Americans Prepping For Armageddon

Reality has a way of humbling even the most generous of souls.

Dec 14, 2023

*When the SHTF happens, you can expend large stockpiles of supplies quicker than you think.*

As 2023 ends, an increasing number of Americans appear not only to be genuinely concerned about what 2024 may bring, but are taking proactive steps to mitigate any events which may unfold.

On the surface, I think this is good news. As a prepper, you want people in general to become more self-reliant. If we all become less dependent on the state, we not only become more of an asset to others, but we also disenfranchise the government in the process, forcing them to work harder to meet our demands.

Central to the matter is that Americans, especially younger Americans, are internalizing that the system isn’t as reliable as they once assumed. A month or two ago, I lamented the fact it was uncommon to see young people taking courses related to preparedness, so it’s promising to hear we’re beginning to see a bit of shift in that regard. Rebellious as they can be, young people are also the most dependent on the system and, at least for my generation, have assumed it’ll always be there to catch them when they fall. That assumption seems to be fading. I suppose it’s a warning sign of where society’s headed, but again, if it results in more people being prepared, so be it. It’s not always about the SHTFs and TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It), but being ready to deal with all of life’s ups and downs.

FOX News explained the emerging trend:

Younger Americans appear to be the ones preparing the most for a disaster scenario ahead of 2024, with everything from global pandemics to the upcoming presidential election on their minds.
A poll from Finder.com earlier this year found that 39% of American Millennials and 40% of Gen Zers reported spending money on disaster prepping in the last 12 months. By contrast, only 29% of Americans in general spent money on emergency preparedness.
“In my work, I see younger people worried about a repeat of a COVID-type event and the types of disruption it can bring to daily life,” Southern Illinois University anthropology professor Chad Huddleston told Fox News Digital.
The coronavirus pandemic seems to have opened up a new market for the preparedness industry.

We all have our opinions about the COVID-19 pandemic and everything that came with it. I think if you didn’t at least learn that SHTFs can happen even in an advanced society like ours and that the government isn’t up to the challenge, well, prepping isn’t for you. Again, I’m heartened by the fact Americans, particularly younger Americans, are alert to the reality that the state cannot be relied upon and that being ready for disaster is as much a personal as a societal responsibility. So yes, it’s nice to see the events of 2020 woke up a lot of people and not everyone’s slipping back into the false promise of “normalcy.”

Of course, 2024’s elephant in the room is the presidential election, certain to be the most hotly-contested in generations, definitely within our lifetimes:

Miller and McCall also suggested that the 2024 presidential election is, and will likely be, a motivating factor for both sides of the political aisle.
McCall said, “I think a lot of these people are belonging to these social media groups where, you know, they may be scrolling one day, somebody that they're either following or somebody that's related to somebody that they’re following said something about a disaster coming up, or they reference this election that's coming up or some stuff that's going on overseas. And they seem to say, well, this person went out and bought this. It’s kind of a jumping on the bandwagon-type deal.”
“I guess a lot of it is driven by the concern over [a] possible civil war next year if the election goes badly, as many people think it will,” Miller said.

Despite these concerns, the rhetoric has, oddly, been rather muted the last few years, at least beyond social media. Much of that’s due to the fact Donald Trump isn’t in office; neither side has a single figure to throw all their support behind or to focus all their vitriol on. Clearly, things aren’t tranquil and there exists an abundance of hard feelings out there. But there’s also a quiet out there, albeit an uneasy one. It makes one think people are bottling up these sentiments, which in turn makes you wonder what’s going to happen when SHTF happens again or if Trump returns to office. The temperature could rise again in this country very rapidly. All you need to do is look at the reaction to the Israel-Gaza conflict. The dry tinder exists in America.

“Progressive” Prepping

A few paragraphs above, I mentioned someone named Brekke Wagoner. She seems to be having a bit of a moment lately, as she was also featured in a USA Today story covering the same topic - the increasing interest in prepping. What makes Wagoner, 39, different is that she’s not only openly far-leftist, but she makes it a central aspect of her identity as a prepper. Most people in the prepping/survivalist community tend to be on the conservative, libertarian, right-wing side of things (myself included). However, this is a correlation - most don’t place their political views at the core of their identity as preppers and survivalists. It’s just that much of the thinking which animates prepping/survivalism, like self-reliance, has a lot in common with conservative, libertarian, or right-wing thought.

