I Just Dropped in to See What Condition My Transition Was in: Part III - Rejecting Survivalists?

[Kathy McMahon]

In Part II - Context, I wondered whether there were distinct cultural differences we needed to pay attention to, between the UK and the US. In this post, I spell out one of them that I see as pertaining directly to the Peak Oil community: the perspective on ‘Survivalism’ as a philosophy.

I had initially thought it was just a matter of personal prejudice on Rob Hopkins part, when I disagreed with him so vehemently in his September 4, 2006 piece entitled: “Why Survivalists Have Got It All Wrong.” He displayed pictures of pseudo-cavemen, and made reference to selfish survivalists hording lifeboats on the Titanic and an “every man for himself” behavior in a house fire. He was responding to Zach Nowak’s piece that had earlier posted in Energy Bulletin. He wrote:

“I have very little time for the survivalist response to peak oil…”

I couldn’t imagine how he could so easily dismiss such a large group of people who were not only savvy about Peak Oil, but were also, in my community, among some of the most active members of our sustainability group.

My response:

“I read what you wrote with interest, but I’m afraid your photos and tone might be undercutting your message. It may be easier to stereotype and point to extremes in a community than it is to look more carefully at what wisdom their philosophy might offer to all of us. If we are interested in building community, we may need everybody, including those who have chosen to keep the basic arts of preparing for difficult times a living, breathing art form. These same people teach others how to hunt or butcher or breed animals; how to can or grow or harvest food; how to weave or sew or preserve fabric. While we may not choose to do all of these things, a move toward greater self-sufficiency might be the unifying message we can all embrace. Survivalism, in its more moderate form, is also social commentary that requires the adherents to “walk their talk.” When we teach our children at home, it is commentary on a loss of faith in public education. When we choose to grow our own food, it is because what is sold as ‘food,’ is often tasteless and lacks nutrition. When we slaughter our own animals, it is because we know they haven’t eaten hormones and chemicals, have been raised with care, and slaughtered gratefully.

There is also an implicitly political message in making a caricature of the “survivalist,” as it suggests that there is nothing in our environment that we need to adapt to and “survive.” If we embrace any notion of having to “power down,” we may want to consider a different message.

Such ridicule isn’t deserved by many people I could label ‘survivalists.’ A true survivalist has gone into that ‘dark night’ and realizes that the notion of isolation is an absurd one.

One final point: when the fire breaks out, the true survivalist has already taught their families to prepare for it, which exits to use for escape and to crawl, not walk to them if the smoke is heavy. And also, I doubt you’d get most survivalists to buy the notion of an “unsinkable” ship. The best would have taught their families to swim, and what to do in the event that there was no room on the lifeboats. That event happened because of a lack of planning. I doubt a ‘survivalist’ was to blame.”

What Survivalists Got RIGHT
The Transition Handbook has a chapter highlighting Post Petroleum Stress Disorder. Here Rob mentions the “irrational grasping at unfeasible solutions.” Also included is a single paragraph that continues to create a caricature of nihilists and survivalists. Hopkins drags out stereotyped examples designed to ridicule these movements, suggesting that, unlike his own, they have no real contribution to make. As I mentioned in my response to his article, my experience is distinctly different. Far from having nothing to contribute, many people in these movements strongly embrace not only the need for community, but offer preparedness skills, insightful, and valid criticisms of our culture, and its predicament. It was difficult for me to understand, then, why in a book filled with encouragement to reach out to the widest possible audience and teach tolerance in community-building, he would stereotype and reject potential allies, who shared his concerns. In addition, overlapping communities with some differences appeared to me to make a movement MORE resilient, not less. It was disappointing to read.

I also wondered why he would be so hostile to the very same folks who will be some of our most skilled community members in the future. Why a parody promoting intolerance for those who “think differently?” Was the goal to “brand” TI as a more “mainstream” movement that’s “not like them?” At the time, I saw such derisiveness as mean-spirited, and marginalizing the dedicated efforts of those who identify themselves in this way.

