If guys with guns are talking about collapse, why can’t we?
November 12, 2020 7:24 AM Subscribe
"But the real prepper story is not about rich people building bunkers in the middle of nowhere. Nor about conspiracy theorists getting ready to defend their kids from nanobots sent by, um, Bill Gates. No, the real prepper story is that our own militaries are prepping."
The US military has been taking climate change seriously for well over 20 years. The reckless irresponsibility of the right wing in the US to deny the reality that our most sober and intelligent military leadership has known for decades is abominable, but also predictable. The US right wing loves military symbolism and hates military reality: planning for future threats -- if it doesn't mean more whiz-bang weapons and fighter jets -- is simply off the table, and taking care of our own physically and psychologically wounded soldiers is something they've never had much interest in.
I don't want to say that all the military leadership are doing the right thing and calling for smart preparations, however. Case in point, I think it's abundantly clear that much of our USAF General Staff has been suborned by seditious (even treasonous) influences, namely Fundamentalist Evangelical Christianity, and most are unfit for their commands.
posted by tclark at 8:08 AM on November 12, 2020 [21 favorites]
I don't want to say that all the military leadership are doing the right thing and calling for smart preparations, however. Case in point, I think it's abundantly clear that much of our USAF General Staff has been suborned by seditious (even treasonous) influences, namely Fundamentalist Evangelical Christianity, and most are unfit for their commands.
posted by tclark at 8:08 AM on November 12, 2020 [21 favorites]
One of the many paradoxes of bipartisan American empire is that the military can claim to take climate change seriously while still being a massive contributor to it:
posted by Ouverture at 8:21 AM on November 12, 2020 [6 favorites]
According to the Costs of War, an ongoing project from the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University, since the global war on terror began in 2001, the U.S. military has produced 1.2 billion metric tons of greenhouse-gas emissions, or as much as 257 million passenger cars annually, roughly as many registered vehicles as there are in the entire U.S. That's a higher annual output than whole countries like Morocco, Sweden, and Switzerland. The total emissions from war-related activity in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Syria is estimated at more than 400 million metric tons of carbon dioxide alone.It is also why I don't take those claims very seriously.
posted by Ouverture at 8:21 AM on November 12, 2020 [6 favorites]
Recognizing an impact or threat is a separate concept from working to avoid said threat. The military is generally skilled at the former, but is organized such that and cultivates a culture that makes it impossible to do the latter.
Prevention requires a mindset more like diplomacy than like security.
posted by wierdo at 8:31 AM on November 12, 2020 [8 favorites]
Prevention requires a mindset more like diplomacy than like security.
posted by wierdo at 8:31 AM on November 12, 2020 [8 favorites]
That's a strange argument. The US military doesn't choose whether to engage in warfare, the political leadership does. Industrial warfare is necessarily resource-intensive, one of the many reasons we shouldn't do it. However the military does choose to a certain extent how it implements the orders of the civilian leadership, and it is certainly the case that within its mandate the military has taken various steps to limit its climate impact, both for political and strategic reasons. Because of this the question of whether the US military is a major contributor to climate change (it is) doesn't seem especially germane to the question of whether it's leadership takes the issue seriously. The only way for them not to be a major greenhouse gas emitter would be to refuse to follow the orders of the civilian government. Which, yeah, maybe we'd all be better off if the military just refused to fight, but that's not how our democracy works. But the fact that they attempt to mitigate their emissions within the context of what is possible to achieve their primary goals suggests that they do take it seriously, precisely because, as the article argues, climate change has obvious strategic implications for them. Note that this is not an endorsement of US military action, just a recognition that those in charge of it are not stupid and can make serious plans for the climate catastrophe, at least within the context of their militaristic worldview.
posted by biogeo at 8:44 AM on November 12, 2020 [8 favorites]
posted by biogeo at 8:44 AM on November 12, 2020 [8 favorites]
Parts of the US military have recognized the strategic and tactical advantages of getting off fossil fuels. (One example: Those huge fuel trucks that need to resupply vehicles have always been a big target for attacks) As with many places, the transition is happening, just not fast enough.
posted by gwint at 8:47 AM on November 12, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by gwint at 8:47 AM on November 12, 2020 [1 favorite]
The changes by The Current Occupant at the Pentagon, appointing loyalists, is a troubling sign and I think there's an irrationally exuberant perspective on the left that any orders around making the election result turn out the "right" way would be objected to or ignored.
