Prepping is an individual solution to the threat of societal collapse. In the grander scheme of things, it can be seen as an anti-solution. It gives some people the idea that they've got an escape hatch. If you think you can run away, you'll be less inclined to fight for a solution that avoids collapse.

Luckily, the article differentiates here and doesn't feature hardcore fatalists only. And in my view, just thinking about what living outside modern society encompasses will actually help people understand what they got. And why they should fight for it.

Personally, I need insulin. So I'm committed anyway. I can't just go hide in a bush for years on-end.

Anyone prepping who hasn't paid to have their appendix taken out isn't really prepping.

You can't be sent to the antarctic if you have one, because the risk of suddenly dying is small but very real and the extraction times impossible.

I'm am not a prepper, but if approached logically I assume you would tackle each risk to yourself in descending order of likelihood.

Given that, having your appendix out would probably be pretty far down the list.

I thought the no appendix requirement was only for doctors going to Antarctica?

There was a Soviet doctor there in the 60's who successfully removed his own appendix, but I think in general that's a situation that you want to avoid.

> In the grander scheme of things, it can be seen as an anti-solution.

Every person who has adequate preparations for themselves and their family is a person who who's allowing societal resources to go to someone else in greater need. It's one less person standing in line for water and food after a disaster.

Far from an anti-solution, it provides distributed herd immunity.

Not disagreeing with that. I'm just worried that the people who build their shelter might do so at the cost of not averting the disaster in the first place.

The people hiding in their shelters will live just a bit longer. If that means they survive: great. But they could also die alone instead of having defeated the danger together.

>In the grander scheme of things, it can be seen as an anti-solution. It gives some people the idea that they've got an escape hatch. If you think you can run away, you'll be less inclined to fight for a solution that avoids collapse.

It comes off like you're saying "well if shit really goes south I'm screwed so these people should be too". A few thousand preppers who are too busy prepping to "fight for a solution" isn't gonna make the difference between shit going south or not.

Not to be an ass but the kind of people I picture saying something like that are stuffy politicians who likes to use phrases like "antisocial behavior", "community norms" and "if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem" and who is completely out of touch with what shapes the decisions of everyday people.

If someone wants to prep for something that's highly unlikely to happen then I see no problem with that. If anything their prepping stands to be useful in a hurricane Katrina type situation. What's the problem with that?

> It comes off like you're saying "well if shit really goes south I'm screwed so these people should be too"

I think it's more a recognition that we are social creatures, and that the minimum-viable unit of social reproduction is the village cluster, not the lone-wolf individual.

The notion that these folk are going to "survive" in any meaningful sense is a fantasy.

I have no problem with people prepping. I understand and accept the reasons for it. I have a problem with people thinking they can just disengage from society and survive. As a hobby, prepping is fine.

If we all disagree what the solution to societal problems is, it is tempting to think I can have my solution independently of others. With this convenient illusion, it is easier to walk into societal collapse. Just live the sweet life now, and when it hits, I run off.

And hurricane Katrina? You realize that many deaths would have been prevented if the levees had been constructed properly? Sure, in hindsight that is easy to say. But that's exactly the issue here: The prepper mindset does not include collective protection. It doesn't scale.

I would think a few thousand peoples efforts could be better used to help keep society together than to stock food, water, seeds, and tools. Or if they really want to be a net gain for some FEMA scaled disaster, help everyone in their community have food, water, and sanitary supplies stored away.

Wrong forum for that kind of sentiment dude. Hacker news is not overflowing with people who value individual autonomy. Most people here see themselves as Correct, and so would much rather you do as they do than make your own decisions.

It’s about anxiety management, not real preparedness. As far as I can tell, the majority of “preppers” achieve very little other than making themselves feel as though they’ve gained some control over an inherently unpredictable and uncontrollable world. A minority of preppers who form heavily armed communities and dedicate most of their lives to it do probably have an edge, but luck will still play an enormous factor and they’re sacrificing their lives today for an uncertain future.

My favorite though are the billionaires who think that they wouldn’t be the first against the wall if civilization collapsed, and really believe their holes in New Zealand will be more than their graves. Still, if it makes people feel better and they’re unable or unwilling to address the roots of their fear and anxiety, it’s pretty harmless in most cases.

The people in heavily armed communities generally have not studied the history of the overall survival of isolated enclaves though.

At best, they get left alone till they run out of supplies, but most likely they get wiped out (if they try to not be absorbed) by the most successful group that adopts a mobile strategy.

I mean ISIS literally proved this model works for a very long time: advance and expand using the resources in the areas you take over, and pacify local populations with equal parts savagery and the spoils of war.

A sustainable version still looks the same - join the largest mobile group, and rapidly absorb territory and people until you become self-sustaining hopefully. And then defend if the same way - by staying mobile, but and having reinforcements to call upon.

The US adopted maneuver warfare as a tactical doctrine for a reason.

I always think back to this comment from a Sarajevo survivor: https://www.metafilter.com/78669/What-if-things-just-keep-ge...

World annhiliation is difficult to assess. Local political disaster .. well, it feels closer than a few years ago. But I don't think it will be the big nuclear one.

Switzerland "preps" on a society-wide scale: every apartment building must have its own nuclear shelter, and the mountains are riddled with more military and civilian shelters and stockpiles. They're completely prepared to blow the bridges and lockdown the country if it's required.

Meanwhile I'm wondering what level of "prepping" is appropriate for Brexit. The government alternates between announcing the issue of commemorative coins and announcing plans to requisition ships to deal with the Channel transport fiasco. I've already experiences not having any fresh food (milk, bread etc) in the shops for 5 days this year - and that was down to two feet of snow.

Individualist survival is always going to be terribly limited, and not possible for vulnerable individuals. The best solution is a society that takes the right threats seriously and looks after its vulnerable.

It seems they are not trying to be the "solution" to shit hitting the fan, they are just trying to be personally prepared for if/when it does.

I'm not a "prepper": I like backpacking; I like gardening; I like shooting (but not hunting, as I'm a vegetarian); I keep a hurricane kit at home with a couple months food and a generator.

This is just enjoying my hobbies combined with good sense preparedness for living in Florida.

As for plastic compasses, they work fine and are hard to break, orienteering is a fun hobby, and bow hunting is a popular sport here.

not compared to the 60's 70's or 80's

The Doomsday clock is a meaningless PR piece.