I’ve come to look upon this as yet another cultural difference.


Fighting off Invaders with a Shake of the Fist!
While I could find dozens of US sites that covered many different perspectives on Survivalism, I could find only one UK site devoted to the same theme. In one of them, a humorous response by one reader was this:

“In the event of the world turning upside down, I think most folk in the UK will dig trenches behind their privet hedges and be prepared to fight off invaders with a shake of the fist and a harsh letter to The Times...failing that, Capt. Mannering and his brave brigade will restore order and justice from GCHQ at Walmington-on-Sea ...as long as we have tea, we will prevail!! “

Capt. Mannering is a character from a popular British sit-com about a military official who keeps order in the UK during WWII.

The only other item about “Survivalism” in the UK, spoke of a 1975-1977 TV series, about a small band of survivors who emerged from a pandemic that wiped out more than 95% of the population. In sharp contrast to our own more recent gun-toting holocaust TV series “Jericho,” the protagonist here, Abby Grant, and her ad hoc group, remained reluctant to arm themselves, even after being confronted by armed adversaries on numerous occasions.

Guns have traditionally been shunned in the UK, and even police did not carry them until recently. One person attributed the spread of hoof and mouth disease to the fact that UK vets aren’t allowed to carry guns, and therefore could not kill the animal on the spot, when they learned they were diseased. As previously mentioned, the UK has, what “is believed to be some of the strictest gun legislation in the world” while the US has some of the most lenient.

Guns and Butter
The very notion of a “survivalist” evokes a distinctly American image of the Wild West, or Appalachian folks with shot-guns in the hills with hidden moonshine stills.

This pervasive spirit of individualism, or the more poetic sentiment that “good fences make good neighbors,” is much more uniquely American. Like the automobile, that allowed us to ‘take in the wide open spaces,’ a majority of Americans believe that they have a right to own a gun. About half of the U.S. population actually live in households with guns, but there is a broad geographical difference between these folks and those who do not. The bulk of gun owners generally live in rural areas and small towns, while the strongest advocates of strict gun laws tend to live in large urban areas.

These rural areas and small towns also enable other features embraced by survivalist thinking, such as raising livestock, farming and creating root cellars. Far from being isolationist, these areas recognize the inherent need to rely on others. Our urban cousins (sometimes referred to as “city-zens”) might have less interest in these arts, given their limited space, zoning restrictions, and easy access to shopping.

Natural Disasters
In a fairly mild climate, like the UK, it is more difficult to remember that there exists in the US, and many other countries around the world, a need for preparations as protection against “the weather.” This winter, my neighbors and I were without electricity for a week or more. My preparations allowed me to have light, keep warm, and to cook hot meals from food storage for my family. We were both the givers and recipients from neighbors, of food, water, and other necessities. We checked up on those that might be facing problems. These preparations are part of our rural lifestyle. Like many of my neighbors, I have pets and livestock to care for, and can’t allow a little ice storm to threaten my life or theirs.

Many survivalists I know have become so, after they’ve lived through a variety of natural disasters or climate conditions such as tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, wildfires, earthquakes or blizzards. Some have had to survive the more mundane problems of unemployment that required them to live off their food storage when money was in short supply. A weeks worth (or even three months worth) of preparations doesn’t make you a wacky reactionary, or anti-social when you live with such threats. It makes you sensible.

These preparations can be as simple as following Red Cross and FEMA recommendations by keeping a first aid kit, shovel, and extra clothes in the car, or maintaining a small kit of emergency supplies in the home and car, containing food, water, a space blanket and other essentials. A “bug out bag” can enable your family to preserve precious photos, medicines and a few non-electric toys, when you are forced to flee in a wild-fire. Basic skills, such as knowing how to drain your plumbing, or shut off your gas, can leave you with a home to return to, once the danger has passed.


