Can liberals be survivalists / preppers?

[PalmettoTree]

They might prep but they will not survive.

If we didn't have liberals half the reasons for prepping would not exist.

[heyrakes]

Originally Posted by Pector55

Awesome thread on demonstrating points based on fringe components of two different parties.

Olberman, Maddow, Matthews <-------vs-------> Hannity, Limbaugh, Karl Rove

Do any of those people really represent any of the people here? If we could shave the fringe I would be willing to bet that the world would be a better place. I oppose big government and big church. I oppose authoritarianism in all forms. I wouldn't jump on board with the Democrats and I won't jump on board with the Republicans either. Face it, survivalists don't NEED a leader, therefore tend to be more independent than strongly tied to party affiliation.

In most cases, liberals and conservatives can get along fine. The problem is when one is an authoritarian and feels the need to force their beliefs. Those most vocal about their opposition are sometimes the worst offenders.

It's not a question of liberals against conservatives, as some has said there will be a great change in the meaning of these words when the SHTF. what really is the evil in this world is the progressives that want to control everything. they are both liberal and conservative

[Artfor]

I voted no because of the question. True liberals use terms like survivalist in a derogatory way. However Some of the best " live off the land / live anywhere with the bare minimal" types of people that Ive known were people that were very liberal, they lived in a commune back in the 70s. A lot what we learn/know comes from there experiences. But when the teotwawki happens there what I'll feed my dogs.

[Watch Ryder]

Originally Posted by Westfalia

I’ve seen a rather high number of posts about that liberals basically can’t be survivalists and some posts that they aren’t welcome. I think it would be interesting to see a poll about what people in general think about this subject. So do you think that liberals can be survivalists?

If they are pro-constitution, live in the wilderness and are purged of their odious mindset and ways I think they can make pretty good survivalists and excellent preppers.

[revan]

Originally Posted by P.Publius

I suspect Liberals think that the "Government" will save then like it did to those people the New Orleans during Katrina. Therefore they will not prep or take any other proactive steps after the SHTF to save themselves. FXjohn may be the exception...

you mean when bush purposely failed to direct fema to help??

anyways... just because a person believes in one thing or the other, doesnt mean they are able to survive something. and if what some posters have already said are true, and the left wing can adapt and make friends with anyone... than whos to say that a liberal cant befriend you as a right wing prepper, then when you become so close you are the one to offer help to them during a time of need.

[heyrakes]

Originally Posted by revan

you mean when bush purposely failed to direct fema to help??

anyways... just because a person believes in one thing or the other, doesnt mean they are able to survive something. and if what some posters have already said are true, and the left wing can adapt and make friends with anyone... than whos to say that a liberal cant befriend you as a right wing prepper, then when you become so close you are the one to offer help to them during a time of need.

just to correct a mistake, Bush had offered help before Katrina. both the democratic Governor and mayor of NOL refused the help. proven fact look it up

[revan]

Originally Posted by heyrakes

just to correct a mistake, Bush had offered help before Katrina. both the democratic Governor and mayor of NOL refused the help. proven fact look it up

ill look you up

[OldBritDude]

The problem is "liberal" is a pretty undefined term. Right-wing folks tend to assume it means "incapable of standing on their own two feet, socialist-inclined, big-government, income redistribution, gun-banning, baby-eating god-hating communist" but in reality life is somewhat more complex. Very few people are entirely one thing or another. I know an ultra-right-wing guy (big time gun owner, small government, pro-Bush, that kind of thing) who is also a swinger. Likewise I know a woman who is in favor of universal health care along the European model who also is an avid combat shooter.

Maybe if we stop labeling each other and instead look at what the useful attributes of a prepper/survivalist are, we can focus on what's helpful instead of getting into pointless arguments about who "can" and "cannot" be termed a "something"?

I like this site because, while I don't agree with a lot of what I read here, I do come across stuff that is useful, new, and makes me stretch my own thinking from time to time. And really that should be what it is all about, right?

And if we want to look at hard data, most of the studies show that strongly religious people tend to fare poorly under conditions of uncertainty and ambiguity - precisely the conditions that will apply in any disaster scenario. Yet I can't imagine any strongly religious person contemplating for a second the abandonment of their beliefs in order to be psychologically more prepared for an emergency, can you? So we are who we are. Let's just get on with the task at hand, which is planning ahead, staying in great shape, and looking after our families.

[bloodwynd]

I wonder if things get soooo bad and the SHTF will any ask or care if the other is a democrat or republican? As long as the person or group can pull his weight and/ or can contribute to the cause.

[Defiant]

There are lots of liberal survivalists but thier reasons tend to be less politcal and more environment or economic. Peak oil, global warming, bee colony collapse, deforestation,etc. We have loads of problems that go far beyond just the narrow minded second amendment issue.