Remember that those greatest generation American military leaders everyone wants to admire- Eisenhower, MacArthur, Patton - were part of the purging of the Bonus Army in Washington D.C. 1932. They went into a peaceful protest camp with rifles and gas and bayonets and killed veterans protesting their lack of a promised bonus from their World War I service, including men those leaders served with.
The mililtary will do what it's told by leaders. As individuals they might not like it, but they'll do it.
That's kind of what they're there for.
posted by lon_star at 9:09 AM on November 12, 2020 [2 favorites]
Remember that those greatest generation American military leaders everyone wants to admire- Eisenhower, MacArthur, Patton - were part of the purging of the Bonus Army in Washington D.C. 1932. They went into a peaceful protest camp with rifles and gas and bayonets and killed veterans protesting their lack of a promised bonus from their World War I service, including men those leaders served with.
The mililtary will do what it's told by leaders. As individuals they might not like it, but they'll do it.
That's kind of what they're there for.
posted by lon_star at 9:09 AM on November 12, 2020 [2 favorites]
Note that this is not an endorsement of US military action, just a recognition that those in charge of it are not stupid and can make serious plans for the climate catastrophe, at least within the context of their militaristic worldview.
I understand this line of reasoning, but my point is that the bipartisan imperialistic worldview, which I include civilian leadership in this, is fundamentally incompatible with any sort of meaningful progress against climate change.
After all, the conquest for fossil fuels are a big part of how we ended up in this mess of broken empire to begin with. What kind of world would we live in where Mossadegh wasn't ousted?
posted by Ouverture at 9:12 AM on November 12, 2020 [2 favorites]
I understand this line of reasoning, but my point is that the bipartisan imperialistic worldview, which I include civilian leadership in this, is fundamentally incompatible with any sort of meaningful progress against climate change.
After all, the conquest for fossil fuels are a big part of how we ended up in this mess of broken empire to begin with. What kind of world would we live in where Mossadegh wasn't ousted?
posted by Ouverture at 9:12 AM on November 12, 2020 [2 favorites]
Because no one in Washington dares defund the military, the military provides a steady source of funding for environmental research and climate change planning. We should just move the missions of NEA, NEH, EPA, etc under the DOD. Likewise, I'm amazed how mum the word is on military COVID protocols.
posted by bendybendy at 10:10 AM on November 12, 2020 [5 favorites]
posted by bendybendy at 10:10 AM on November 12, 2020 [5 favorites]
I understand this line of reasoning, but my point is that the bipartisan imperialistic worldview, which I include civilian leadership in this, is fundamentally incompatible with any sort of meaningful progress against climate change.
I largely agree with that. But there are actors within that system that still understand and attempt to address or mitigate the problem, despite the intransigence of the system overall, and I also think it's useful to see and understand what those actors are doing. For one, there is the rhetorical value of statements like "See, even the military understands this is a problem and is working to address it" when speaking with people who respect the military but not other institutions. For another, it's important to understand in what ways those actors may be forces for (or against) necessary change of the larger system. And finally it's valuable to understand how those actors may respond should the system, and the constraints within which they currently operate, change fundamentally.
posted by biogeo at 10:36 AM on November 12, 2020 [1 favorite]
I largely agree with that. But there are actors within that system that still understand and attempt to address or mitigate the problem, despite the intransigence of the system overall, and I also think it's useful to see and understand what those actors are doing. For one, there is the rhetorical value of statements like "See, even the military understands this is a problem and is working to address it" when speaking with people who respect the military but not other institutions. For another, it's important to understand in what ways those actors may be forces for (or against) necessary change of the larger system. And finally it's valuable to understand how those actors may respond should the system, and the constraints within which they currently operate, change fundamentally.
posted by biogeo at 10:36 AM on November 12, 2020 [1 favorite]
I also came into this thread looking for coup talk bc I'm wondering how seriously we should take this. I would think not seriously but I'm always getting surprised. A British friend thinks it's like Brexit, a grift with the potential to go sideways.
posted by subdee at 11:11 AM on November 12, 2020 [2 favorites]
posted by subdee at 11:11 AM on November 12, 2020 [2 favorites]
Because no one in Washington dares defund the military, the military provides a steady source of funding for environmental research and climate change planning. We should just move the missions of NEA, NEH, EPA, etc under the DOD. Likewise, I'm amazed how mum the word is on military COVID protocols.
That’s hilarious and true. Can you imagine IRS under SecDef?
The VA system would make even more sense to roll under Defense. Maybe they’d even get funding.
Also Homeland Security. Get some grownups in charge of the loonies over there.
posted by leotrotsky at 1:05 PM on November 12, 2020 [2 favorites]
That’s hilarious and true. Can you imagine IRS under SecDef?
The VA system would make even more sense to roll under Defense. Maybe they’d even get funding.
Also Homeland Security. Get some grownups in charge of the loonies over there.
posted by leotrotsky at 1:05 PM on November 12, 2020 [2 favorites]
Also Homeland Security. Get some grownups in charge of the loonies over there.
Showing up to note that the Coast Guard is within DHS (and, so far as I can tell, notably un-politicized so far).
Frankly, the country would be better off if they broke up DHS, put CG back in with Transportation, and put FEMA and EPA together in a cabinet-level department of Systemic Problems or some such thing. Dunno about CBP etc. Move 'em to Interior and take away all their guns and prisons?
posted by suelac at 3:19 PM on November 12, 2020 [1 favorite]
Showing up to note that the Coast Guard is within DHS (and, so far as I can tell, notably un-politicized so far).
Frankly, the country would be better off if they broke up DHS, put CG back in with Transportation, and put FEMA and EPA together in a cabinet-level department of Systemic Problems or some such thing. Dunno about CBP etc. Move 'em to Interior and take away all their guns and prisons?
posted by suelac at 3:19 PM on November 12, 2020 [1 favorite]
This discussion reminds me I was doing some research and OSHA does have the authority to refer a case to the Department of Justice if they think you were criminally negligent and it led to a worker's death. However, because prosecuting OSH Act crimes is hard and nobody wants to deal with pissing off big business, the DOJ moved it under their Environmental Crimes unit and works with the EPA. This is because federal environmental laws actually have teeth, so you're more likely to get a conviction and a punishment, since most workplace safety violations that kill someone probably have an environmental impact like a chemical spill/exposure/whatever. One of my sources. Another one.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 5:00 PM on November 12, 2020 [3 favorites]
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 5:00 PM on November 12, 2020 [3 favorites]
Dunno about CBP etc.
Move 'em to Commerce, because that's where Customs should be anyway.
posted by tclark at 6:22 PM on November 12, 2020
Move 'em to Commerce, because that's where Customs should be anyway.
posted by tclark at 6:22 PM on November 12, 2020
Via Nature, yesterday:
An earth system model shows self-sustained melting of permafrost even if all man-made GHG emissions stop in 2020
An earth system model shows self-sustained melting of permafrost even if all man-made GHG emissions stop in 2020
The risk of points-of-no-return, which, once surpassed lock the world into new dynamics, have been discussed for decades. Recently, there have been warnings that some of these tipping points are coming closer and are too dangerous to be disregarded. In this paper we report that in the ESCIMO climate model the world is already past a point-of-no-return for global warming. In ESCIMO we observe self-sustained melting of the permafrost for hundreds of years, even if global society stops all emissions of man-made GHGs immediately.posted by They sucked his brains out! at 8:03 AM on November 13, 2020 [2 favorites]
That's a very interesting paper, but a couple of notes about it. One, it's in Nature Scientific Reports, an open-access journal that reviews primarily for technical correctness rather than perceived importance or soundness of its suggested implications, not Nature's flagship journal. That's not a knock against it at all; Scientific Reports is a good journal, and I actually like that publication model, but it's just to note that the editors and reviewers would probably not have been assessing whether what they did with the ESCIMO climate model actually has external validity. Which leads to the second note, that this is just one climate model, which the authors describe as a "reduced complexity" model, and consequently they suggest their results need to be validated against other "larger" models. So while this result is definitely interesting, for non-specialists I don't think much should be made of it until more complete models of the Earth climate system show similar findings.