Preparation: Community AND Individual Solutions
But still, unlike our ancestors, who simply assumed that it was smart to be skilled in basic arts such as canning, preserving, chopping wood, raising livestock, and yes, even killing an animal that posed a danger to your children, these are lost to a great many of us. They aren’t required of urban dwellers. Even those who should take an active interest in “surviving” presenting dangers often do not. They simply assume that government officials will rescue them when the worst happens. This is a decidedly “non-community” focus, that taxes the common resources of all of us. Hurricane Katrina is a teaching tale in this regard.

More worrisome, those who were well-prepared during this disaster experienced the hostile attitude Rob typifies, and were often looked upon with suspicion by relief workers, when they preferred to stay put, after the initial danger had passed. One writer believed that the relief workers assumed that these inhabitants must have stolen what they had, so rare was this notion of being “well prepared.” He believed that these officials were convinced that public shelters were automatically a better solution, than remaining in one’s home, and some homeowners reported being threatened when they refused to go.

I would like to suggest that in the US, we should be emphasizing the need for more of our neighbors to be well-prepared, rather than mocking those who are.

Beyond Cliché: Toward Embracing Commonality
I, therefore, would ask that we, here in the US, take a more sober approach to our writings and our attitudes toward those who might identify themselves as survivalists. We can begin by promoting sensible books like Kathy Harrison’s now classic “Just in Case.” Such books make basic notions of surviving a wide variety of disasters, whether you live in the city or the country, good common-sense.

The current edition of the Transition Handbook is a manual now being regarded as the blueprint for the future. Unfortunately, his prejudice against survivalists is now officially part of the TI perspective. It is unfortunate that Hopkins is incorporating this second-hand cliché of the American survivalist movement, as a truism. Having no first-hand experience of how large and diverse a community it is, he is doing a disservice to spread this bias. I attribute this to another example of how dangerous cultural blinders can be, when we seek to transplant a set of ideas from one culture to another.

American “Survivalist” movements straddle a vast array of attitudes and opinions, from deplorable notions of white supremacy, to accepted wisdom of community self-sufficiency that bear a great resemblance to the best aspects of TI. They do, however, emphasize skills, stores, and self-defense, whether on an individual or community level. “Hope for the best, prepare for the worst” could be said by a survivalist, but this does not automatically mean an individual approach. This preparation often encompasses the community; encompass notions of giving and charity, while simultaneously stressing individual responsibility.

The single most popular and widely read blog, SurvivalBlog, emphasizes the values of community, sharing knowledge, the necessity of faith, and the importance of charity, while stressing the need for “bullets, Band-Aids and beans.” It has approximately 124,000 unique visits per week, 208 million+ hits since it was founded in August of 2005. It is a growing force in the US Peak Oil movement, and might be the dominant paradigm currently having a far greater number of adherents in the US, than the TI movement.

We can all have a good laugh pointing out their “folly,” or we can be sincere in investigating where we share common ground. The choice is ours.

[Auntiegrav]

As a Survival- ist (I'm not completely isolated, and I can survive, I don't work at it.), I am not offended by either viewpoint, but I am annoyed by the lack of understanding of the skills.
Therein lies the animosity, I believe. I think it partially lies in the envy by the non-survivalists of the skills that survivalists have achieved or work to achieve, and in the fear of exploitation of my skills by people who don't have them. This fear isn't irrational: it comes from experience.

I don't have very many friends because as soon as someone gets to know me and my skills, I am immediately implored to 'help' them with some problem they have, while I receive little in return if I don't write up an invoice. Let's face it, the non-survivalists don't know how to offer their value in return, and they need to learn by joining with survivalists. They need to learn how to be fair in the relationship.

Ask anyone in an intentional community how things work out or not, and it will be a matter of those with useful skills leaving town after a very exhausting attempt to 'fit in'. The panglossians always WANT to be part of a successful community, but they want it to be through their 'good will' rather than their own usefulness.

I would love to see a cooperative solution. Thanks for the good work on all three essays, Kathy.

