In a case where aid is limited, even finite, it is a judgement which is essential.
Is "preparedness" a state of mind?
- Thread starter GreyCat
- Start date
-
BushMoot: Come along to the amazing Summer Moot 31st July - 5th August (extended Moot : 27th July - 8th August), a festival of bushcrafting and camping in a beautiful woodland PLEASE CLICK HERE for more information.
Yes - or at least don't allow good intentions of assisting put yourself in a situation that potentially may harm yourself.
Put your own oxygen mask on before helping others put theirs on.
You can’t help others in a sustainable manner without first looking after yourself.
You can’t help others in a sustainable manner without first looking after yourself.
See above. Please.Does the Bible actually reference rapid cabin depressurization?
Amazing!!
I suppose the question could be asked today.
How do you feel about all the people who die of malnutrition, lack of clean water, basic sanitation or rudimentary healthcare?
People die every day of things we could prevent, but choose not to.
I think there is more a subtle difference and depends on context of the situation.
There is a huge difference between localised issues where one group of people are suffering and another group are not - that certain acts of care and benevolence can certainly occur without potentially the people in a position assisting opening themselves up to a somewhat weakened position.
I don't think self reliant types are by default set into a 'screw you jack , I'm ok - You're Not ' type mentality .
If however the scenario is more equal across all parameters - everyone is experiencing the same ongoing issue/threat , and it isn't a minor occurrence but ongoing - I think there probably is a shift of sorts.
If one has spent time , money ,resources and energy into trying to put safeguards into place to retain some resilience for ones family , I can understand why there would be a reluctance in weakening that position.
I do think prepper types value self reliance as a key Trait - and many people do have the same access to the same decisions in the build up to creating or not creating some individual level of resilience.
There is a huge difference between localised issues where one group of people are suffering and another group are not - that certain acts of care and benevolence can certainly occur without potentially the people in a position assisting opening themselves up to a somewhat weakened position.
I don't think self reliant types are by default set into a 'screw you jack , I'm ok - You're Not ' type mentality .
If however the scenario is more equal across all parameters - everyone is experiencing the same ongoing issue/threat , and it isn't a minor occurrence but ongoing - I think there probably is a shift of sorts.
If one has spent time , money ,resources and energy into trying to put safeguards into place to retain some resilience for ones family , I can understand why there would be a reluctance in weakening that position.
I do think prepper types value self reliance as a key Trait - and many people do have the same access to the same decisions in the build up to creating or not creating some individual level of resilience.
I believe there is a hierarchy of care for most people (ignoring people that are paid to care) though I accept that some people spend their lives reaching way beyond what most of us do.
So, there is:
World - an element of concern and desire to help on a worldwide basis - weak
Country - patriotism, sometimes gentle other times aggressive
Community - could be region, town, team, or even housing estate - variable
Wider family - can be strong but also surprisingly weak in some circumstances
Close family - very strong
As situations worsen most people's concern tumbles down that list and, I would argue, most people would be prepared to do anything to protect close family - and that would include keeping back resources to improve likelihood of survival. There's no point waiting to do that until you're on your last tin of beans.
It's in our genes to do what needs to be done to protect us and ours. That's how we have evolved.
So, there is:
World - an element of concern and desire to help on a worldwide basis - weak
Country - patriotism, sometimes gentle other times aggressive
Community - could be region, town, team, or even housing estate - variable
Wider family - can be strong but also surprisingly weak in some circumstances
Close family - very strong
As situations worsen most people's concern tumbles down that list and, I would argue, most people would be prepared to do anything to protect close family - and that would include keeping back resources to improve likelihood of survival. There's no point waiting to do that until you're on your last tin of beans.
It's in our genes to do what needs to be done to protect us and ours. That's how we have evolved.
You are correct. I honestly do not know what I would actually do or who I would help. What I know is, that in my present state, mental, spiritual and physical then I am in a very good place to help others and I would like to think that I would do the right thing. Whilst I am a soloist I do consider what I am learning in relation to helping others and passing it on. I am 58 now and have accumulated a wealth of knowledge and experience. I would be devastated if I did not get to pass some of that on either today or tomorrow, Years ago those entering into elderhood would have understood that this stage of life was right of passage, a privilege and a pleasure. DD x
I think that holds true to some extent now but if we lived in larger groups then it could go the other way. Whereby the survival and welfare of the group becomes the most important thing because without that small family groups would perish.. Looking back, living in large groups and co operating was done worldwide up until very recently in our history. I would like to think that we will revert to type and reconnect with one another. x
I get that also. I am very disillusioned with the whole thing but. I think regardless it pays for me to stay positive and hopeful. We have everything we need. Nothing will ever really change till we hit some sort of rock bottom collectively and at that point we might wake up and smell the flowers. Whatever happens it is fascinating to watch it all unfolding. I can't remember it ever being this mad even when Thatcher was in power xxxYou have far more faith in humankind than I do
Last edited:
Oh I dunno, it was pretty darn rough in the seventies and early eighties. You just heard a whole lot less about it. If you wanted to hear someone "say wot everiwun else is finking" you had to buy their fanzine. These days they get beamed right into your living room, 1080P (at least).
Much depends upon expectation. I'm a bit older & remember when fewer than 10% of people went to university and a normal, working class household:
- Almost certainly rented their home with no expectation of ever buying
- Had no car
- Had no central heating
- Had no freezer
- Never went abroad
- Used a launderette & wore clothes for several days
- Used a call box to make a phone call
- Rented a TV if they had one at all
- Still had an outside toilet
- Were paid in cash and had no savings
I think most people today have it pretty good to be honest
@British Red Would you say that we were more resilient in those days?
We had a couple of weeks food at a pinch. Spuds and oatmeal. A bit of flour. (Rarely pasta and no rice) We could stand a while without services. Many of us had a kitchen range built into the kitchen fireplace and a coal shed or coal bunker. Loss of electricity was common - pre national super grid. You just moved stuff to the fire and got sooty.
On the other hand an ambulance was going to take at least an hour by the time you’ve gathered your forpunce gone to the call box.
The local doctor might get there quicker if he was about.
Treatment was pretty low tech.
We didn’t think much about disasters - we’d just been through years of war. We just got on with it.
Then ten or so years later school was plastered with posters about atomic bombs. They didn’t mean much to me at the age of ten and nothing changed at home.
It has certainly affected my attitude to so called preparedness. I just get on with it but I’m a LOT more comfortable and have vastly more choices and options. I wouldn’t go back to the fifties conditions unless forced to. If I did I’d manage.
We had a couple of weeks food at a pinch. Spuds and oatmeal. A bit of flour. (Rarely pasta and no rice) We could stand a while without services. Many of us had a kitchen range built into the kitchen fireplace and a coal shed or coal bunker. Loss of electricity was common - pre national super grid. You just moved stuff to the fire and got sooty.
On the other hand an ambulance was going to take at least an hour by the time you’ve gathered your forpunce gone to the call box.
The local doctor might get there quicker if he was about.
Treatment was pretty low tech.
We didn’t think much about disasters - we’d just been through years of war. We just got on with it.
Then ten or so years later school was plastered with posters about atomic bombs. They didn’t mean much to me at the age of ten and nothing changed at home.
It has certainly affected my attitude to so called preparedness. I just get on with it but I’m a LOT more comfortable and have vastly more choices and options. I wouldn’t go back to the fifties conditions unless forced to. If I did I’d manage.
Last edited:
