group. But that would be one of the ground rules is assimilation. It’s not going to be like people come on your property and it’s a democracy all of a sudden, and they’re deciding what happens with stuff.
It has to be more of a top-down dictatorship, at least at the beginning, until people start to prove themselves. It’s just not fair that a person who didn’t prepare at all comes into your domain and starts trying to dictate or thinks that they have an equal voice in how things get distributed. This is not because you take any pleasure in being a dictator and wielding food in necessities over people’s heads. It’s just the reality that you’re the one who invested all the sweat equity in doing all that stuff while they were pissing around with their time, even though you could see all the warning signs from like miles away.
I’m not one who is going to immediately, as a knee-jerk reaction, say, never come around my property type thing. Because, again, people are resources, and we really need to get into that mindset. In terms of security and minimizing politics, I would be more inclined to bring in people that had children. When you have children, you almost have a protective, a vested interest in wanting to build a community that can provide a safe network. Because, of course, if you have kids, you’re going to want that community in case you die to take care of them. So you know that if somebody has children, they’re probably going to assimilate better into whatever sort of paradigm you have in practice.
Which is not to say that there’s not benefits to lone wolves, right? Because in some ways, they might be willing to take more risks, like if you need a runner, if you need somebody to fight in a combative role. You know, they may be more inclined to do that because they’re not as worried about their family. But they also have less allegiances. They have less of a vested interest in a community. You know, a person can really survive by themselves scavenging. It’s when you have children that you need a community. I would avoid taking like two families who knew each other or something.
Because then you get politics. You can also get collusion against you. It’s almost better that you have people who don’t really know each other. And it sounds kind of Machiavellian, but this is a strategy that a lot of dictators use to stay in power. They have many different armies, and all of the armies are scared of the other army. So no army attempts to overtake the government. So like in Vladimir Putin’s case, he has the Russian MOD. He has the Chechen army, which is somewhat separate from the Russian MOD, even though they by and large take their marching orders from the MOD.
You have the Wagner Group, which is a private security organization. And you have the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republic that are their own independent army. The Russian MOD is never really going to attempt to overthrow Putin because they know they have to deal with the Chechens and the Vogners. And the Vogners are never going to attempt to overthrow Putin because they know they have to deal with the Russian MOD. And then you have all these other like three-letter agency equivalents that are also somewhat functioning independently. So you have to keep things compartmentalized if you want to maintain rule of law and not invite a mutiny of sorts.
And of course, you want to be benevolent because you don’t want to be the person who mistreats people and gives people a reason to want to rebel. You want people to be comfortable where they are and for them to think that this is as good as it’s going to get. Because if they think, oh, well, you know, if Nate wasn’t in charge, then things could be better, then that’s going to give somebody an incentive to take me out. You want them to view you in the most utilitarian way possible, meaning doing the greatest amount of good for the most amount of people.
The initial supplies are just to get going because eventually you’re going to have to build a self-sustaining life. You’re going to have to have regenerative systems. You’re going to have to harvest energy. You’re going to have to harvest water. You’re going to have to mill wood to make structures. You’re going to have to, you know, do animal husbandry. And you’re going to want a guy who knows metallurgy and forging, you know, going back to all those basic things, somebody who practices medicine. The more people, the better. And the more specialized you can become, the stronger you’re going to be.
Maybe in the initial phases, they might be slightly better off. But over time, you need people who can specialize in one area. Everybody should have some degree of security, but I think you’ll want to have somewhat of an upper hand also. You want to ensure that before you ever put a gun in someone’s hands that you, number one, trust them 110%. You also want to make sure that you have some force multiplier or some way to control access to higher technology. So you might give them an SKS and you have the Tabor or something like that.
There’s different sort of ways to manage that situation. And people will say this in jest, like, haha, I’m going to come to your house when shit hits a fan. Not that they’re really, they truly believe that at the time, but little do they know that will be probably what they think. And I’m here to tell people that if you come to my place uninvited after SHTF, and I don’t know who you are, and you’re just expecting a handout, you’re going to be handed out something, but it’s not going to be what you think it is.
And that’s a nice way of saying it. I don’t revel in that idea of having stuff while other people don’t. That’s not a situation I want, which is why I’ve dedicated my life to try to encourage people to prepare. So you don’t have to come to my place. You don’t want to come to my place. You want to be at home with your family in control of your existence, not being at the whim of somebody else’s rationing. Nobody wants to be in that position. So it’s to the point now where when people say things like that, I confront them on it and I challenge them on it.