[Kathy McMahon]

I appreciate your thoughts, Auntiegrav. I'm curious about the issues you've spoken to, as Rob has addressed them as well, in a gendered way, speaking of the fear the modern man has because of his lack of skills.

I think there is a class-issue here as well. The wealthy professional can hire the "handiman" (forester, plumber, mechanic, carpenter) for a fraction of what he or she might make per hour. It's been a long time since anyone thought of the mundane 'repair' work of everyday life as something other than existing below that of the "intellectual." Farming hasn't been seen as either lucrative or sexy in decades.

Getting one's hands dirty IS part of the job before us. Shifting our mind-set is probably going to take longer to accomplish. It is a shifting focus I see between valuing work purely in material terms (I can buy that cheaper than I can make it) and seeing some inherent value in being able to develop the skills to do that things. Finally, there is the mindset to see various tasks as equal in value to other jobs, despite the difference in pay. Most of us can live well for decades without a lawyer or a banker, but when our roof leaks, we need someone NOW!

[Colorado.CA]

I too have experienced exactly what you've discussed here ... the capable are prevailed upon at every opportunity and almost never "repaid" in kind or otherwise by the ones seeking their help. At times one can feel very put-upon and taken advantage of when always on the giving end of every interaction with neighbors.

[bob banner]

Thanks!!!! Yes bring on wise critiques of the Transition "movement." We need them. It reminds me of my friends comment on his own page at this US site:

<<By learning and teaching the skills of awareness that contribute to instilling change without implying wrongness. Without this perspective and these skills, I believe we will be unintentionally creating resistance to the change we want.>>

And we need to expand and stretch in a big way to get beyond the typical “organic permaculture” crowds (which Im a part of). This is why I have been posting information about the "resilient communities" movement from the global guerrillas at the CA site.
And we are thinking of establishing a Group or a Theme at the CA site that ALLOWS for critiques of this nature for ongoing dialogue!

Thanks Kathy!!

[Kathy McMahon]

We sharpen our thinking when we allow people in who we've traditionally thought poorly of. Both of us become less "cardboard."

Keep me updated if you do institute that ongoing dialog.

[Douglas Anarino]

I agree that the survivalists have been unfairly demonized - by Rob, but also by just about everyone who discusses them. In general, we should all stick to saying nice things about each other, or nothing at all. And the stone throwing is ridiculous of course, since we're all busy trying to figure out how best to survive the coming transition.

But people are ridiculous sometimes, and this is really just a branding exercise... I can see, if not respect, the political expediency of creating distance between images of guns and spam, and one's own efforts - especially if you're attempting to convince others to join in them. And, regardless of how it got that way, these are the images that most folks conjure up when the word 'survivalist' is heard. It would take a tremendous marketing effort to turn that around at this juncture - but this was a great effort, Kathy!

I would point out too, that the Transition Movement owes a good bit of its success so far to skillful marketing and framing. The solutions it suggests are nothing new, but it has assembled a campaign strategy that is working, at least in the UK. Just compare the sound of 'transition' to 'relocalization' or 'peak whatever' - the word speaks of action, rather than the problems or solutions. One might then ask - what kind of action? And then you're a part of the movement.

This is fundamentally the same approach that Obama took with his adoption of the word 'change', and that seemed to mobilize people across many cultures. Let's hope that Rob and everyone striving to survive this transition can be as all embracing as that campaign was. And do more with the mandate!

[Kathy McMahon]

Fortunately, Douglas, I'm speaking to a small group of people who share a tremendous overlap in thinking with the "demonic survivalists"(!) I think we can expect a more refined thinking that is more inclusive, and we walk a dangerous path to try to appeal to "mass culture" in a branding exercise that cuts out those who might be most likely to join our efforts, if we haven't already successfully alienated them from the get-go.

We have to be careful of "bait and switch" because, as I think we'll see with Obama, it will come back to bite us on the butt. We have to build in expectations for frustration, anger and despair as "part of the process." This is part of the "inoculation training" that keeps any movement truly fit.