Also interesting to note that their model finds that in order to avoid this run-away effect from melting permafrost, human greenhouse gas emissions would have had to have ceased completely in the 1960s. This is much, much earlier than anything else I've seen as far as suggested tipping points for climate change, and it seems unlikely to me (as a total non-specialist) that previous modelling would have missed such an effect completely. The most likely explanation, it seems to me, is that this result reflects some unusual feature of the ESCIMO climate model they used. But maybe this is actually real, in which case this strongly suggests that resources should be diverted to mitigation and possibly geoengineering efforts rather than just emissions reduction, since even immediate and elimination of new human greenhouse gas emissions seems to at best delay warming by about a century in their model. Given that possibility, we should certainly hope this is just an effect of the particular model they used (as seems likely to me).
posted by biogeo at 8:53 AM on November 13, 2020 [5 favorites]
Also interesting to note that their model finds that in order to avoid this run-away effect from melting permafrost, human greenhouse gas emissions would have had to have ceased completely in the 1960s. This is much, much earlier than anything else I've seen as far as suggested tipping points for climate change, and it seems unlikely to me (as a total non-specialist) that previous modelling would have missed such an effect completely. The most likely explanation, it seems to me, is that this result reflects some unusual feature of the ESCIMO climate model they used. But maybe this is actually real, in which case this strongly suggests that resources should be diverted to mitigation and possibly geoengineering efforts rather than just emissions reduction, since even immediate and elimination of new human greenhouse gas emissions seems to at best delay warming by about a century in their model. Given that possibility, we should certainly hope this is just an effect of the particular model they used (as seems likely to me).
posted by biogeo at 8:53 AM on November 13, 2020 [5 favorites]
One, it's in Nature Scientific Reports, an open-access journal that reviews primarily for technical correctness rather than perceived importance or soundness of its suggested implications, not Nature's flagship journal
You're right: Apologies.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 9:04 AM on November 13, 2020 [1 favorite]
You're right: Apologies.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 9:04 AM on November 13, 2020 [1 favorite]
Eh, it's hosted on nature.com, so you weren't wrong! Just thought it was worth clarifying.
posted by biogeo at 9:23 AM on November 13, 2020
posted by biogeo at 9:23 AM on November 13, 2020
The global pandemic suggests that the world isn't going to deal with climate change in any meaningful way. We can't even get people to wear masks and wash their hands when faced with a much more immediate threat to their health and that's nothing compared to what we need to do to fight climate change.
posted by interogative mood at 4:34 PM on November 13, 2020
posted by interogative mood at 4:34 PM on November 13, 2020
Happily, our obsession with market capitalism provides very simple levers with which to make people change their behavior. The moment it becomes cheaper to do the right thing, the large scale emitters either change their ways or get driven out of business.
The rapid shift away from coal despite all the whining from the usual suspects provides a great example. Thankfully, the vast majority of emissions come from industry and state actors, not the individuals that industrial concerns love to place the blame upon, so it really doesn't matter if some jackasses continue rolling coal in their brodozers. Everyone else will do whatever is cheapest and banks will help encourage that the moment electric cars become better collateral.
posted by wierdo at 5:18 PM on November 13, 2020
The rapid shift away from coal despite all the whining from the usual suspects provides a great example. Thankfully, the vast majority of emissions come from industry and state actors, not the individuals that industrial concerns love to place the blame upon, so it really doesn't matter if some jackasses continue rolling coal in their brodozers. Everyone else will do whatever is cheapest and banks will help encourage that the moment electric cars become better collateral.
posted by wierdo at 5:18 PM on November 13, 2020
Happily, our obsession with market capitalism provides very simple levers with which to make people change their behavior. The moment it becomes cheaper to do the right thing, the large scale emitters either change their ways or get driven out of business.
