The politics of preparedness

**Teotwawki** · 06-23-2008, 08:42 AM

Sorry if I am starting a thread bound to be closed... but...

... quite a few SHTF scenarios are the result of bad politics, world politics, idealogical differences and so on.

Hopefully, without getting into any philosophical / political debates: How can one completely separate consideration of possible SHTF scenarios from politics?

I think anticipating the possibilities is an important component of preparation. Take out natural disaster and one is left with man-made crisis.

Short of a meteor, super volcano or the likes, natural disasters are relatively short term, localized survival situations whereas man-made crisis (I think) tend to be longer term, geographically broader, and therefore potentially much harder to survive.

Thoughts?

**bulrush** · 06-23-2008, 12:48 PM

Political problems are often caused by selfish or greedy people, or angry people who hold a grudge. If you eliminate all selfish and greedy political leaders in the world, and get people/leaders to respect each others' sovereignty and rights, then that would go a long way to improving conditions and reducing wars.

But that, we all know, is simply not possible.

The "Greed Drive" as I call it, provides energy for people to have more "things" than others, to explore, and to invent new things or new ways of doing things. It is one of our defining traits as human beings. It is also related to our survival instinct: people want to have more assets to make sure they will survive bad times, whether the assets are food, water, money, salt, or gold.

**crashdive123** · 06-23-2008, 12:51 PM

Originally Posted by Teotwawki

How can one completely separate consideration of possible SHTF scenarios from politics?

Thoughts?

I don't think that you can, nor do I think that you should. Like you said, I'm not looking to get into a political debate. Many situations that we face are the result of politics, be they local, national, or international. Today I took my first canning class. Now that we are putting food in our gas tanks, food prices are going up. Being able to store the food I grow is more of an interest now than it ever was before. If laws are passed that make it more difficult for me to defend myself in my home, or while traveling, I need to take responsibility and prepare....or change the situation (become an activist for the issues that I believe in, or remove myself from a bad situation).

**Rick** · 06-23-2008, 03:55 PM

I agree with Crash. I don't think you can separate politics out of any scenario. And Bulrush, don't limit yourself to politicians. Whether or not you assist someone else or they assist you is a direct form of politics.

"use of intrigue or strategy in obtaining any position of power or control, as in business, university, etc." is one definition. Have a neighbor you don't particularly like so you don't bother to help them even though you could have? I guess that makes you the greedy, vindictive politician.

Whether politics is parlayed within the family, neighborhood, town, county, state or country, it plays an integral role in our overall survival capability and should be considered and included in our plans.

**Ole WV Coot** · 06-23-2008, 09:28 PM

Politics, always been and will be until the end. Unless there is an obsession with a political party, leader, dictator, religion etc which each in its own is political you are "politically correct" whatever that is at any given minute.

**BraggSurvivor** · 06-23-2008, 10:07 PM

Originally Posted by Rick

I agree with Crash. I don't think you can separate politics out of any scenario. And Bulrush, don't limit yourself to politicians. Whether or not you assist someone else or they assist you is a direct form of politics.

"use of intrigue or strategy in obtaining any position of power or control, as in business, university, etc." is one definition. Have a neighbor you don't particularly like so you don't bother to help them even though you could have? I guess that makes you the greedy, vindictive politician.

Whether politics is parlayed within the family, neighborhood, town, county, state or country, it plays an integral role in our overall survival capability and should be considered and included in our plans.

Good post Rick.

**Sam Reeves** · 06-23-2008, 11:03 PM

In an all out SHTF situation one can expect this:

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/eo/femalist.htm

**BraggSurvivor** · 06-24-2008, 12:05 AM

Originally Posted by Sam Reeves

In an all out SHTF situation one can expect this:

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/eo/femalist.htm

Thanks for the reminder Sam, gonna have to dig my holes even deeper now.

**crashdive123** · 06-24-2008, 07:18 AM

Any government can be over-reaching or over-reacting in an emergency. The images of gun confiscations during Hurricane Katrina are still vividly etched in my mind. I am encouraged by the number of laws passed post Katrina to prevent that from happening again. I suppose that I take a more optimistic view of things. This is not to say that I’m not prepared.

I always try to multiple source information that I find on the web. I view websites with a skeptical eye that espouse conspiracy theories and start out with inaccuracies.