There was a time when I kind of just, like, kind of laugh it off and be like, oh, yeah, yeah, sure. But now it almost seems like as we get closer and closer to things going awry, I am starting to take that more personally. You don’t want people to know who you don’t want to know that you’re a prepper. Privacy is number one. Ideally, only the people you would trust would know. So that minimizes the problem altogether in the first place, besides the unwanted random stragglers who are going to be out there roaming the wasteland who come knocking on your door.
I’m more so talking about the people with intent. They will eventually come because people are going to be thinking about who has stuff. If things get so bad that the grocery stores get cleared out and the farmers’ fields get cleared out, well, they’re just going to keep going down the supply chain and there you’ll be. You’ll be that guy, they’re remembered, who is stockpiling stuff. Because preppers are so vigilant, I think this is not going to be a huge problem. If you’re so short-sighted that you didn’t prep, you’re going to be short-sighted when you try to take someone else’s preps and you’re going to get clipped.
This is not something I would take any enjoyment in, turning somebody away or having to resort to violence to defend myself. These are the last things anybody should want. But you also need to make it abundantly clear to people that there is a red line. Because if you don’t, they will overstep the boundaries. I mean, just one look at the geopolitical situation around the world, and we can see that red lines don’t mean anything if you don’t enforce them. You have to enforce these red lines immediately, strictly, and resolutely. You can’t waver on your rules.
Which brings me to the next thing, rules. Some rule of law. You need to make sure that the ground rules are laid out, so there’s no ambiguity about what’s right and what’s wrong and what a person can do and can’t do if they want to assimilate into your group. Now, I know all this sounds like dictatorial. Again, I must emphasize, this is not a situation I want. Some people look forward to the day where they can be king of the castle. I don’t want that responsibility. But I’m saying if I’m burdened with that responsibility, this is what I’m going to do.
Creating some kind of equivalent of a constitution. And you make it abundantly clear that this is not just about lording over people. This is about protecting everybody’s rights and freedoms to a lesser extent. Because of course, in that type of situation, there has to be some very strict laws and strict punishments. You don’t have the luxury of having prison guards. The punishments have to be harsh and immediate, essentially. Again, it would take no pleasure in having to do all that out, but it’s just the facts. Having an established set of rules, they could just be very simple rules.
No stealing, no killing, no sexual assaults, no, you know, all the basic stuff. But there might be some other stuff, like rules with respect to pulling your own weight. Everybody’s got to pull their weight, because some people are just going to milk it if you don’t say that. So if you don’t have that expectation right from the get-go, you’re going to have more political problems. This is why law supersedes politics. If you’re fighting from the inside because people think they’re being treated unfairly, then you’re going to have problems. In fact, you want them to feel empowered as a member of the group.
The more you can do this, the more they’re going to have a vested interest in wanting to defend that group with their life. So there’s no reason why you can’t get people to trust you. It’s just you have to have those boxes checked. They have to feel as though it’s safer in here than it is out there. But it’s only safer in here because of the way things are set up. Routine is going to be one of the best hedges against people trying to take things from you by force. Prioritize family, like close family, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents, children.
Secondary would be your extended family. Next would be people with children. That’s not the only criteria. Just because you have children is not sufficient in and of itself to guarantee that you’re getting into the group. Because there’s a lot of people with children who are either terrible parents, or they have criminal records, or they mistreat their kids, they mistreat their family, and they’re just hotheads. So you need to really assess a person’s character. And for that, I would say you almost do need some kind of interview. In the show, The Walking Dead, they go to this town called Alexandria.
This leader of the group interviews people, and they’re the ones who determine whether or not they’re fit for the community. You want to select several people from a group, I think, to act as some kind of board to determine if somebody is fit. People are going to be very deceitful in these circumstances, so you don’t know if somebody was in jail before she hits the van for violent crime or something like that. The best way to support this channel is to support yourself by gearing up at CanadianPreparedness.com, where you’ll find high-quality survival gear at the best prices, no junk, and no gimmicks.
Use discount code PreppingGear for 10% off. Don’t forget the strong survive, but the prepared thrive. Stay safe. [tr:trw].
See more of Canadian Prepper on their Public Channel and the MPN Canadian Prepper channel.
Author