I hope this works for the US. The "moment it becomes cheaper to do the right thing" has been rescheduled in my country several times. It seems, for now, that it's still cheaper in the US to poison groundwater and start wars.
posted by pompomtom at 6:08 AM on November 14, 2020 [1 favorite]
I hope this works for the US. The "moment it becomes cheaper to do the right thing" has been rescheduled in my country several times. It seems, for now, that it's still cheaper in the US to poison groundwater and start wars.
posted by pompomtom at 6:08 AM on November 14, 2020 [1 favorite]
I just want to point out one thing I have been thinking for, well, maybe decades now, ever since I first heard the term 'prepper': they have a point and have some emulation-worthy behaviours.
Let me preface this by saying on the whole I think they are mad, anti-social and wierd.
BUT!
Local, independant sustainable power generation? Local food sourcing? Local water sourcing? A frugality of environmental impact by design due to having to source power/food/water yourself?
Isn't that en entirely environmentally sustainable way of living? Shouldn't we aspire to a more frugal use of resources, too? And the use of solar/wind power .... that sounds familiar, no?
If we all lived like preppers without the antisocial elements, without the guns, wouldn't that lead to a more local, more distributed, more ecologically responsible lifestyle?
Yeah, even in dense cities, we can use more local solar and wind. And of course we can use the greener economies of scale in centralised power-generation where it makes calculated sense.
Even so, I have always felt preppers were making a good point, they just had no idea what about what they were doing was sensible.
posted by MacD at 9:12 AM on November 14, 2020
Let me preface this by saying on the whole I think they are mad, anti-social and wierd.
BUT!
Local, independant sustainable power generation? Local food sourcing? Local water sourcing? A frugality of environmental impact by design due to having to source power/food/water yourself?
Isn't that en entirely environmentally sustainable way of living? Shouldn't we aspire to a more frugal use of resources, too? And the use of solar/wind power .... that sounds familiar, no?
If we all lived like preppers without the antisocial elements, without the guns, wouldn't that lead to a more local, more distributed, more ecologically responsible lifestyle?
Yeah, even in dense cities, we can use more local solar and wind. And of course we can use the greener economies of scale in centralised power-generation where it makes calculated sense.
Even so, I have always felt preppers were making a good point, they just had no idea what about what they were doing was sensible.
posted by MacD at 9:12 AM on November 14, 2020
Likewise, I'm amazed how mum the word is on military COVID protocols.
There is a difference between "I am not seeing something" VS something existing.
The DOD has a history of production of documents. Things like "how to survive fall out" to "how to make zip guns" with these documents being traded as e-files going back to gun shows, mail-in places like Loopmatics, e-files on FTP sites, newsgroups on anews based code and other places.
The Military has PLENY of COVID info. One just needs to suspect that the Military has it and then go looking. One public tip-off was US Army wants industry to keep COVID safety rules in place, even after the pandemic ends And once one has such an understanding then one takes the understanding of the naming from years of Loopmatics and goes to a search engine of choice and looks up DOD COVID PMG.
As for collapse - the documents of DOD about the weather and crops has existed for decades. Long enough for Alex Jones to use them as part of some of his rants. Those 30+ year old documents will give someone a trail to obtain the more modern thinking on the topics. I get if you are 20ish years old and 1st hear about the old and new documents to think you are onto something but a longer life and exposure to the old and then new documents shows the concern has been there for a while.