[arleigh]

Any one can clame the name survivalist .
We even have raider and canabal mentalities here as well.
I would suppose that in the boadest term any one alive is a survivalist even an infant .
The levels of survivalism, so to speak , are broad and wide, So to make some spicific definition it would have to be accepted as a personal perspective and not a blanket definition.
The government has determined that any one with stored food ammo and a few fingers missing IS in fact a terrorist , They have to be, because they said so, isn't that the facts ??? that's typical liberal thinking . If the government says it's OK then it's OK.
That just about covers every farmer and carpenter in america. See how that works?
The government has the right to kill with out due process, but we do not have the right to defend our selves against a currupt government or their buddies on the sreet (thugs). You defend those that support you .Lawyers defend criminals. that's their bead and butter.
Liberals support this kind of govenment ,and call them selves survivalist, are wolves in sheeps clothing, far as I am concerned. I have no need to support nor defend those of an imoral behavior ,those are the ones that helped create the problem to begin with.
It's my opinion alone .
My definition of a survivalist .
1.Takes responsibility for one's own security.
2.Is NOt on the government dole.
3. Believes to be responsible for the truth, and not deliberately misleading in conversation.
4. Though many are some what self sufficient they are not "selfish" .
5.Having warned the world around them to prep, not obligated to share, jepordizing those in their trust.
6. Make no planns to take from some one else ,nor defy the security of others at any time.
7. Willing to work for or trade for barter. Business. Commerice .
8. Using armed force is a last resort as required .
9. When the government obeys the constitution and the states obey the constitution and criminals go to jail/exicution, then needing to worry about the government taking away rights ,would be a thing of the past , no one would need to have an AK .
10. but as long as the criminals and comunists in government are proceeding with their agenda, the citizens will arm them selves afraid of the government and one another.

This is my opinion.



.

[PeterEnergy]

Originally Posted by OldBritDude

The problem is "liberal" is a pretty undefined term.

That is what Liberals say. I wonder why? You would not admit to being a Liberal, would you?

[dontbuypotteryfromme]

Originally Posted by PeterEnergy

That is what Liberals say. I wonder why? You would not admit to being a Liberal, would you?

Ah good primary school arguments.

So I counter with the I am rubber you are glue gambit.

[onealx4]

I think most liberals will depend on uncle sam to take care of them, and these will be the ones getting moved into the FEMA camps.

Once in there, they may find themselves being victimized by all the other have nots, and this will likely lead to riots in these camps.

I'll be home. Screw those camps, those camps are for the ones that can't take care of themselves and they will get every bit of what they deserve for sticking us in this situation in the first place.

[dontbuypotteryfromme]

Originally Posted by onealx4

I think most liberals will depend on uncle sam to take care of them, and these will be the ones getting moved into the FEMA camps.

Once in there, they may find themselves being victimized by all the other have nots, and this will likely lead to riots in these camps.

I'll be home. Screw those camps, those camps are for the ones that can't take care of themselves and they will get every bit of what they deserve for sticking us in this situation in the first place.

The view of a conservatives self intrest vs the liberals belonging to a comunity.

Should a disaster occur. I will do what I am told. go where I am supposed to go and help out if I can.

My aim will be to make life easier for the people around me. And for the people working to fix the problem.

This way a natural disaster is less likley to become a man made one.

Liberals make better survivalists. Because teams are more effective than individuals.

[kaszynsky]

Why I’m no longer a Liberal

Oh I won’t go far right but the left lost me for sure. It was a very long time in coming. I have several good reasons.

1) Every word of anti-Jewish or anti-Israel comments directed at me came from liberals. Except when I found this place then I found lunatics but thats another story........The Thanksgiving following 9/11 I was at a friend’s house for the holiday. A gay man openly blamed the Jews for 9/11. I told him he didn’t know who his friends are. Israel is the only country in the Mideast that doesn’t harm their gay population and even hosted the gay games. He was unmoved. That’s only one example and I could cite at least 10.

2) I also think the social policies keep poor people poor by removing incentives even if I believe in universal healthcare and I think the rich should pay more tax. 2nd and 3rd generation welfare families point to a failure.

3) Political correctness......I lived in the most liberal area in the Midwest maybe in the country. It is a form of thought police and speech control. I know it, I lived it and I hated it. I could go on..........

4) Diversity, they are sure they guard it. In truth they do not. Not unlike the far right they detest differing opinions. I have been confronted and called names for expounding centrist opinions or voicing acceptance of dissenting opinions. At a party I was in a discussion on the book of Job. The discussion was on Job's dealings with suffering. At this time we were confronted by people and chastised for discussing the bible. I asked the men if they ever read the bible? I was told they didn’t have to they know about people who read it. I told them that we were in a discussion on our own and it was they who sought us out and we should be left alone. Guard diversity, no liberals do not guard diversity. We have become a nation that would rather fight the other person knowing nothing about them.

Kaszynsky

[dontbuypotteryfromme]

Here is an example of this in practice.

People out of selfness charity. have decided to act in the benifit of the community.

They allowed the government to take control and co ordinate a large cohesive effort. Police military emergency service all worked together to get the job done.

You Tube

[Artfor]

That may be the way it works there but not here. We had a bad flood two years ago upstate NY. The govt sent the national guard and fema in. They stood around and played politics. The people that they sent in to help clean up arrived a week and a half later and did very little. The community is a mix of liberals and conservatives most of the work however was done was by the local farmers, general contractors and construction crews which around here are conservatives. They gave lots of time and supplies to help people rebuild. The liberal enviro's assisting fema were there making up all sorts of stupid rules making it very hard to do anything. Its been two years we still have roads washed out and county buildings still unfit to occupy aside from homes that havnt even started to rebuild because of red tape. A private person or company cant do work on any state or county road, building or land without approval even if theyll do the work for.free. Since it was a declared a disaster area its up to fema even with private homes. The biggest problem is the enviromentalists and there all liberals.

[dok]

I'm a proud capital "D" Democrat and proud liberal. I'm also a survivalist, prepper, Mt. Climber, long duration expedition backpacker and wilderness survival expert. So yes. The very question is bigoted,offensive, and just stupid.

[ralfy]

Definitely, and for the same reason that conservatives can be survivalists:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism