Comment by poulsbohemian | Hacker News Reader

Comment by poulsbohemian | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I've got a whole hypothesis around this, but without getting too political... your statement "a way for people to feel like they have some sense of control over their future in a world they are disillusioned with" fits really well with the people I've met via real estate who are looking for these types of properties. At the root, they are scared and this kind of lifestyle is a way for them to channel that fear.

Ironically though, every cabin in the woods / prepper camp that I've seen as a real estate agent, wouldn't even last someone through a winter. Still way too many reliances on the modern world. Oh you've got a giant water tank and a well, but the pump (or your generator) runs on gas? Yeah good luck with that. Ok you've got a year's supply of freeze-dried meals, but no greenhouse, no setup for animals, no access to hunting, so... how are you going to produce more food? So you've got woodpile, but no more trees on your property and your only source of heat is a wood stove, so...

It's good to be prepared - earthquakes, tornadoes, and certainly fires are going to continue to be a thing. But I feel a kind of sadness for a lot of these folks who have survivalist fantasies that are a manifestation of their fears.

Another layer to this is that even if they have an active hobby farm that is self-sustaining, do they have medical skills? Can they set a broken leg, deliver a baby, and pull a rotted tooth? Do they have the technical skills to maintain various equipment, even if its renewable?

The irony for a lot of the prepper community is that the most efficient "off grid" social structure is concept that they strongly oppose, the commune. A small community working together for a common good in a shared space.

> The irony for a lot of the prepper community is that the most efficient "off grid" social structure is concept that they strongly oppose, the commune. A small community working together for a common good in a shared space.

I have a feeling that the opposition of preppers to the commune is a rather US-American thing. In other countries I rather sense that some kind of small commune is at least accepted as a necessary evil among preppers to increase the chance of success/survival.

My understanding is that in almost all cases, communes that were established in the US during the 1960s devolved into leadership by the most sociopathic, rather than a true community governance. I suspect the resulting backlash is why we in the US aren't attracted to the idea.

> concept that they strongly oppose, the commune

This makes no sense. Why would people that want to survive these end-of-the-world scenarios be opposed to the one thing that makes survival more likely?

I'm not doubting you, but it makes no sense to me.

It doesnt make sense, but many americans have been conditioned to think helping anyone but yourself is socialist/communist, and they would rather die than potentially be labeled one.

There's a part of me that feels the urge to prepare for disaster. And yet I know it's a reaction to fears I have that won't be helped by being prepared. My main concern is that one of many possible AGI disasters will come to pass. None of them are really solved by prepping. But I can speak to this being driven by fear, at least for myself.

To be honest, I have fantasies -- but they are fantasies of a simpler life without all the craziness of the world. Or rather, if I had to spend all my time getting food and staying alive for the next few days, I wouldn't have a lot of mental energy to worry about all the ways that things could go really badly that I don't have any control over.

I see what's being described in this thread as at least three different things:

1) Disaster preparedness, like you are describing, as a sane and prudent thing for many people and places. Know your local conditions and put in place some resources you could use if there were a fire / tornado / earthquake (whatever your local threat) for some period of time.

2) Simple living. That is, if there are things you can do that make you more self-sufficient and create pleasure, then go for it. Many people plant a garden, raise some chickens, etc not because they are prepping for the end of the world but because they enjoy it.

3) Actual off-grid preppers - people who for one reason or another plan for some time in which they will need to be entirely self-sufficient and may even wish to explicitly separate themselves from other people (war, zombie apocalypse, etc).

I think it's really just this third category that raises eyebrows and questions.

I'll add one more: my ex and I spent six years full-time RVing. During most of that time, we had approximately 30-days of off-grid capability, depending on where we were camped.

And that was without trying to push it. Realistically, we could have extended that by months - limited only by food - by camping near a water source.

Our lifestyle at the time wasn't at all "prepper" driven, but I think it's another category worth recognizing here.

Many full-time RVers have similarly, surprisingly-long off-grid capaciy at all times.

We did meet a few 'real' preppers along the way, though. The kind who have a reinforced "bug out room" deep in their basement, with positive pressure air ventilation, shelves lined with MREs, many crates of water, and an substantial arsenal. Interesting dude, but the prepper thing wasn't my speed.

Wow, now you've got my mind spinning, as yes, the nomad crowd is yet another whole genre of characters and stories. You've got everyone from essentially homeless people with wheels to trust fund kids / FIRE with total freedom. I'm sure you have many stories if you were on the road that many years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com