And if one goes back to (for some of you) your Great-Great Grandparents (others just your parents) there was the tradition of "The Sunday Drive" where the family was loaded into a car and you just drove around. Or how "trips into town" were combined with other things to "not waste gas or the tires". This can be linked to WWII and the rationing. Now imagine if todays Americans were told to keep the Jets fighters in the air, the tanks rolling, the boats under power the citizens will need to conserve hydrocarbons? Is it not simpler for the Government to offer money via tax law to do as much production as possible of hydrocarbons?
posted by rough ashlar at 9:51 AM on November 14, 2020
There is a difference between "I am not seeing something" VS something existing.
The DOD has a history of production of documents. Things like "how to survive fall out" to "how to make zip guns" with these documents being traded as e-files going back to gun shows, mail-in places like Loopmatics, e-files on FTP sites, newsgroups on anews based code and other places.
The Military has PLENY of COVID info. One just needs to suspect that the Military has it and then go looking. One public tip-off was US Army wants industry to keep COVID safety rules in place, even after the pandemic ends And once one has such an understanding then one takes the understanding of the naming from years of Loopmatics and goes to a search engine of choice and looks up DOD COVID PMG.
As for collapse - the documents of DOD about the weather and crops has existed for decades. Long enough for Alex Jones to use them as part of some of his rants. Those 30+ year old documents will give someone a trail to obtain the more modern thinking on the topics. I get if you are 20ish years old and 1st hear about the old and new documents to think you are onto something but a longer life and exposure to the old and then new documents shows the concern has been there for a while.
And if one goes back to (for some of you) your Great-Great Grandparents (others just your parents) there was the tradition of "The Sunday Drive" where the family was loaded into a car and you just drove around. Or how "trips into town" were combined with other things to "not waste gas or the tires". This can be linked to WWII and the rationing. Now imagine if todays Americans were told to keep the Jets fighters in the air, the tanks rolling, the boats under power the citizens will need to conserve hydrocarbons? Is it not simpler for the Government to offer money via tax law to do as much production as possible of hydrocarbons?
posted by rough ashlar at 9:51 AM on November 14, 2020
Even so, I have always felt preppers were making a good point, they just had no idea what about what they were doing was sensible.
Well, yes, the right is correct about many things, they just pick the wrong course of action and cause. It's absolutely a good idea to have emergency supplies for many given situations. Of course, having first aid supplies is a good idea. Planning to get out of a disaster zone is just good sense. Figuring the government will be paralyzed and useless for days/weeks is just plain sensible, especially after Katrina and everything else.
On the other hand, people tend to band together after a crisis (there's a book called A Paradise Built In Hell about this). And in the event of a near-total collapse of civilization, you don't need a Navy SEAL operator-worthy AR-15 for the "zombies" (usually a barely-veiled reference to hordes of urban minorities, of course). What you need is a clean source of water because you'll die of cholera or the many bad things in an unfiltered water supply before you use 5,000 rounds of ammunition. I mean, sure, buy a hunting rifle if you want (but you better know how to gut, skin, and prepare game as well as know how to prep and store the meat with no/limited refrigeration) but you're more likely to die because you drank from the wrong puddle than from the ravening urban hordes.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 9:59 AM on November 14, 2020 [3 favorites]
Well, yes, the right is correct about many things, they just pick the wrong course of action and cause. It's absolutely a good idea to have emergency supplies for many given situations. Of course, having first aid supplies is a good idea. Planning to get out of a disaster zone is just good sense. Figuring the government will be paralyzed and useless for days/weeks is just plain sensible, especially after Katrina and everything else.
On the other hand, people tend to band together after a crisis (there's a book called A Paradise Built In Hell about this). And in the event of a near-total collapse of civilization, you don't need a Navy SEAL operator-worthy AR-15 for the "zombies" (usually a barely-veiled reference to hordes of urban minorities, of course). What you need is a clean source of water because you'll die of cholera or the many bad things in an unfiltered water supply before you use 5,000 rounds of ammunition. I mean, sure, buy a hunting rifle if you want (but you better know how to gut, skin, and prepare game as well as know how to prep and store the meat with no/limited refrigeration) but you're more likely to die because you drank from the wrong puddle than from the ravening urban hordes.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 9:59 AM on November 14, 2020 [3 favorites]
Like the right is absolutely right that there's a group of people conspiring to work you to death just for the sake of enriching themselves. The problem is it's called Your Boss, not The Jews (or Blacks or Whoever). It's the guy making you work 60 hour shifts for minimum wage with no benefits, not George Soros. It's RIGHT THERE.