[Leo Brodie]

Thanks, Kathy. I think you're right to speak out for better acceptance of the varied ways of responding to the coming crises. This issue is an example of the kind of polarization that seems to divide us, when in fact we're all facing the same issues and need to work together.

As a generalization, we're dealing with three basic types of response:

1. "I'm not worried – the government, the scientists, the experts, technology, the free market (etc.) will make sure nothing goes wrong and rescue us if it does."
2. "When TSHTF, I don't trust anyone except my family, my dog and my gun. It's every man for himself."
3. "The government isn't going to help us and technology can't save us. The only true security lies in our own skills and our interdependence within the family, neighborhood, and local community."

I count myself in the 3rd group. I'm learning to grow food, and I've stocked up on food. Yet I'm also working vigorously with a community group that is using the Transition movement principles to engage the community to learn resilience as well.

The problem you've identified is that many of us in the third camp use the word "survivalist" to refer to the 2nd camp; whereas some people who call themselves "survivalists" would identify with the 3rd group.

When Rob writes about survivalists, I believe he's talking about the second group. The problems with this approach are many. For one thing, it's not sustainable. You just can't expect to isolate yourself and keep watch over your goodies with a rifle for very long. And what happens when you run out of canned food?

I would rather educate and encourage all my neighbors to grow their own food than set up a wall around my property and try to defend my miserable little potato patch.

Another cultural difference is that Americans identify with the "rugged individual." We do have a tendency to distrust our neighbors, and believe that only our own hard work will pull us through. In the broad sweep of history, this viewpoint is pretty unique to our culture. Generally, cooperation is recognized as necessary for survival.

A few months ago, I sent an unsolicited email to a local leader in the Peak Oil movement, inviting him to look into the Transition movement. The following is part of his reply:

"My first impression is just another series of personality cults surrounding the word 'community'. To 'catalyze, inspire, encourage, network, support and train communities' is to go around telling other people what they should be doing. …We feel strongly that this is a poor approach. The best way to get something useful done is to model it by doing it yourself. It leaves little time for proselytizing your achievements, but more time enjoying the real fruits of your labor, and besides, people tend to know real solutions when they see them in action."

So here you have the opposite kind of polarization: a "survivalist" who thought that working with the community is a poor approach!

Well, a few of us starting going to their meetings, and now this person is a regular at our meetings. The fact is, he and others in his group have been doing very positive, tangible projects that help not only themselves but everyone around them. It's just that that came from an "individualist" bias, the same way that perhaps many in the Transition movement have a "community" bias.

That we reached out to that group in the first place was a result of Rob's insistence on the importance of connecting with related groups. Apparently we were able to overcome our initial suspicion of each other.

As you say, survival will require a combination of personal responsibility and working together.

Thanks for raising this important call to inclusivity.

[Kathy McMahon]

I like the many examples of overlap, Leo, and of course you are right. Humans are a funny lot. We want to identify in one way, and then create exceptions. Of course as the world gets smaller, we'll have to exercise an "acceptance" muscle that we haven't had to use, when we could simply hop in our cars and find someone who thinks more like us.

I appreciate your comments.

[Sarah Anne Edwards, PhD, LCSW]

I think its important to distinquish each transition community in US and elsewhere from each of those in the UK and most importantly from Rob Hopkins as a particular individual who has his own opinions and beliefs. One of the things I like most about Transitions is that although there are steps that have worked there and that Rob has used and shared, the process in every community evolves in its own appropriate way because there is no "way."
"Let it go" is one of the basic principles. You can't let it go and control or shape it in a predetermined way at the same time. Each community is different as is each country. We began our process here in Pine Mountain in 2005 and though it is unique our process has been almost identical to the TI process. This past summer I visited Eureka Springs AK and they too have a group very much like ours. Although they had no knowledge of TI, just as we didn't until recently, their process though unique is also nearly identical to ours and TI's, while different in detail and form.
What I believe this says is that the Handbook is the articulation or complication of a general process that is intuitively going on independently all over because it works. The book has given us many interesting ideas we hadn't yet thought of for our community, some applicable; others not, at the moment at least. The real strength of our network I believe is that we undoubtedly all have interesting ideas, projects, and activities that are working or will work for our shared over-riding goals that might be useful to others, all of which easily fall within the general construct of what Rob has articulated so well, but are in way limit and stunted by it.

