Would you want to survive the end of civilization?

Let’s say the end of the world as we know it is coming — but someone offers you a priceless spot in their guaranteed-to-be-safe bunker, so you can be one of the chosen few who rebuilds the Earth. Would you want to survive, and emerge into the post-apocalyptic wasteland? Would the positives of playing a role in a new society outweigh the loss of creature comforts? Or would you rather just go out with the majority of the human race?

I wouldn’t last long in a Mad Max-style world — the most complex thing I can do to my car is replace its refrigerant. I’d probably die in the first couple of months — or once my glasses broke, whichever came first.

But what if the new world resembled ours, just a little more rugged and difficult? Would you enjoy the opportunity to rebuild society? Here are a few of the positives and negatives associated with a civilization changing event to help you decide.

The top image of a civilization extreme shown in Mad Max 2: Road Warrior.

The Negatives

Your new world lacks the creature comforts of today – no electricity, no communication, no instant access to a plethora of information. Hell, the information that lies in your head likely carries little value.

If you have read any of the 99 issues of Robert Kirkman’s The Walking Dead, you know that surviving in a new world with few skills amidst packs of zombies and dangerous people is no way to live. Thankfully, the end of the world as we know it probably wouldn’t include flesh-eating zombies. The end of civilization, however, would bring with it a lack of communication, resources, and lead to immense amounts of unbearable drama, due to fear, hunger, and power grabs.

Do you want to live in a situation where every day includes a dangerous search for food, your nights involve defensive formations to protect those in your community, and you never know what the next moment will bring?

This type of vicious world definitely has its extremes. The bad times would cease over time as groups of people join together to reform civilization, but he birth pains of this new civilization will be severe. Would you want a part in the new world?

The Positives

What if the end of civilization leaves you in a reasonably safe place, amongst family and friends? The television show Jericho explored such a scenario. An independent community relied on itself to survive, with scant information about the outside world. In this case, it might be fun to start things over — maintain a background set of laws to maintain order, but re-create society in your image. This view might be a tad bit on the optimistic side, but it’s a possibility.

Your new life will lack a number of the meaningless stresses of today — no e-mail to check, no presentations to give, no centuries old baggage stemming from geopolitical conflicts. The slate is wiped clean — why not take advantage of the positives inherent in a second chance?

Your Decision

Would you want to survive a devastating event that turns society on its head? The role you play in the rebuilding process might be a large one — how do you weigh the pros and cons?

Images from Image/Skybound and CBS Paramount Network Television.

via Would you want to survive the end of civilization?.

15

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SOURCE : http://www.urbanprepping.com

8 thoughts on “Would you want to survive the end of civilization?

  1. Ben Heslop

    The people who dominate this world will dominate the next.

    They have the ability to lead and the cunning to make sure they’re well positioned with private armies and provisions before it all goes to hell. Just look at who profited from the financial crisis. Hint: it wasn’t the poor or middle class.

    Our best bet is to use democracy to make society more equitable, because you can be sure that any new ‘Jericho’s’ that arise will be run by ruthless warlords (like The Governor) and not some hippie communes.

    So why not invest yourself in saving our best and last chance of civilisation by distancing yourself by a right wing movement financed by the rich and powerful and filled with naive idiots. Try instead to lead them towards enlightenment that people like me offer.

    http://Www.deists.com

    Reply
  2. David Sims

    I disagree with Ben Heslop. The powers that be today depend on fossil fuels to power their heavy industry and military equipment. Without those, they will have only weapons comparable to ours: rifles for a few decades, then back to swords, daggers and bows. Given enough time, we might even gain the offensive advantage over them. The strategy of the rich will be using their military-industrial advantages against us decisively, while they last, while keeping us divided or by introducing hostile aliens that will, by posing us more proximate problems, divert us from attending to the scoundrelly rich.

    Reply
  3. KJQ

    If my wife and sons lived, then I’d want to as well. It is my duty to provide for them, which includes protecting them. If they did not survive, I’d be happy to go to be with the Lord, or stay and do as He wishes to help my fellow citizens.

    Reply
  4. Ben Heslop

    David, there are like 10 flaws in your logic.

    Basically you watch too many movies. When fossil fuels are low, who do you reckon will buy up the rest and make sure they control remaining production?

    You’ve seen the rich live in walled villages? That will be expanded into walled towns, cities and even countries. Don’t worry they’re not stupid.

    My point is that we have some power over the rich now via democracy. After that collapses, we’ll have none. Your bunker will keep you alive for a year, after that you’ll have to join the slave armies to get a food ration and be granted a degree of protection from the local Lord. It’ll be the middle ages on steroids.

    And the Tea Party and Libertarians and GOP Voters are accelerating this process through their absolute stupidity.

    Reply
  5. M J Winkler

    “The middle ages on steroids,” are we not well on our way already? Over 40% of American households are currently dependent upon the “local Lord” for some type of assistance. This percentage will undoubtedly increase.
    So do I distance myself from the “right wing,” filled with rich, powerful, naive idiots, many of whom promote personal freedom and responsibility, self sufficiency, and smaller government?
    Or do I distance myself from the “left wing” who are equally rich and powerful, and who embrace equality through democracy, legislating fairness, and increasing my dependency upon the government “Lord?”
    Simple democracy is wonderful, as long as one is always within the majority, not so pleasant when one is not. Legislating equality and fairness works well on a small scale, but has proven disastrous for significantly larger populations.
    While it may not be “enlightened,” I look to history for what has worked and that provides my answer. If I have one year in my “bunker,” the time will be used wisely, responsibly, and centered on preserving self sufficiency and personal freedom. I could set no better example for the future civilization.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.