That’s not to say those on the left cannot be preppers/survivalists. Even the most right-wing of survivalists wouldn’t be bothered to learn someone on the Left is getting into prepping; they’d probably feel vindicated by it. Generally, however, people on the Left are more deferential to the system and even regard self-reliance as threatening behavior, because it involves opting out of the system, therefore undermining it. It’s not necessarily true, but it’s the perception which has developed over the years. Those who choose to be self-reliant are regarded as basically creating a challenger to the prevailing social order. America has a reputation of being a culture which celebrates the outsider, but let’s face it - we’re as conformist as anyone else.

I checked out Wagoner’s YouTube channel, Sustainable Prepping. I haven’t watched all her videos, but I briefly watched the following to get a sense of what she’s all about. She makes some sense, but in the segment titled “Government,” she very casually, matter-of-factly states that liberals need to prepare for the “tailspin into far-right fascism.”

Watch if you desire:

She echoed these sentiments in the USA Today article:

Instead, she worries that an incompetent federal government run by someone like current Republican front-runner and former President Donald Trump will botch the humanitarian response to a predictable disaster. She’s one of a growing number of people on both sides of the political divide who are preparing for the possibility of a disastrous collapse of society after the 2024 election.

I’m not interested to refuting her political beliefs, though I have to wonder if she’s paying attention to anything going on currently. About botching humanitarian response to a predictable disaster - what does she think about the Biden administration’s handling of the wildfires on the island of Maui of Hawaii this past summer?

Anyway, if someone genuinely believes we’re on the verge of fascist dictatorship despite what’s happening in the real world, there’s nothing I could say to get them to see otherwise. To me, this is no different from the prepper who claims year after year that societal collapse is just around the corner. I bet you, 10 years from now, Wagoner will still be claiming fascism is one election away (though by then, she might be right, albeit by virtue of her side of the political divide being in power and abusing it for so long).

The parts I found most troubling were the ones titled “Progressive Politics” and “Lone Wolf.” In the former, she attempts to draw a line between liberal preppers and conservative, more traditional preppers by claiming liberals are more community-minded and care about others more, while conservative, traditional preppers are selfish and concerned only about themselves.

Here are her expanded thoughts in USA Today:

“In the face of an apocalypse, I want to come out and calmly help people,” she said. “I want to be able to create a society that instead of wanting to shoot every stranger, understands our interdependence and creates a better society.”

I’m not sure how long Wagoner’s been doing this, but based on what I hear, I don’t get the sense she’s all that familiar with the prepping community at-large. Yes, there are many crazies, lone wolves, and doomers out there. I criticize these people. But most preppers, including the conservative and traditional ones, aren’t anti-community as Wagoner claims. They’re simply realistic. Even in the good times, you could count on a single hand the number of people you’re willing to trust with your well-being. Those who aren’t reliable today won’t be reliable in an emergency. Don’t be too confident in the friends and neighbors you get along with today, either. Contrary to conventional wisdom held by some, crisis doesn’t bring us closer together, not on its own. It threatens to tear us apart, even when the ties that bind are seemingly strong.

Why do soldiers spend hours on end practicing fighting and moving as a unit? If it were easy, little training would be required. But even well-trained units see their cohesion unravel in the face of hostile fire. I often speak of the human body’s fight-or-flight response and how it can easily overwhelm your decision-making capacity. There are few things more powerful than one’s self-preservation instinct. The community you thought was cohesive enough to overcome a disaster can easily fall apart once stress is applied and everyone’s self-preservation instinct kicks in. These aren’t soldiers we’re talking about, after all, and it’s not like there’s necessarily going to be a strong leader who can hold it together. Who says anyone’s going to look at Brekke Wagoner as a source of authority, anyway?

Well, some unnamed “disaster response experts” apparently do:

Many disaster response experts say the ideas espoused by Wagoner is the most reasonable and responsible approach for Americans to take, building off the assumption that neighbors, churches and nonprofits like the Red Cross or Salvation Army will always play a front-line role in helping recover from a disaster, filling in the gaps until the federal government gets organized.

The statement self-destructs upon the introduction of the term “assumption.” No, you shouldn’t assume society’s going to collapse, but the idea neighbors, churches, and non-profits are “always” going to play a front-line role is mistaken, too. If that’s what someone really believes, then it shifts the burden of preparedness onto others. This is the problem with the so-called “community-based” approach over the household-centric approach Wagoner decries. The incentive to prep isn’t as strong if you think someone else will always be on hand to assist in an emergency. This isn’t true in times of tranquility, so why would it be any truer in a time of crisis?