[Sandi Brockway]

This is confusing. I think because there is a mix-up in terms and labels.

A survivalist, traditionally, has been generally a person who stockpiles guns and tests his limits in the wild or warfare. They are a long cry from Amish farmers.

This is different from just being self-reliant or engaging in sustenance lifestyles - being a clever McGiver making do with what one has or creative with salvage and repairing broken things.

People living sustenance lifestyles are not all survivalists, and not all survivalists live exclusively in sustenance lifestyles. Many survivalists stockpile guns, are Libertarian, and/or provide us with paranoid scenarios - where the end of the world is a dog-eat-dog world.

I, personally, am a jack of all trades. I can repair just about anything. When i was ten I started to make my clothes and knit. I helped my dad tend an orchard. I was taught to back pack, fish, and even hunt. I salvage stuff whenever I can and re-invent it. That is the artist in me first. I also restore and repair all sorts of vintages stuff, rededicating it to use. When I am lacking a tool, I just invent one. I taught myself to build computers. I love food, and someday believe I might run a little food stand. I taught myself how to do carpentry by watching the carpenters and reading books. Generally, people who know me have called me a self teacher. I am always challenging myself.

Does this make me a survivalist? Granted, with all the packing into the wild I did, it taught me to survive on very little. That is sustenance living, but this does not make me a survivalist. Survivalists might have a few useful tools to teach us, but they are operating out of a lot of fear and anxieties over the future. A lot of survivalists were born out of the Cold War mentality, and fears over atomic disasters.

[Sandi Brockway]

It is unimaginable what people do to each other and animals. A large part of the people and animals living today are already in an apocalyptic period. Is there anything we can do to rid the earth of this immense amount of violence and fear? While discounting all illusions my answer is a resounding yes. Yes, we can if we truly want it and if we are totally committed to achieving it."

Dr. Dieter Duhm

------------
Is this discussion thread an effort to be an apologist for American violence? Preparedness does not make someone a survivalist. Police, fireman, etc. are they survivalists now? Suvivalist training, or Preparedness training are slightly different - traditionally. Survivalist training of the past was always based on having an ENEMY - fear and hatred.

Just because I did boot camp, does not make me a Survivalist. the US is a gun obsessed nation with its identity wrapped up in the West, and pulling oneself by his own bootstraps - a very individualistic anti-community even racist killer heritage. Bullets are either the great equalizer, or solve problems and reinforce superiority.

Then why is my husband or father the most dangerous people in my life?

Buying Amish supplies, and adopting Amish customs, would not make me Amish either, would it? But, you know, there is Libertarians, and there are libertarians, the meaning can be different.

The Fear and Competition inherit in this Uber Man Survivalist coupled with extremist Capitalist ideology is what got us in the mess to begin with - driving us ever the more to specialize and create hierarchies - but worst of all a pervasive narcissism that has been impossible to shake that has relied on bigotry. So the gun is an addiction, giving false security and false identity, violence extracting its privileges and enforcing its culture for 1000s of years - subverting its victims through trauma.

One more interesting symptom has been religious cults that hole themselves with stockpiles of guns and explosives, ridiculously paranoid and delusional - but all so special indeed. The original American Survivalists were founded in the mentality of the Cold War and Racism - and religious extremism. Nothing is going to change that much.

But, i do have much faith that we will outgrow the Cold War and racism soon, and the need to have an enemy less relevant. Otherwise there is no hope for us. So, I understand Rob's criticism regarding the American Machismo inherent in our western heritage. Guns so rarely solve any problems, and create so many more.

BTW, what you said about the UK Vets is not true. They carry needles wherever they go. That is what vets do.