This type of prepper prides himself on how prepared he is for any apocalyptic event. He finds it hard to keep his mouth shut about his food preparation, water supply, and his self-sustaining environment that he built as a whole. The problem with this is if a disaster does happen, those ill-equipped groups will surely come for these religious preppers first.


The stories of alcoholic beverages historically being safer to drink than unfermented ones are apocryphal at best; however, as any 17th-century sailor would tell you, the addition of some spirits to potable water that's been sitting around for too long will make it much more palatable. Liquor distillation was originally invented in part for medical purposes, and alcohol can be used as a solvent to dissolve medicinal herbs -- and also to knock out patients during good old-fashioned fallout-shelter surgery. High-proof alcohol can be used as an antiseptic, and it does a great job of cleaning wounds and preventing infection.
When you go back to the last depressing days when we were in a survival mode, the last one the Y2K of course, before the 1970s, what had happened was you only saw this one element of survivalist, you know, the caricature, the guy with the AK-47 heading to the hills with enough ammunition and pork and beans to ride out the storm. This is a very different one from that: you're seeing average people taking smart moves and moving in intelligent directions to prepare for the worst. (...) So survivalism in every way possible. Growing your own, self-sustaining, doing as much as you can to make it as best as you can on your own and it can happen in urban area, sub-urban area or the ex-urbans. And it also means becoming more and more tightly committed to your neighbors, your neighborhood, working together and understanding that we're all in this together and that when we help each other out that's going to be the best way forward.
The article mentions “The Commander Prepper”. I get it, yet I don’t get it! Especially, when bounced against “commanding and leading”. I guess if taken in the context of just prepping, I sort of get it. But if associated with after the catastrophe trigger has been pulled, I definitely have a problem with it. I do not know the leadership experience the author has had or even claims to know, but I do know from personal experience that situational and operational awareness, eminent actions and the make-up of your individual team dictate the three leadership styles. There is not enough time for discussion here, but you should research this on your own. Their is no replacement for hands-on experience, but leadership disciplines can be quickly studied, learned and put into practical use.

Despite a lull following the end of the Cold War, survivalism has gained greater attention in recent years, resulting in increased popularity of the survivalist lifestyle, as well as increased scrutiny. A National Geographic show interviewing survivalists, Doomsday Preppers, was a "ratings bonanza"[79] and "the network's most-watched series",[80] yet Neil Genzlinger in The New York Times declared it an "absurd excess on display and at what an easy target the prepper worldview is for ridicule," noting, "how offensively anti-life these shows are, full of contempt for humankind."[81]
The most dangerous people in a survival situation is the gang of outlaws who only want to take what they need and don’t care about what happens to the owner(s). The hardest to know what to do with, and for, is the individual (person or family) who has done nothing to prepare for emergencies or disaster. It’s hard to want to help someone who does not, and will not, help themselves. But it’s endemic to our society – it’s all about big brother taking care of you, or “the government” being your friend. It’s about entitlement. It’s about not caring about other people, only yourself/family. They are the 2 true dangers to preppers.

Interest in the movement picked up during the Clinton administration due in part to the debate surrounding the Federal Assault Weapons Ban and the ban's subsequent passage in 1994. The interest peaked again in 1999 triggered by fears of the Y2K computer bug. Before extensive efforts were made to rewrite computer programming code to mitigate the effects, some writers such as Gary North, Ed Yourdon, James Howard Kunstler,[17] and investments' advisor Ed Yardeni anticipated widespread power outages, food and gasoline shortages, and other emergencies. North and others raised the alarm because they thought Y2K code fixes were not being made quickly enough. While a range of authors responded to this wave of concern, two of the most survival-focused texts to emerge were Boston on Y2K (1998) by Kenneth W. Royce, and Mike Oehler's The Hippy Survival Guide to Y2K. Oehler is an underground living advocate, who also authored The $50 and Up Underground House Book,[18] which has long been popular in survivalist circles.
Survivalists maintain their group identity by using specialized terminology not generally understood outside their circles. They often use military acronyms such as OPSEC and SOP, as well as terminology common among adherents to gun culture or the peak oil scenario. They also use terms that are unique to their own survivalist groups; common acronyms include:
In both his book Rawles on Retreats and Relocation and in his survivalist novel, Patriots: A Novel of Survival in the Coming Collapse, Rawles describes in great detail retreat groups "upgrading" brick or other masonry houses with steel reinforced window shutters and doors, excavating anti-vehicular ditches, installing warded gate locks, constructing concertina wire obstacles and fougasses, and setting up listening post/observation posts (LP/OPs.) Rawles is a proponent of including a mantrap foyer at survival retreats, an architectural element that he calls a "crushroom".[7]
We get that creature comforts will be ever more important as the things that used to make us happy slowly break and crumble around us. But do you really want to put a ton of effort into opening a bakery when everything is going to shit? And we hate to be the bearers of bad news, but no amount of odor elimination is going to stop the uncivilized world from smelling really, really bad.
Not taking a cheap shot at the author, but wouldn’t the author fall into 1 or 2 of these categories? I think the human character of every individual harbors a little bit of all or several of these. Most, if not 100% of anyone prepping has in their specific individual plan – their family members. Each family member brings their own set of considerations (assets & liabilities) to the table. Are we to avoid/cast out these family members due to their nonconforming attributes? This eludes me to one of the categories you left out – The resistant/reluctant prepper. Because if you have a family there’s a strong chance you will have one of these, but they too come around in time.

I.N.C.H. pack: I'm Never Coming Home pack. (It is another name for a Bug Out Bag. often used by those trying to show that they are experts in the preparedness field.) A pack containing everything needed to walk out into the woods and never return to society. It is a heavy pack loaded with the gear needed to accomplish any wilderness task, from building shelter to gaining food, designed to allow someone to survive indefinitely in the woods. This requires skills as well as proper selection of equipment, as one can only carry so much. For example, instead of carrying food, one carries seeds, steel traps, a longbow, reel spinners and other fishing gear.[citation needed]
With the world seeming to become a more volatile and dangerous place with every encroaching year, it can be hard to know exactly where you can feel safe. The modern media is overloaded with stories about violence, crime, and sensational pieces on the worst people in our society. But there have to be some places within the United States where the chances of anything like that happening to you is next to impossible, right?
×