In a major emergency, chaos reigns. Help isn’t always forthcoming. As much as you might be willing to lend a helping hand, others may not be as willing to reciprocate. Your neighbors whom you thought you could trust end up not being so trustworthy after all. You can and should cultivate community, but it often takes a disaster to see how well it holds up under stress. Your ability to help people comes down more to a matter of being able to maintain order and resolve inevitable conflict, but again, who’s in charge?

It’s not to say communities unraveling is an inevitability. If it were, there would be no reason to even try to cultivate a community. It’s to say that there’s a reason you always prioritize the personal over the group. You can only control your actions in the end and if you cannot secure you and your family’s needs first, you won’t be an asset to anyone else. Again, this is reality. Community can help you get through a crisis, but if you’re worried about an apocalyptic scenario, whether it comes as a result of civil war, collapse, or “fascism,” your long-term survival comes down to strong leadership and strong group ties. Typically, the smaller and more familial the group, the tougher the bonds. When your group gets larger and incorporates other families or even strangers, leadership becomes paramount, but one more time, who gets to say who’s in charge?

Still, if you want to be able to help everyone, leadership and order assume greater importance. It’s not enough to simply want to help others. Selco Begovic, survivor of the 1990s Bosnian War, says:

Correct leadership [bold original] is other thing that will help you a lot when undesirable persons are staying with you.
I am not talking here about democracy. Sorry folks, but real democracy does not work very well in situations like this.
If you are a strong leader of your group, you have the skills to set the rules and to make the people obey the rules. If you do not have those skills, someone else will.
With correct leadership within a group, the person who shows up suddenly and does not want to contribute in the right way can be “pushed” to contribute.

I don’t want to belabor the point, but being more concerned for yourself and your family above all others isn’t a matter of selfishness and it’s most certainly not a matter of one’s political convictions - it’s a matter of common sense. You’re just not going to have as much control over the situation and others as you think. If you’re not prioritizing the personal and those within closest proximity to you, as far as I’m concerned, you’re not prepping - you’re trying to run a charity, instead.

Still, credit where credit is due. Wagoner does provide a good framework for thinking about what to prepare for and why:

She explicitly rejects the philosophy of what Garrett calls “dread merchants” ‒ people capitalizing on fear to sell packs of freeze-dried meals, "bugout bags," battery banks or guns ‒ and encourages her audience to think about how prepping will help their community.
“When I talk about preparedness, I start with ‘What’s most likely’?” she said. “You have to ask, what are you prepping for? Are you prepping to survive for a Max Mad world? Because if that’s what prepare for, that's what you'll ultimately create. And I’m prepping for community survival. My perspective is that we are better together.”

I can’t disagree with anything there, because it’s what I’ve been saying on this blog. I’ll only add that she’s not unique in her philosophy and it’s certainly not something that breaks down along political lines, as I think I’ve made clear. Far too many in the prepper/survivalist community obsess over worst-case scenarios that are possible in theory, but overall unlikely. The likeliest of scenarios, no matter how “boring” they might be, ought to take precedence over the more dramatic, but less likely scenarios. I think for some, prepping/survivalism is a way to cope with dissatisfaction, a way to withdraw from the world and still feel like your life serves a purpose. If this is why you prep, I’d say prepare to be disappointed. Whatever emotional needs are going unfilled before SHTF happens aren’t going to be satisfied when SHTF does happen.

Wagoner’s emphasis on “better together” also isn’t unique to her or to those of her political persuasion and I have to admit I’m irked by the fact she seems to be trying to make that seem to be the case. Every prepper worth their salt, most of whom aren’t progressive leftists like Wagoner, emphasize the important of community. It’s just that they scale that community down to your family plus a network of your closest, most trusted social connections. If you can create a “tribe” full of multiple families, great, but can you manage such a large group? In a short emergency, it might not be a big deal, but the longer it goes on, conflicts and differences will inevitably arise. Leadership and “policing” will be required to manage social relations and resources. It’s simply not enough to display helpful intent.

Going back to Selco:

“Do good and expect good” or advice in that tone is out there, and I do understand the place for those philosophies. Actually I share it too.
But, not when the SHTF.
First do not expect that in hard times doing good deeds will be taken in the correct way and that the person will do good back to you. Second, do not expect that you’ll be able to do only good things all the time.
It is a messed up world when the SHTF, so things get blurred and weird.