It's like the QAnon thing. There absolutely are a lot of pedophiles and sexual abusers in high places. Harvey Weinstein is RIGHT THERE. But there don't have to be, like, city-linking tunnels full of child sex slaves. Statistically speaking, it's just your local priest/coach/guy you know, not Hillary Clinton.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 11:15 AM on November 14, 2020 [4 favorites]
It's like the QAnon thing. There absolutely are a lot of pedophiles and sexual abusers in high places. Harvey Weinstein is RIGHT THERE. But there don't have to be, like, city-linking tunnels full of child sex slaves. Statistically speaking, it's just your local priest/coach/guy you know, not Hillary Clinton.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 11:15 AM on November 14, 2020 [4 favorites]
Local, independant sustainable power generation? Local food sourcing? Local water sourcing? A frugality of environmental impact by design due to having to source power/food/water yourself?
Isn't that en entirely environmentally sustainable way of living? Shouldn't we aspire to a more frugal use of resources, too? And the use of solar/wind power .... that sounds familiar, no?
Since when the fuck have peppers done ANY of that shit? Local food and water sourcing? Sustainable power? That sounds like work, and that would get in the way of their cosplaying "Postapocalyptic warlords vs the zombies". The preppers I've seen are all about stocking a year's worth of MREs and 20 years worth of ammunition, not about creating sustainable food and water sources. In any real crisis they're going to be a hazard, not a savior.
If we all lived like preppers without the antisocial elements, without the guns, wouldn't that lead to a more local, more distributed, more ecologically responsible lifestyle?
Preppers without the racist, antisocial aspects aren't preppers. They're a potential threat, not a lifestyle to emulate.
posted by happyroach at 3:57 PM on November 15, 2020 [1 favorite]
Isn't that en entirely environmentally sustainable way of living? Shouldn't we aspire to a more frugal use of resources, too? And the use of solar/wind power .... that sounds familiar, no?
Since when the fuck have peppers done ANY of that shit? Local food and water sourcing? Sustainable power? That sounds like work, and that would get in the way of their cosplaying "Postapocalyptic warlords vs the zombies". The preppers I've seen are all about stocking a year's worth of MREs and 20 years worth of ammunition, not about creating sustainable food and water sources. In any real crisis they're going to be a hazard, not a savior.
If we all lived like preppers without the antisocial elements, without the guns, wouldn't that lead to a more local, more distributed, more ecologically responsible lifestyle?
Preppers without the racist, antisocial aspects aren't preppers. They're a potential threat, not a lifestyle to emulate.
posted by happyroach at 3:57 PM on November 15, 2020 [1 favorite]
As someone whose interest in bushcraft/outdoorsy stuff has resurfaced in the last couple of years I have had a not insignificant exposure to the many flavors of prepper. Not just the weird and sometimes unhinged presentations of Doomsday Preppers but the quite rational and helpful advice[SLYT] of Les Stroud. There is also the leftwingsurvivalist blog, who is an admitted exception to the largely right-wing prep-o-sphere but the prepper/homesteader/hippie earth-child crossover is not insubstantial. And I should probably throw the Mormons in that pot too. Solar power, water storage and purification, sustainable agriculture, medicinal herbs, animal husbandry, anti-urbanism, forging a stronger connection with nature show up in Mother Earth News, Backwoods Home, Modern Pioneer, The New Pioneer, etc…though some of them are clearly thinking about guns a whole lot more or less than others. I would ask that you not conflate the whole with things like The American Redoubt movement. Prepping may have a much higher asshat to humane ratio than the general populace but conflating all preppers with racist bigots is like calling all antifa activists black bloc thugs.
