Been thinking:
Why does prepping exist as it does today?
What makes it popular or possible based on numbers that participate to a greater or lesser degree?
Humans have been around as a genus species (homo sapiens) about 200,000 years, with civilization of some sort about the last 6,000 years. Industrialization has been around since about the 1800’s. As a planet 85-90 percent of human history has been spent trying to survive long enough to identify and learn basic use of natural resources. The remainder to date has been spent exploiting what we learned for private gain. 90% or more of everything invented since the beginning of time, has been invented in the last 60 years.
When I was born in 1958 there were roughly 2.3 billion people on the earth. There are now roughly triple that. Not only the increase, but the rate of the increase is increasing… That’s exponential. Now add time moving forward, 10 or 20 or 50 or more years.
What does that do, or what is the effect?
It increases competition for resources. It creates cities that have 4-12 million people living in them, in desperation, on top of each other, without enough food, education, medical care or hope.
That is an excellent cauldron for tomorrows diseases like Zika, Ebola, SARS and whatever next. It will definitively be something. History says so, not speculation. Ignoring the fact that some diseases might be created and released either by error or maliciously, the effect is the same regardless.
One symptom of competition for space and resources is a gross devaluation of life.
Socially, even if we know better and when we see too much – even atrocities seem more normal than before. Behaviors we would never have tolerated even 10 years ago have much less impact. That’s how fear works if you have to live with it. Anybody that has ever lived under mortal pressure will know that eventually you can’t worry any more, and you begin to act as though mortal peril is normal, whether on the battle field or elsewhere. As a defense mechanism you believe you are removed from it, because if not, you have to face the fact that you can’t or won’t do anything about it. It’s a way to carry on. I’m not sure what you call it if you ignore it and do nothing when you are not directly affected. I suppose it depends on the situation. Maybe we are so covered with so much that we feel like we can’t change it all so we don’t try until we are directly involved.
Physically, competitive pressure does very strange things to behavior and physiology.
We did some testing in college (biology grad studies), where we increased the population density in a population of mice. The result was a marked increase in disease and homosexual behavior. No I don’t know why, I am not a mouse. Blame the study, statistics, whatever.. it is what it is. I’m not blaming any particular behavior on population density. Just reporting the study observations so remember these are mice, not people. We are supposed to be more intelligent than mice.
Another Study.
On an island in the great lakes that was too far for the deer to swim away or predators to reach, a population increased slowly, until it reached critical mass density. The island was visited regularly for study, so there was a base line over time. One time the visit showed that the entire population was dead. Not gone, dead. Since it was well studied, testing for things like poison, predation etc… were done and compared to the base line. They found that the adrenal glands had vastly increased in size from stress on the population due to crowding. The deer reached a tipping point and catastrophically failed suddenly.
I’m not saying population density causes homosexuality, or everybody is going to die, or the sky is falling. I’m saying that population density and competition as time goes on becomes increasingly negative in effect in proportion to the increase. (RE: Thomas Robert Malthus for demography in (Essay on the Principal of Population – 1798)).
So why should I care?
First more studies …
European ethic origin reproduction is dropping. Something like 2.3 children per couple. Yes I know people who have more too. I also know as many couples that are opting to go childless… and why the term dink was coined (Double Income No Kids). The Hispanic birth rate is higher that European but it has dropped by half over the last few years. Where Middle Eastern reproduction is concerned it’s something like 7-8 children. Not my numbers, go do your own research, and feel free to draw whatever conclusion you like. Do the math on the whole and use facts. The nature of competition includes winning and losing, based on the qualities of the competitors.
What does the long term growth rates with just those three populations (there are more) tell you?
Were the studies that arrived at those number flawed or biased?
Fair question. Probably, since a large number are biased and based as much on who is paying for it and what they want the study to support as facts. Like voting districts or other.
Back to prepping in its incarnations from totally defensive to totally offensive. (Bug in, Bug out, or a variant.) What makes the movement possible?
It’s likely we, of more than a few years, bring a perspective that 20 something’s don’t have. We, whether analytically or instinctively, understand something is up and it drives us to act, to prepare for it. Misguided or not we will act or not. No small wonder an industry springs up to create products, and sell them based on a market demand. It also is not a surprise that some fan the flames to create a buzz to feed the marketing pig. Maybe we feed it, or maybe we read it and take it with a grain of salt, and use more practical approach. Without much doubt, fear, whether of the unknown or the perception of specific threats, is a driver behind why we do what we do.