“Do good and expect good” works in an orderly world. It doesn’t work in disorder.

This leads to my next point. I have to say this final remark by Wagoner is the epitome of naivete:

She added: “Jesus would slap the s--- out of anyone who had food and refused to help their neighbors who were hungry.”

Reality would slap the s--- out of Wagoner if she thinks she won’t ever need to say “no” to anyone. Returning to Selco one last time, how did he define “SHTF?” When there are more people than resources.

It sounds to me Wagoner has an idealized vision of what prepping entails. Yes, you need community. Yes, you want to be able to help others when possible. No, you can’t make it entirely on your own. But when you’re dealing with more people than resources, hard choices inevitably have to be made. Even if you could feed everyone who asks for food, how big would your rations be? Who gets priority? Elderly? Children?

If she thinks people will simply accept what they’re given and thank her for her kindness, she’s never seen what desperate, hungry people are like. And that’s not being hyperbolic, either. Remember the saying society is nine meals away from anarchy? In a serious emergency, even a single day of missed meals will cause panic to set in. Scale that out to a societal level. Are you ready to feed everyone who comes knocking?

The answers to these questions are never clear and obvious, whether beforehand or in the moment. Reality has a way of humbling even the most generous of souls. Your large stockpile can be reduced to critical levels in a blink of an eye if you become too giving. We live in a world where grocery store shelves will be emptied during an SHTF. Does Wagoner think people will show up in an orderly fashion at her door, calmly asking for supplies, after the stores have been stripped bare? After all, she’s basically advertising her home as a go-to in an emergency.

If you’re not mentally prepared to make hard choices today or even say “no” to someone, you’re going to find it impossible to do so in the heat of the moment. Humans are adaptable in the long term, but stick to habits in the short term. How you behave today is a good indication of how you’ll behave in an SHTF. In a state of disorder, your kindness will be exploited as a weakness. Just ask those who’ve lived it. It’s nice to think we can help out neighbors and we should, but at the end of the day, you can either prep for you and yours or for the entire community. Not both.

I’m not one to criticize the preps of others and I still believe prepping at all, for any reason, is better than not prepping. Still, why you’re doing it matters. Anything beyond looking out for yourself, your family, and your closest relations is missing the point. Prepping can help emphasize interdependence and cultivating a better society, as Wagoner puts it, but again, crisis tends to break these things down. What’s you’re preparing for is civilization ceasing to function, along with disorder. No, things are seldom as dramatic as the doomers portray, but if you think it’s going to be everyone coming together and helping each other in peace and love, then there’s a rude awakening coming.

Even in the worst of times, you do see moments of heroism and humanity, but calamities tend to create more problems than we’re capable of handling. That’s why they’re called “emergencies” and “SHTFs.” Once more, they’re situations with fewer resources than people. They’re situations where we catch the glimpse of the hard reality of existence, the fragility of civilization becomes exposed, and our most basic of instincts resurface. The objective is to survive along with what’s most important to you. They’re not opportunities to create your own utopia. To think otherwise is no different from wishing for collapse and civil war so you can build a new, “based” society from the ashes. It’s childish, unrealistic thinking.

My verdict on “Sustainable Prepping” is that there’s lots of good practical advice and Wagoner seems to have a common sense approach to prepping, which is good. However, it’s mixed with lots of bad: she very clearly has a political agenda and, while she may be a genuine prepper, she also seems to be trying turn it into an ideological movement. Perhaps, as leftists tend to do, Wagoner thinks prepping, though useful, has a “representation” issue and is overcompensating by trying to get what she regards as the progressive majority of Americans to become the new face of it. She’s trying to accomplish that by drawing a hard line between “progressive” and “traditional” preppers, making the distinction one of community, interdependence and cooperation versus selfishness, lone wolves, and everyone-for-themselves. It’s a false dichotomy and shame on Wagoner for trying to peddle the narrative, but I guess the only way for leftists to get into prepping is to be led to believe their political views are consistent with preparedness.

If you want to listen to Wagoner, be prepared to deal with the talk of “fascism any day now” as if it were self-evident, descriptions of American society as “oppressive,” and broadsides against capitalism (she owns a lot of property for an anti-capitalist). Otherwise, I can think of many other great sources of prepping info whose political views may be more in line with yours or at least don’t figure as prominently into their commentary. I’ve already mentioned Selco; Daisy Luther and anyone featured at The Organic Prepper are also excellent sources. I rave often about Todd Sepulveda of the Ready Your Future podcast; he emphasizes community, interdependence, and cooperation despite not being a progressive, nor do his political views feature prominently in his commentary. I also listen to The Survivalist Prepper Podcast hosted by the excellent Dale Goodwin. Goodwin does broach politics often, so he may not be an option for the progressive-minded. However, he doesn’t make it an “us versus them” thing either, like Wagoner does. Like most preppers, instilling a mindset of readiness is his focus, so his politics really shouldn’t be too distracting for most of us. If it is, then it probably means you’re more progressive-minded and should listen to someone like Brekke Wagoner.

The unfortunate truth is, we need to be discerning. Lots of people are selling you something, much of which you don’t need. Some of the advice we receive isn’t helpful at all. And as I’ve stated previously, you need to realize that those who don’t share your values are unlikely to be useful to you in a crisis. Sure, in extremis, you may need to rely on anyone and everyone. Selco will tell you the same thing. But crisis tends to exacerbate, not diminish, differences. Just look at how quickly we became hyper-polarized after 9/11, despite a brief period of hyper-solidarity. COVID is a more recent example. Someone who thinks Jesus would slap the s--- out of you for putting yourself and your family first is someone you’re going to be at loggerheads with throughout the duration of a crisis.

Real-world SHTF are more boring than you imagine. They’re also more fracturing than you imagine, especially in a society lacking solidarity to begin with.

The Left Arms Up… But Why?

Another emerging trend is that left-wing Americans are beginning to jump on the Second Amendment bandwagon. Despite their preference for gun control over gun rights, leftists are coming to the realization that relying on the state for their protection is probably an unsafe bet.

From Newsweek:

The proportion of registered Democrats who have a firearm in their home has jumped significantly over the past few years, according to a recent NBC News poll, with some analysts saying rising crime in urban areas could be behind the increase.
In November 2023 the survey found 41 percent of Democrats said they live in a household with a gun, up from 33 percent in a similar survey conducted by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal in August 2019. Notably, 33 percent of Democrats also said they lived with a gun in a similar NBC survey conducted in March 2004, indicating the sharp rise has been concentrated over the past four years. The latest NBC News poll of 1,000 registered voters was conducted between November 10 and 14.
The data also showed a rise in Republicans having a gun at home, though this was much less sharp and more in line with previous trends. In November 2023, 66 percent of registered Republicans said they live with a firearm, against 64 percent in August 2019 and 57 percent in March 2004. Overall 52 percent of registered voters said their household has a gun in the latest poll, up from 46 percent in 2019.

As with prepping, it’s a good thing to see Americans all across the spectrum are taking personal safety more seriously. It’s even more encouraging that crime may be the driving factor behind the push by Democrats to take up arms. No, more crime isn’t a good thing. But it’s been such a divisive issue for so long, that if both Democrats and Republicans now believe crime is in fact a problem, then that means it’s likely to become less divisive of an issue in coming years, which can only be a good thing.

Clearly, I’m being overly optimistic. At the end of the article:

Professor Deana Rohlinger, who teaches sociology at Florida State University, agreed rising gun ownership amongst Democrats reflects their anxiety but suggested this could be linked to America’s intense political divide, especially among minority groups.
Addressing Newsweek she said: “A decision to purchase a gun is complicated, regardless of political affiliation. Social scientists point to several possible explanations for the increase in gun ownership including a heightened sense of uncertainty and fear.
“For some, a gun purchase may be the result of their read on how increased political tensions and divisiveness in the U.S. might play out. For others, it may be the result of of individuals assessments of their personal safety in what they regard as a dangerous world. For example, LGBTQ+ individuals as well as religious and racial minorities might decide to purchase a gun for personal defense and so that they can feel safe.”

Like Professor Rohlinger says, it’s up to each individual to assess risk and decide what it is they’re concerned about that’d necessitate arming up. The notion that minorities are at some kind of special risk has been conventional wisdom throughout my lifetime and there’s a grain of truth to it. Unfortunately, I’d argue that’s probably going to be truer going forward than before. The reaction to the Israel-Gaza conflict has been concerning, to say the least. What’s probably the biggest wave of antisemitism in generations has gone largely uncontested outside a few Congressional hearings about the goings-on at Ivy League university campuses.

If antisemitism is a problem in this country, it’s clearly more of a problem among Blacks, Hispanics, Democrats, and young people. It’s also a problem you’re going to see more prevalent in urban areas. This comports with what you see in Europe - antisemitism, along with crime more generally, is a problem among the Muslim migrant class in urban areas.

Antisemitism is obviously not the only type of prejudice there is. But as Bari Weiss said recently, Jews have always been a canary in the coal mine. So if minorities really are at special risk and will become more so in the coming years, it’s likely to be a problem in urban, metropolitan America. The diversity, large numbers, and population density combined with social tensions and increasing costs of living will exacerbate conflict, potentially of the armed variety, in our population centers.

This all pre-dates Gaza. Asian Americans, especially in the San Francisco Bay Area, have been under relentless assault at the hands of Black criminals for years. Cosmopolitan America isn’t a peaceful place, despite being the focus of our cultural and economic activity. No matter what the media depicts, if a civil conflict erupts in the U.S., it’ll be as big a problem in Cosmopolitan America as it is anywhere else. No race, ethnicity, nor religion will be exempt as either victims or perpetrators. One of the great unfortunate revelations of the past several years is the extent to which even culturally pluralistic America is tribalistic. Crisis tends to exacerbate, not dampen, tribalism.

And now even the unusual suspects are arming up. It’s a good thing when people take their safety into their own hands, but why they’re arming up matters, too. Taking up arms is a big responsibility and one needs to be clear-eyed about the threats they face. Worsening crime and social tensions are perfectly reasonable justifications for arming up. However, arming up because someone thinks “MAGA” Americans or a Christian “Taliban” are going to sack the cities is an unhealthy response to an imaginary threat. One needs to assess threats prior to arming up to understand what one is more likely to be at risk of. I’m not sure that’s happening here, but I don’t know that it’s not happening, either.

Back to the USA Today article:

But he said some liberals, especially younger ones, were shocked into action by the pandemic and the federal government's response to the George Floyd protests ‒ they had never personally experienced such government failure or hostility before and suddenly feel vulnerable. He said the upcoming presidential election is only sharpening those concerns on both sides of the nation's divide.
“We do have this authoritarian streak running through the right, and prepping plays into that. They are prepared for violence, no question,” he said. “But you’re also seeing an increase in militancy on the left. I’m seeing a lot of liberal preppers buying guns, saying that they waited too long. It’s an unfortunate arms race that I do think we’re going to see escalating as we head into the election, particularly if it’s Trump versus Biden.”

I take issue with some of what was said, but I’ll say that younger liberals learning for the first time the reality of government failure and hostility is a positive development, though it seems to be exacerbating the tribalism I noted a few paragraphs above. Instead of learning to become skeptical of government in general, they seem to think government under a certain administration is the bigger issue. I get the sense, as I did with Brekke Wagoner, that some, if not all, of the preparedness you’re seeing on the Left today is a response to the possibility of Trump and the Right returning to power. If true, this makes their preparedness efforts less genuine; by contrast, conservative and libertarian preppers have engaged in preparedness regardless of which party controls the White House.

When it does all hit the fan once again, the question of whether they’ll finally come to grips with reality or whether they’ll double-down of fantasy will be answered once and for all.

You Need To Calm Down

I’ll close with something one of my favorite preppers, Fabian Ommar, said recently on The Organic Prepper about mental preparation.

He writes:

In life, it’s vital to balance action, mindset, and spirituality. When it comes to preparedness and survival, I try my best to keep visiting between these three essentials constantly, for myself and also in my guidance work and writings. I find Stoicism to be particularly helpful.

Mental preparation is something I don’t talk about enough, even though it’s arguably the most important aspect of preparedness. All the guns and supplies in the world won’t save you if you don’t possess the mentality to overcome life’s challenges. If you think your day-to-day problems are too much to handle, you’ll never be able to manage an SHTF. It’s that simple.

The bottom line is this:

Another way of expressing that idea is “we don’t control what happens, but how we respond.” That’s important in life, no matter the context. Still, it becomes even more powerful during challenging times like now and even more so if TSHTF because that’s when focusing our energy and efforts on ourselves, our thoughts and our actions is the only way to improve our situation.

If stoicism seems to esoteric a concept, just think of it as calmness. It’s easier said than done, but it’s worth it. I can tell you from personal experience panic never makes the situation better. It’s terrifying to think you have no control of the situation, but there are ways of mitigating that, like not putting yourself in avoidable situations where you have no control of the outcome.

