Group Survival 101.

[Sarge47]

I started a new thread dedicated to group survival as I feel that I might have gotten off the thread topic on the other one and this is probably going to be a lengthy thread. How many of you ever saw the "original" movie: "Flight of the Phoenix"? In the film a plane crashes in a large African desert; the pilot, played by James Stewart, starts out as the leader of a group of survivors. Two of them strike out on their own, but one comes back and one dies in the desert. The one that comes back is near death. The time is shortly after WWII and "anti-German" feelings still run high; however, a German airplane designer, played by Hardy Kruger" becomes the leader for awhile because only he knows how to re-design the plane to fly them out. Needless to say, he is an "unpopular" leader! After the plane is fixed and started up James Stewart regains leadership as he's the only one who can fly them out. One scene that stood out for me in the film was when they all had to work together, pulling the airplane into the proper position for take-off. They all were involved because it was the only way to save their lives. This is kind of what I'm talking about.

[Sarge47]

I think that you make a good point here VW; ergo are we looking at "Short Term" (ST) vs. (LT) survival situations. In ST situations our leader criteria probably wouldn't be as sophisticated as in LT. An example might be that everyone is lost but one member of the group. Since that person knows the way out it's "Lead on, McDuff!" & away we go! We might be stranded on an Island with no way off except for the person with the boat! This does not give the leader anything but the responsiblity to use their particular knowledge or equipment for the good of the group.

In any sort of LT situation the criteria would have to be more "in depth". I don't believe that any of us in the Wolf Pack would need to learn survival skills out in the field as it's pretty obvious that we all are up on that. Likewise on equipment as everyone has their knives, firestarters, etc.. It would require something completely different to move us "outside the box..or out of our comfort zone." Maybe a disaster that has one or more of us needing serious medical attention. Remember, if your not in danger, it isn't "survival".

I "do" believe that the problem that would arise in a group like this would be psycological; the mental move from one of "independence" to becoming a "team-member". We would have to bond and trust one another in all things until the problem is solved.

[owl_girl]

Volwest have you ever seen the movie dogvill? just wondering.

[trax]

How did we ever manage to form societies? Everyone seems so sure that any group in a survival situation is going to fall all over itself with the last two survivors fighting it out to the death for the last scrap of bacon rind or whatever....people bond, period. They form groups and the groups learn to adapt to the environment and either thrive or die out. some individuals depart the group, and either join another group, start another group or spend whatever's left of their days as loners. Same thing, thrive or die out, all part of a much larger process, but it happens all the time and has happened since the beginning of time.

[trax]

For making me yawn uncontrollably, nevertheless, yeah....ALL I'm saying is...people have managed to "bond" and go far beyond bonding for many thousands of years....that's all. You and so have I and so have several other people in different postings mentioned that the things we talk about are situationally dependent, so.....so is this. It was just one little piece I wanted to add.

[Sarge47]

Okay, anybody besides me notice what is going on here between Trax & Vol West? 1st we have two Alpha males in the pack snapping at each other on two seperate threads. 2nd, it is what is known in "polite society" as "a personality clash". The clash is not in their respective opinions, ideals, & concepts, but rather how they express them. Here on the forum it's no big deal. It actually is a learning experience. Not only are we who view these posts learning from all that they have to say, not only are we learning more about their background, experience, and education, they are getting to know one another.

If we were in a deadly situation, however, would they both stop their debate long enough to bond, become team-mates, and help keep the group/pack going? I believe that they would.

BTW, VW, While I have not been in a train wreck, I have had my school bus totaled out while I was driving it; while I have not been "under fire" I have been married twice...do either of these things count?

[owl_girl]

Owl girl...no i haven't, you want to talk about it ?

Well if I talk to much about it that might ruin it for you if you decide to see it. One thing I will say is the beginning is really boring, I almost turned it off because I don’t have that long of an attention span but don’t turn it off it gets better. Based on the beginning I did not expect that ending. I loved it though I was depressed the rest of the day lol. Mostly I was just wondering what you would think of that scenario.

[trax]

Volwest! You can't agree now, Sarge will be so disappointed in us! well, ok...

Sarge, I agree with Volwest

Owl_Girl...I'd like to learn more about that movie as well, because amazingly, I passed it by for something else just two nights ago at the movie rental place, but it looked interesting.

[owl_girl]

Owl_Girl...I'd like to learn more about that movie as well, because amazingly, I passed it by for something else just two nights ago at the movie rental place, but it looked interesting.

Id’ definitely recommend it. But it dos start out a little slow. If you see it tell me what you think.