Prepper(s) are not blinded, are intuitive, and are proactive rather than reactive, to some degree.
They don’t wait, and that causes fear in “leadership” of the US and other countries, because proactive people are not easily manipulated. We need to think about what that fear by Leadership might mean, and how to use that information.
The above premise might build a basis for every political and legal action for the last 50 years, maybe more. Too much noise and it gives the perception of a threat greater than it is, not enough and nothing gets done or changes. I don’t know anyone that wants catastrophic change. Do we want positive change? Absolutely. What positive change means is a whole other discussion. Maybe several, and is the basis for the majority of political discord.
While our leadership is self-serving and not necessarily bright, many of the people analyzing data for them are bright indeed. Never underestimate an opponent in any conflict, or difference of opinion. They have concluded some of what I am describing, in different words probably, with lots of data and charts. Remember they fund the Census, and many other data gathering studies. No need keep it from you, if it’s piled under mounds of other misdirection. Have you seen the search engines lately on any subject?
Something has to be done in order for the planet to survive. It’s really that simply stated.
National/International leadership(s) are making mistakes in trying to manipulate things so they remain in control and in power. Some likely think they are doing the rights things.
The thing about answers gathered from huge amounts of data, is that to get good conclusions, you have to ask well designed questions. What questions do you think they are asking? Did they start with a conclusion and work backwards to get data to support it? Most do when they are more concerned about a predetermined answer instead of a correct answer.
Consider another aspect.
If you were a world leader in any country, U.N., European Union, Far East etc… How would you try to exhibit control? What would you do and why? Remember they might not be bright, and may be very self-serving, but their analysts aren’t stupid.
Without going all conspiracy theory and using bits and pieces of random facts. Let’s avoid ideological divisions just now. What could be done to control a population?
If you wanted control you would likely consider:
– disarmament at a basic level
– control food supplies from reducing inventory and availability through distribution and manipulated crop production
– control the water supply chain. (Remember the U.S. population living today has never known bad water except in isolated incidences)
– manipulate the economy to the point that it is either classless or two broad classes (Upper and Lower).
– subsidize education to control what is taught historically, and limit innovation.
– control medical care and medicines by subsidization through insurance or created shortages.
– implement a system to advocate importation of resources
– export manufacturing
I am sure there are more relating to money supply etc… but it’s a huge topic.
You could enforce all your control measures by withdrawing government subsidization.
Why or how could that be possible?
Who is the largest employer in the US? The various local and Federal Governments.
(Local government is subsidized by Federal government programs.) Include Military and Government retirees as well as Social programs. You also have to include Social security for the private citizen. Don’t follow my rules, I quit paying you.
In answer, I would want to say, “But Social Security is MY money, not something that belongs to the government. I paid for it out of what I earned”. I agree in principal, but you would be both right and wrong. Beginning the day Social Security Trust Fund became more accessible in 1969, the idea that the Trust could be used for something else gained traction. During the Linden Johnson Administration the Social Security Trust Fund began being treated as part of the “unified budget”, then was again turned back off in 1990. In either case, it is only an accounting practice. The actual issue has been a violation of the intent of the Trust Fund by all parties, and the idea remained and became an accepted practice. It never became part of a general fund.
(source SSA.gov. That is the SSA’s OWN website not just me) That means this is solely placed on the shoulders of our politicians, and is party agnostic.
The point being that the Federal Government can leverage the majority of Americans directly or indirectly whenever they want. The only question is to what degree, and how well it will be tolerated? The answer is gradually. Remember how we live with fear.
I’ll paraphrase an axiomatic, saying.
“How do you cook a frog? Put them in a pan of cold water, and turn it up gradually.
By the time it notices it’s already cooked”
So what do you think, are we cooked, or is there still time to do something?
We can choose to act or react.
I have ignored conspiracy theories and parties, or tried at least, but have speculated certainly.
It feels a little dark. I can’t tell if it’s because I “think” it is, or it actually is, or to what degree.
I’ll leave that to you.
You are welcome to any or all of the ideas if they stimulate your gray matter.
I clearly think too much and over analyze. It’s what happens with 3 undergrad degrees and a masters then add in IT and stir actively with time.
Feel free to disagree, or agree to any degree you like. Criticize my word usage, run on sentences, and punctuation. Whatever works for you. The premise of the write-up is to get you to think, not convince you to agree with me. Do your own research, and become engaged. Don’t be satisfied with reading or listening to an opinion of someone else’s opinion.
If you made it this far, you already have what it takes.
Good luck and safe Journey!
Thanks
Goingray58