FEMA was founded in 1979, so I’m not sure how President Kennedy issued an order to grant it additional powers in 1962. http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa090997.htm

It also raises red flags for me when titles like “Seizure of ……” are listed so freely in describing the list of Executive Orders.

**Rick** · 06-24-2008, 07:56 AM

See? This is an excellent example of what happens when looney birds are let loose on the internet. They post anything they want with little regard to investigating whether or not it's true. It doesn't take a lot of digging to separate fact from fiction:

First: EO 10995 was enacted by John Kennedy in 1962.

Assigning telecommunications management functions

* Signed: February 16, 1962
* Federal Register page and date: 27 FR 1519, February 20, 1962
* Revokes: EO 10460, June 16, 1953
* Amends: EO 10695-A (not published); EO 10705, April 17, 1957
* See: EO 11051, September 27, 1962
* Amended by: EO 11084, February 15, 1963
* Revoked by: EO 11556, September 4, 1970

Executive Order 10997
Assigning emergency preparedness functions to the Secretary of the Interior

* Signed: February 16, 1962
* Federal Register page and date: 27 FR 1522, February 20, 1962
* See: EO 10952, July 20, 1961
* Revoked by: EO 11490, October 28, 1969

Source: http://www.archives.gov/federal-regi...970.html#11556

I'm not going to go down the whole list because I think you can see the trend with just the first two.

People should fear the folks that post garbage more than the end of the world or financial collapse. It's irresponsible for someone like Sweet Liberty to report just half the story!

**BraggSurvivor** · 06-24-2008, 09:21 AM

Oh good....... the holes will stay at their current depth for now. Thanks for the clarification uncle Rick!

**Sam Reeves** · 06-24-2008, 10:33 AM

Loony birds, huh? I guess next you'll be tell me that they really didn't take peoples guns in Louisiana after Katrina.

And by "revoked" they basically mean replaced with another Executive Order. Do a little research.

Do you really think a government is going to relinquish any control once it has it?

**Rick** · 06-24-2008, 11:44 AM

Sam - Do you actually read posts or just assign your thoughts to them? MY POINT is the article is inaccurate. If there exists a EO on a subject then they should have posted the CURRENT one. Not some order that had been rescinded decades ago.

Revoked means revoked. If it had meant replaced it would have said....replaced.

But you are welcome to dig through the series of EOs until you find one. Then you can post it here for everyone to review. Until then, spend five minutes and check out your sources to see if they are even accurate.

**Sam Reeves** · 06-24-2008, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Rick

Sam - Do you actually read posts or just assign your thoughts to them? MY POINT is the article is inaccurate. If there exists a EO on a subject then they should have posted the CURRENT one. Not some order that had been rescinded decades ago.

Revoked means revoked. If it had meant replaced it would have said....replaced.

But you are welcome to dig through the series of EOs until you find one. Then you can post it here for everyone to review. Until then, spend five minutes and check out your sources to see if they are even accurate.

I'm not sure you understand how EOs work.

This one:
http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/eo/eo11000.htm

"revoked" a previous one ordered by FDR.

They replace one with another one. The government doesn't just tear one up and throw it away.

Anyway, in a SHTF situation you can expect whatever one is currently in the books to be handed down until it is replaced by a different one.

A EO is basically a protocol.

**Rick** · 06-24-2008, 01:07 PM

I completely understand how they work that's why I posted the fact they were revoked. Why I took the time to show how they were revoked. The one you just listed has been revoked. And yes, they do wipe the slate clean with outdated EOs. Some are re-instated with new EOs and some are not. And yes, Sam, they do just tear them up and throw them away. It's how we operate. You can find them listed in the Federal Register and also in Title 3 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

**Sam Reeves** · 06-24-2008, 09:15 PM

Originally Posted by Rick

I completely understand how they work that's why I posted the fact they were revoked. Why I took the time to show how they were revoked. The one you just listed has been revoked. And yes, they do wipe the slate clean with outdated EOs. Some are re-instated with new EOs and some are not. And yes, Sam, they do just tear them up and throw them away. It's how we operate. You can find them listed in the Federal Register and also in Title 3 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

Tell that to the boys in Louisiana.