The greatest benefit of calmness is that it instills the same in others. Of course, there are people who cannot help themselves and cannot be calmed no matter what, but for most of us, we respond to how others act. Have you ever worked for a boss who loses their cool easily? How does that feel? Is it easy keeping your cool dealing with someone like that? Now imagine you’re the one everyone looks to for an answer. If you’re not calm, what sort of confidence are you inspiring in anyone else? I guess what I’m trying to say is that it might be difficult to be calm for your own sake, but you need to do it for the benefit of others.

What does calmness look like? Watch this scene from the movie Apollo 13. Based on the real-life space disaster that nearly took the lives of three astronauts, the film emphasizes the steely-eyed professionalism that defined NASA’s Mission Control, specifically. This movie, especially this scene in particular, left an impression on me as far as how to conduct yourself in the face of crisis.

Watch:

In case you’re not following, the flight controllers have told legendary Flight Director Gene Kranz (portrayed expertly by Ed Harris) the astronauts are going to suffocate to death due to an excess of carbon dioxide, which needs to be filtered out of the spacecraft’s atmosphere. Despite this awful news, the reaction is a simple assessment of the situation, followed by an order to “Fix it.”

Take a look at this photograph of Apollo 13 astronaut John Swigert onstructing the device that’s going to save their lives by filtering out the carbon monoxide:

Notice how calm Swigert appears, even though he and the other two astronauts are on the precipice of suffocating to death, trapped inside a cramped spacecraft. On top of that, they’re entirely dependent on people millions of miles away to come up with solutions to every single problem they encounter on their dangerous journey home. That’s a heavy load for anyone’s mind to bear.

Hopefully, none of us ever find ourselves in a situation similar to what the Apollo 13 astronauts found themselves in. The lesson is that the key to overcoming to emergencies is to devote your mind not to all the terrible things that could happen, but to ways of dealing with the problem. Your mind needs to default to solutions, not outcomes. It’s easier said than done, of course. But so much of what we do involves filtering out the things that matter from the things that don’t. The outcome surely matters, but you have less control over that than you think. What you do have control over are your actions, I’m sure I’ve said that a million times by now.

From several essays ago:

Like I say routinely, if you have trouble dealing with life’s challenges in general, you’re going to have trouble dealing with SHTFs. This is why you need to adopt a problem-solving mindset, which is what preparedness amounts to: What is the problem? What do I need in order to fix it? You need to be able to confront issues as if it’s just another day in the life of and not operate with a zero-defects mentality where nothing’s supposed to go wrong, ever. You must approach life with the mindset that there’s always a challenge to overcome, a problem to solve. This is how you avoid panic.

It’s not about looking for something to fix. It’s about understanding there’s always something that’ll need fixing. This is how you live comfortably, worry-free, while still being prepared to deal with any crisis life throws your way.

What’s On Your Mind?

What are your thoughts? Do you see more people in your neck of the woods getting into prepping? What about “progressive” prepping? Do you know any leftists who are into prepping? What’s going through their minds? Are they taking up arms?

Let’s discuss in the comments section.

Max Remington writes about armed conflict and prepping. Follow him on Twitter at @AgentMax90.

If you liked this post from We're Not At the End, But You Can See It From Here, why not share? If you’re a first-time visitor, please consider subscribing!

Brian Villanueva

Based on the "holocaust is a myth" survey, it appears you your average Holocaust denier is a urban, black, zoomer, male who's a hard Left Democrat but thinks he's actually quite moderate.

"One of the great unfortunate revelations of the past several years is the extent to which even culturally pluralistic America is tribalistic. Crisis tends to exacerbate, not dampen, tribalism."

Sebastian Junger's book Tribe is very good if you haven't read it.

"I get the sense the preparedness you’re seeing on the Left today is a response to the possibility of Trump and the Right returning to power."

What happens if Trump actually wins? 2016 featured tens of thousands of people chanting "not my president" for weeks on end. Will 2020 feature an armed version of that? I fear these folks will convince themselves that they're fighting fascism by trying to overthrow democracy. That really does sound like an insurrection.

On Apollo 13, everyone always talked about the "failure is not an option" scene, but the "make a square peg fit into a round hole" is my personal favorite.

Expand full comment

1 reply by Max Remington

1 more comment...

We're Not At the End, But You Can See It From Here