Rational, reasonable preparedness does not make for good copy and gets much less attention. Everyone should have engaged in some level of disaster preparedness. If only in case of long term power outage, earthquake, large local fire, etc…. Preparing to face massive climactic shifts, possibly at a rate which is faster than what we might think given our locality, seems like a somewhat wise idea.
There are ideas and lessons to be learned from preppers that do not require going full, partially, or a even the least bit gun-crazy, becoming a right-wing or libertarian whack job, or losing the ideas, intent, or actions that help build and maintain a diverse community.
posted by Ignorantsavage at 11:09 PM on November 16, 2020 [2 favorites]
Rational, reasonable preparedness does not make for good copy and gets much less attention. Everyone should have engaged in some level of disaster preparedness. If only in case of long term power outage, earthquake, large local fire, etc…. Preparing to face massive climactic shifts, possibly at a rate which is faster than what we might think given our locality, seems like a somewhat wise idea.
There are ideas and lessons to be learned from preppers that do not require going full, partially, or a even the least bit gun-crazy, becoming a right-wing or libertarian whack job, or losing the ideas, intent, or actions that help build and maintain a diverse community.
posted by Ignorantsavage at 11:09 PM on November 16, 2020 [2 favorites]
Everyone should have engaged in some level of disaster preparedness
Indeed. Japan has considerable capacity ready for all kinds of things as I found when I was in Tokyo last year for research and went through typhoon Hagibis. And a small earthquake, as it happens. Excellent public planning and public communication was quite evident, even though it didn’t impact Tokyo quite so much in the end. (Other areas were not as lucky, including areas of Chiba and the unfortunate flooding of some 10 parked shinkansen trains in Nagano.)
You can even visit the Tokyo Disaster Preparedness Park, perhaps as a school trip.
All of this seems like great public planning. I was reminded by TV (in English also) and my research collaborators to stock up on food and supplies. Bought candles, a flashlight and batteries at the local hardware store just in case.
Of interest for this thread, as far as I can tell, Japanese prepper activity seemed more focused on justifying the purchase of fancy camping gear. Although it was an interesting (and often noted) selling point of electric vehicles that you could eg power your phone and rice cooker off of the battery charger in an emergency. Very practical in an area of typhoons and earthquakes.
posted by ec2y at 9:16 PM on November 17, 2020 [2 favorites]
Indeed. Japan has considerable capacity ready for all kinds of things as I found when I was in Tokyo last year for research and went through typhoon Hagibis. And a small earthquake, as it happens. Excellent public planning and public communication was quite evident, even though it didn’t impact Tokyo quite so much in the end. (Other areas were not as lucky, including areas of Chiba and the unfortunate flooding of some 10 parked shinkansen trains in Nagano.)
You can even visit the Tokyo Disaster Preparedness Park, perhaps as a school trip.
All of this seems like great public planning. I was reminded by TV (in English also) and my research collaborators to stock up on food and supplies. Bought candles, a flashlight and batteries at the local hardware store just in case.
Of interest for this thread, as far as I can tell, Japanese prepper activity seemed more focused on justifying the purchase of fancy camping gear. Although it was an interesting (and often noted) selling point of electric vehicles that you could eg power your phone and rice cooker off of the battery charger in an emergency. Very practical in an area of typhoons and earthquakes.
posted by ec2y at 9:16 PM on November 17, 2020 [2 favorites]
To be fair the purchase of fancy camping gear can seem to need justification. You do not need much to camp but the toys you can buy seem pretty cool.
posted by Ignorantsavage at 11:05 PM on November 17, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by Ignorantsavage at 11:05 PM on November 17, 2020 [1 favorite]
« Older Painters think he is a sculptor. Sculptors are... | The Donald John Trump Presidential Library Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Extinction Rebellion has made some mistakes in the past, but I like the framing of "Honour Their Sacrifice: Climate Change Means War"
posted by gwint at 7:44 AM on November 12, 2020 [9 favorites]