[wareagle69]

i think that somehow we have been sold(brainwashed)into thinking that we need to fear what we do not know. i know that i protect what i have with ferocity, i wonder i i might miss out on a friend during a situation because i fear that he is going to try to take what is mine

eaver see the movie contact, i love that movie and forgive me for butchering this quote but it goes something about "why is it the contention of every politician that all aliens are hostile" to which he replies "why is it every egghead assumes that they are benign. where do i fall in as shtf scene i will probably(and unfortunatly) asumme that everyone is hostile

[Sarge47]

i think that somehow we have been sold(brainwashed)into thinking that we need to fear what we do not know. i know that i protect what i have with ferocity, i wonder i i might miss out on a friend during a situation because i fear that he is going to try to take what is mine

Could you explain this a bit more please, Wareagle?

[wareagle69]

sure sarge.

let me think on how to explain this differently.
it seems in the movies that i have watched and grown up with it is always one man against the world. look at most apoctalyptic movies, it seems that one or two ppl are hiding out and hordes of angry or recently raised from the dead mobs are after what you have. i think we are taught to miss trust anyone nowadays with all the deviants and pervs out there guilty until proven innocent any more and even when proven not guilty(never innocent) there is always doubt left in ppl minds. my dealings w/ ppl in life itself have left me this way. my whole life i wanted to be a soldier, which i became the best of the best they said "rangers lead the way" and i did, they taught me to kill and i did, then when my tour was up and i had to deal with the loss of 18 comrades, the miltary said well yor a civillian now best of luck, betrayed by what i beleived in, so when the shtf and some one comes down the street how will i react? the way i have been trained to do my whole life. fortunatley my wife is a good person and has learned about my life as an americian ( and she still loves me anyways) and has learned how to deal with my personality but i fear that, in a world of hypermachoism the samurai warrior no longer is allowed to exsist.

sorry to get so deep ,once istarted typing , weel you know

[spiritman]

A little bit of maths...
1+1+1+1+1 = 5 is bonding.
1+1+1+1+1 = 1 is unity.

You + me + Sarge + Trax + Wareagle + everyone here = Wolfpack

That's what sarge was doing when he wanted a name for the group, something we could all stand behind.

I am a wolf

[spiritman]

An example might be that everyone is lost but one member of the group. Since that person knows the way out it's "Lead on, McDuff!" & away we go! We might be stranded on an Island with no way off except for the person with the boat! This does not give the leader anything but the responsiblity to use their particular knowledge or equipment for the good of the group.

I find that an interesting statement sarge, I agree with it in the sense that the guy with the boat has certain power. I want to compare it to the $1,000 knife. I think because of how modern ppl think about ownership the same thing would happen. A bad example of what I think could happen would be like jack in lord of the flies, while a good scenario would be the owner standing up and using his knife to benefit the group. I don't think it would be taken away, but he would have some very specific responsibilities that others don't.

[mangyhyena]

Leadership:
I have been on other survival forums and I have seen a widely held assumption repeated time and again. (Not by everyone, but by a high enough percentage of survivalists that it's worth commenting on.) The assumption is that because survivalists have knowledge and skills pertaining to survival they're a natural choice as leader of a group, assuming no one else in the group is as knowledgeable or skilled. I think this is dead wrong. I think that even though the survivalist has these skills and knowledge, there may well be someone better qualified to lead within the group, even if that individual does not have those skills and knowledge. Have any of you ever worked in a place where a new lead, supervisor, or manager was hired and he/she didn't know as much about the business as you did? Why do you think that individual was hired over you? Perhaps that individual has proven, through a job history, that he/she is a competent leader with skills valuable to your place of business even though his/her particular skills are not specific to the tasks you perform at your job.

Let's look at the one thing so many believe qualifies them to lead: knowledge and skills pertaining specifically to survival. You're in a group where you're the only one who knows what to do to stay alive and has the skills to do so. You will use those skills and knowledge to benefit the group on the condition that you become leader. Great, now you're in charge because you've blackmailed them with something they need to survive. But how long before the rest of the group learns your skills and has your knowledge? They will learn very quickly because their lives depend on it! Once they do, why would they need you to be in charge anymore? Answer---they don't.

IMHO, leadership requires more than knowledge and skills. Perhaps Volwest could comment of what qualities make for an effective leader. And what type of leader is required during a long-term emergency.

As I mentioned in the other thread, I wouldn't choose to be the leader of a whole group. I would do it if there was no one else and they chose me, but I know there are others who would do a better job. In other words, I'd do in a pinch, but I'm not the ideal candidate. I'm not afraid of the responsibility (or at least afraid enough to reject the job if it needs doing) and I do not believe I'm a totally incompetent leader, I just believe there are other people who are more skilled at actually leading groups.

Just being honest.

What do you all think?

[owl_girl]

wareagle,

Pretty much all men want to "save the world".
I cannot talk about it more because it is related to religions..."one man vs the world"...But thank you for expressing this "tension".

You also talk about the fear of the unknown...this is another instinct of ours, and like many others, comes from a time where venturing out of the cave was synonymous of extreme danger. "Out there", is the unknown, and the safety in numbers was paramount to survival.
Of course today, this instinct, like many others, has taken a different shape, it has evolved with us (not much), and governs many of our "actions" (re-actions).

The "taking what is mine" thing, can be observed in dogs when we approach their food bowl. This is more linked to the fear of "lacking", and this subject can be a gold mine for the survivor, because it exposes many unconscious processes impacting our survival. Maybe i'll talk about it later...


"so when the shtf and some one comes down the street how will i react? the way i have been trained to do my whole life."

I think this is an amazing statement...it shows how programed we are to do certain things...you link your conditioning to the military, but the rabbit hole goes way, way deeper.
Conditioning is another subject we might talk about if you are interested...

A dog grads his food bowl because of fear of lacking? No a dog grads his food bowl because of fear of loosing his dominate position. You are lower ranking then him so you get to eat last. If your dog is grading his food bowl from you you need to establish your role as leader not treat his fear of lacking. I’d train him for you but I’m to lazy to walk that far lol

[Sarge47]

Okay, here's some stuff to chew on. 1st, I only used the $1000 knife because the respondant in the post he mentioned it mentioned also "pride of ownership."
I believe that I could be lost in the woods with any or all of this group and we would have enough knives, guns, poison darts and machetes to scare off Osama Bin Laden! I used the knife because it was an easy thing to grab on to to demonstrate what has certainly proven itself here, that just about everyone here, while certainly qualified enough on a solo jaunt in the woods, might find difficulty in accepting authority! Yet, in order to survive, you just might have to do that! If I had both the mindset and the $$$ to purchase a $!000 knife, and the leader of the group told me that, for whatever reason, I had to give the knife up to save someone else's life, even someone who was totally unpopular along with the fact that I'd never see the knife again I'd do it without grumbling...much. What's a human life worth? Less than a $1000? Nonsense! I'll bill 'em later & buy a nicer one, but if I saved a life in the meantime...well that's what survival is all about, isn't it? Saving lives. Now please comment, especially some of you lurkers!

[trax]

Is there a point to your example of chaos theory? We shouldn't help someone because later in life they might make something bad happen? I mean, that's the example. I'm just asking here, you've gone to great lengths to point out how stupid I am so clear this up for me. Doesn't chaos theory mean that nothing is predictable? Maybe humans should stop breeding altogether because some people grow up to be serial killers.

[Sarge47]

Chaos theory is unpredictable, you demonstrate that yourself, VW. In everything that I teach to anybody who bothers to listen is this: I err on the side of caution." Who's to decide who's going to live or die? What if someone wanted you out of the group because they felt your words were very offensive to them, but to do so would put your life in danger? How could we, in all humanity, jeprodize your well-being over someone else's hurt feelings. It gets back to Authority & Law Enforcement. All life is precious, and if someone you saved kills others, deliberately or accidentally as a result of you saving their life, so what, you didn't do it. Are you physic? Can you tell in advance who's going to do what? No. Neither can I, so we don't let someone else die because we don't know what the future holds; only if, by letting them stay, we would be endangering the welfare of the whole group!

[Sarge47]

"Perhaps Volwest could comment of what qualities make for an effective leader. And what type of leader is required during a long-term emergency."
mangyhyena.


First off, i agree with you. The "best" leader for a group is not necessarily the one with survival knowledge, or military skills, or medicine power, or the biggest muscles, or who knows what.

The leader will be the one that is able to influence us in the most effective way. This influence might be a skill desperately needed, or a certain knowledge, or like Sarge said, the simple owner of the last gun/knife/dart.

All of this under short term conditions is going to be what it is...for it means that we will not choose the leader, we will be under the spell of his influences.

Now, long term group cohabitation is a lot more complex. And leadership positions would happen the same way it always has. The qualities of this individual will depend on the direction, the composition, and a multitude of other factors emanating from the group itself.
Making a list of qualities would be pure speculation as to what this emanation could be...

But, there are traits that are observable in any leader, and the list that FVR posted, is after all not a bad one...for the perfect followers of a leader.

Natural born leaders are often charismatic individuals, with a pronounced sense of self. They are coherent towards themselves, and we feel safe in their hands. Charisma comes from the greek " divine gift", and it is the gift of influence.
Those individuals seem to project calmness and focus, confidence and assertiveness, but more importantly, they communicate very well.
This communication skill is the ability to adjust their speech to anyone...for we all do not hear the same way. It seems those individuals are born with this gift, and charisma cannot be acquired through life. You got it, or you don't.

Through out history we find such individuals that have had "the gift", and charisma has fallen into the realm of mystery. Charismatic people are everywhere, but often time, because of conditioning, or outside pressure, they were not given the opportunity to express this side of themselves...and this natural leadership mystery, stays locked in a box we call, personality.

I believe that in a group situation, the leader will emerge by himself, and only time will tell if this leader was and is the "good one", after that, nature will take it's course, and a pretender to the job will eventually challenge the position with or without the help of the group.

VW, this is probably the best post you've ever written! It speaks right to the heart of the matter. Sometimes :"Charisma" is often over-rated. Trust in said leader is, in my opinion, priority one.