Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 4/27/2009 11:22:30 PM EDT
Recently read Lights Out.  Very interesting and insightful work.  Hope there is a sequel (last letters of the protagonist were from the Republic of Texas...it would take a lot to get to that point, and I'd be interested in the author's depiction).

Regardless, one thing that stood out to me was the "survival neighborhood", which was essentially a small, gated community filled with hopefully like minded individuals.  If the SHTF, close the gate, and start converting the common areas to gardens, or so the theory goes.

Interesting in theory.  But do these places exist in reality?

And if not, do you think there would be a market for such?  

I hope and pray we never end up in a SHTF scenario, but most of us are forced to live in confining urban environments for economic reasons.  If the poop got flowing during the workday it would be a challenge to make it home - even with the most super-duper BOB - to say nothing of making it out of the county to a BOL.  Think of your worst Friday afternoon rushhour times 10, as everyone tries to get out.

But there are still smallish tracts of land (say 20-30 acres) that could be bought and developed with, say 10 like-minded families willing to pay a premium for certain community features.

Any thoughts?  

Link Posted: 4/27/2009 11:42:03 PM EDT
None that I know of but it would be sweet! I do seem to remember a story of an upscale development out west that came with a fancy shooting range instead of the usual golf course.
If the price was right I would think you would get a lot of takers. There could be a problem with the equal housing people if someone felt they were discriminated against if they were unable to purchase a house they wanted because they "didn't fit the desired demographic"
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 2:07:23 AM EDT
when you find 10+ families that all get together, that have nothing more in common side s being "survivalist" that can and will work and get along...let me know.
Even if you hand chose those 10..figure 4 per family .. there will be some major personality issues.
Who will be in "charge"

what will you do when sally and tom, frank and june, decide..we dont want to work in those nasty gardens ,,we have all this freeze dried...
what will you do when they refuse to stand gaurd at 3am?
what about training, gear commanilty etc.
what will you do even if they have bought that tract of land,, force them off come shtf? what if they sell that tract to angry new yorkers who hate guns and think that you should cater to them>

ymmv
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 2:59:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By protus:
when you find 10+ families that all get together, that have nothing more in common side s being "survivalist" that can and will work and get along...let me know.
Even if you hand chose those 10..figure 4 per family .. there will be some major personality issues.
Who will be in "charge"

what will you do when sally and tom, frank and june, decide..we dont want to work in those nasty gardens ,,we have all this freeze dried...
what will you do when they refuse to stand gaurd at 3am?
what about training, gear commanilty etc.
what will you do even if they have bought that tract of land,, force them off come shtf? what if they sell that tract to angry new yorkers who hate guns and think that you should cater to them>

ymmv

Way to smash OPs dreams.

Link Posted: 4/28/2009 3:05:20 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 3:45:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DueNorth:
Originally Posted By protus:
when you find 10+ families that all get together, that have nothing more in common side s being "survivalist" that can and will work and get along...let me know.
Even if you hand chose those 10..figure 4 per family .. there will be some major personality issues.
Who will be in "charge"

what will you do when sally and tom, frank and june, decide..we dont want to work in those nasty gardens ,,we have all this freeze dried...
what will you do when they refuse to stand gaurd at 3am?
what about training, gear commanilty etc.
what will you do even if they have bought that tract of land,, force them off come shtf? what if they sell that tract to angry new yorkers who hate guns and think that you should cater to them>

ymmv

Way to smash OPs dreams.




reality sucks

Point being is that even if you got  a bunch of guys from here for example it may not work....

Ok i got 200 acres i got a place setup ,,each guy can have 2 acres to make  his place. there will be one large " group" field to plant/farm.

well off i go into the abyess of survival forums looking for all those i think may wanna come live with me.
Ok.. theres ole hawkeye,,lotta good post..AHHH OHH he has multicam.....out goes the invite....Ohh TJ,,invite,,waldo,,invite,,,,and down the line i go.

so 20 invites later 10 show up to look at the place and after a bit of talking etc all buy in....

3 years later........

One guy has a small 10x20 cabin built.....2 guys burried caches......3 guys show up 1-2 times a month to train( aka walka round wearing rattle playing rambo)
They all show up to do campouts and drink beer.
None of their families or wives show up.

SHTF............

4 of them actualy show up. 8 others show up........they are the owners of the other parcels. Seems the other guys sold them to family/friends .

So, the MZb's are out  and about.
Youve got  4 guys that know the land. 2 that actaulluy trained, the 4th is old, can shoot, but aint worth jack in the field.
The other 8,well...i guess they could use those  30-30's to keep watch with.

The wives are always complaining, the kids crying, and the teenagers going stir crazy....
4 weeks in Jane is caught with bill,,,,while bill  is " on watch".....she's married to Tom......Who is out on a patrol with sam and kevin.
Christy is knocked up by Sams teen age son, john.
The feild never got planted, and the 8 new folks have run out of food.


.....................
............



Link Posted: 4/28/2009 3:55:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2009 3:57:45 AM EDT by protus]
Originally Posted By Hawkeye:
Originally Posted By protus:
when you find 10+ families that all get together, that have nothing more in common side s being "survivalist" .................


You've failed before you even got started. If thats the route you go, then yeah, its not going to stand a chance of working.


No matter what route you take it will have some failure rate.  Who do you pick.. all young guys,who are ex mil, ? guy who have the gear,training, etc?
But dont have jack for food storage? Or a bunch of mid 40's/50's BTDT's that can not do much besides be extra eyes and ears>?

We all know that "open" invites for example such as " 2 acres of xxx for sale for the shtf.." will get alot of buyers.
It is a insc. policy to them. Push the easy button
Ill drop 4 K on 2 acres and be in a place full of others like me! For the majority it will not progress towards that.

It does not happen that way. While i know there is alot of "like minded" folks here for example, only 2% would fall in to the  percentage of folks i would actually even consider AFTER a bit of getting to know them  for canidates to buy those 2 acres!


Think of it this way.
Most here in internet land can afford a payment  to have their own BOL.  I know that if  i can afford it alot of others can as well. IF They chose to.
Yes thats is assumeing alot. Im assueming that folks take what they preach seriuosly about getting out of debt, storeing food and living better.
But that assumption is wrong  for the most part as most are not trying. Alot are, but alot are not and it shows when they post.


Would a perfect utopia of survivalist be cool to be in when the SHTF...sure it would.
But it wont happen.....to many variables.
Even with close family and freinds, there will be issues.

IMHO to the OP>

If you got the  flow to buy a large BOL go for it.
Get it started, well,shelter,planted fruit tree's, gardens... and even live there,down the road.
If you want others to "join" you  SHTF.....start meeting folks, network and start relationships.........then maybe invite  those that YOU trust  to sit down and start planning with  you.
Offer land for sale for the perfect community  offers the lazy a way to push the easy button to get their feet in teh door....and will cause major issues down the road when hard times,stress and hardships fall in your lap.


YMMV


Link Posted: 4/28/2009 4:20:12 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 4:40:54 AM EDT
The design / construction is the easy part.  The creation of a functional group is much more difficult.  The rules, the governing procedure, yadda yadda - that's the hard stuff.

If you're really interested take a look at other intentional communities.  One variety is Co-Housing.  Yes, it's generally a bunch of hippies, but they've documented one approach to make a community function, and get people to work together.
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 4:46:17 AM EDT
Better to find a nice place with good neighbors - Some places seem to self select good people.

Out in the "executive estates(2-10 acre lots)" around here, there are a lot of 'prep' minded people, in big fancy houses.  Their day jobs are executives, bankers, directors, whatnot.  But then they come home, feed cows, and shoot on the weekend.  They never run around in battle rattle, but are good neighbors to be around overall.
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 5:03:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By protus:
when you find 10+ families that all get together, that have nothing more in common side s being "survivalist" that can and will work and get along...let me know.
Even if you hand chose those 10..figure 4 per family .. there will be some major personality issues.
Who will be in "charge"

what will you do when sally and tom, frank and june, decide..we dont want to work in those nasty gardens ,,we have all this freeze dried...
what will you do when they refuse to stand gaurd at 3am?
what about training, gear commanilty etc.
what will you do even if they have bought that tract of land,, force them off come shtf? what if they sell that tract to angry new yorkers who hate guns and think that you should cater to them>

ymmv


+1

I only know of one family where everyone gets along well, and even they have fights now and then. I doubt they would stick togehter for extended periods of time during a crisis.
And blood is thicker than friendship, at least around here.
Most of us mere mortal barely stand our family a couple nights a year during holydays, for Christmas, New Year, and other special occaisons.
Living with an uncle or grandparents is a possibility, mostly due to necesity, but several families all living together under the same roof or under the command of one person is very far fetched in my opinion. I couldn't do it, I'm too much of a knowitall prick to take orders from other people. Sooner or later I'll be told to do something I dont think it's the best course of action.
If it works for others then more power too them, I sincerely think that all living under the commands of one, under the "house owners" rules, sooner or later personal goals and ambitions kick in.
We're not ants or bees.

FerFAL
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 7:31:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2009 7:34:24 AM EDT by NoStockBikes]
Human nature is a bitch. It would have to be very loose knit. I'm thinking pioneer days, where you had enough space between people that they were independent, but close enough that they could get together for a barn raising, etc. Anything too "co-op" would fail in the long term from human nature.



 
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 8:58:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2009 9:38:55 AM EDT by Orbital-Burn]
the only way I could picture this working would be if you found 10 Mormon survivalist families.  They, and the Amish, are the only people I know of who don't have differences that would tear the community apart, given half a chance.  9mm vs 45, 308 vs 30-06, 22mag vs 17hmr, Armalite vs DPMS, big and slow BOV vs light and fast BOV, answering the door naked with a cookie in mouth and AR in hand vs answering the door like a normal human, Baptist vs Assembly of God, Jew vs Christian, everyone vs athiest.....

There are too many ways that this will not work, and not enough ways that it possibly could.  In the story of Light's Out, the only one that probably would have worked was that compound that they were invited to and turned down.  But even then, where are you going to find that many people in the USA who will submit to one person's absolute authority, especially when you haven't already known them for most of your life and trust their judgment?  And democracies are fail from the beginning.
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 10:22:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2009 10:27:24 AM EDT by Cacinok]
Originally Posted By NoStockBikes:
Human nature is a bitch. It would have to be very loose knit. I'm thinking pioneer days, where you had enough space between people that they were independent, but close enough that they could get together for a barn raising, etc. Anything too "co-op" would fail in the long term from human nature.
 


this is essentially what we have discussed w/ my wife's family.  she's the oldest of 7 kids, so there will be enough families.  but we have discussed buying 100-200 acres, building cabins far enough from each other that you don't step on toes, but having a community garden, stock pens, orchards, etc.  i know and trust her family well enough, that it could work out.  there's only one brother-in-law that i would consistently feel the need to shoot, but he would at least pull his own weight work wise.  he would just drive me insane, in general.  i have no idea how well it would work, but the hope is that w/ sufficient separation, it would be doable.

@orbital burn, i think you are probably right about the Mormon/Amish thing.  for a group like this to work, the entire group would have to be on the same page on almost everything or it would fall apart.  a deeply seeded religious belief, or at least a willingness to abide by the groups belief would be essential for survival.  but again, we're getting back to a pioneer type arrangement that NSB referenced.

@bearacuda, halffast has said he plans on writing the sequel, eventually.  he is writing and posting other stuff in the fiction section here on arfcom.
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 11:11:47 AM EDT
A religious group is the way to go because they would all be on the same team.
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 11:28:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By hammerkill:
A religious group is the way to go because they would all be on the same team.


Nah there is infighting in pretty much any religion. Like someone else said, it would only work if you were Mormon or Amish.  I would prefer to have my nice like 100 acres of land and then have some good friends that live near me.
Link Posted: 4/28/2009 11:31:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By hammerkill:
A religious group is the way to go because they would all be on the same team.




When was the last time you went to church?

Link Posted: 4/29/2009 9:01:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/29/2009 9:02:03 PM EDT by Bearacuda]
Originally Posted By hammerkill:
A religious group is the way to go because they would all be on the same team.


LOL.  Guess I forgot to mention in the original post I'm a Baptist...we'd start our own little SHTF, split the community several ways, use the land that was reserved for food production to start 4 new competing churches, and then start shooting at each other oversome esoteric doctrinal issue.

Back to reality...I appreciate all your posts.  You have raised some very valid points.

At the end of the day, human nature is what it is.  Sinful and all its various manifestations - pride, greed, laziness, etc.  All of these would work against survival in any situation, be it your current neighborhood, a newly created "survival neighborhood", or on your own remote BOL populated with only your "family" (which has its own issues).

Link Posted: 4/30/2009 2:10:00 AM EDT
Lest we forget:



NECESSITY IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION
Link Posted: 4/30/2009 5:48:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/30/2009 5:49:45 AM EDT by ferfal308]
A level of organization in a tight comunity is possible, but dont expect "military" subordination, you wont get it.
At least around here, most of the time people just chip in to hire security or private guards. Or they orgainze to watch for each other and call the cops or hitting some kind of alarm when there's trouble.
Some people I know of, they agreed on everyone going out on the street, making noise and simply overwhelming the street with presence so that the bad guys just leave. Works some times, can be a disaster in others, with a more desperate armed criminal.
At best, a few hours a week is all you can expect from people.
In smaller comunities, sometimes they've organized watches and guard shifts, but in most cases it doesn't last long and people soon get tired and quit.

FerFAL
Link Posted: 4/30/2009 10:24:35 AM EDT
Originally Posted By hammerkill:
A religious group is the way to go because they would all be on the same team.


Two words: Waco, TX.
Link Posted: 4/30/2009 10:44:07 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Teague:
Originally Posted By hammerkill:
A religious group is the way to go because they would all be on the same team.


Two words: Waco, TX.


two more words:  General Discussion

if you want to bring up the case of where the government murdered a religious group, made up stories, and made up evidence, the proper place to bring that up is in GD....
Link Posted: 4/30/2009 11:07:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Orbital-Burn:
Originally Posted By Teague:
Originally Posted By hammerkill:
A religious group is the way to go because they would all be on the same team.


Two words: Waco, TX.


two more words:  General Discussion

if you want to bring up the case of where the government murdered a religious group, made up stories, and made up evidence, the proper place to bring that up is in GD....


It actually occurred to me before he posted it.  Just the way the .gov would see it probably.
Link Posted: 4/30/2009 5:28:38 PM EDT
Take a class sometime in small group psychology and you will see in a hurry why things like this arent often successful. Never say always or never but most times. Small group dynamics are crazy even in an office setting where there are positional leaders - throw that out and have a pseudo-democracy and what youve got left is bad ju ju. Better to have a nuclear family with their own setup than have this jacked up situation.
Link Posted: 4/30/2009 5:34:49 PM EDT



Originally Posted By ZombieHuntClub:


Better to have a nuclear family with their own setup than have this jacked up situation.


Yup. The best bet for a "community" is the autonomous family set ups in relative proximity. Think neighboring farms, rather than community farms. Close enough to help each other and trade when needed, far enough apart to let everyone do their own thing.



 
Link Posted: 4/30/2009 6:45:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By NoStockBikes:

Originally Posted By ZombieHuntClub:
Better to have a nuclear family with their own setup than have this jacked up situation.

Yup. The best bet for a "community" is the autonomous family set ups in relative proximity. Think neighboring farms, rather than community farms. Close enough to help each other and trade when needed, far enough apart to let everyone do their own thing.
 

Exactly my thoughts.

....And make sure the in-law's cabin is on the opposite side of the lot.

Link Posted: 4/30/2009 7:00:56 PM EDT
this is why you have one good solid group of friends, who are on the same wavelength. So when something happens you all handle business. With my people, the only thing we have a problem with now is logistics on weapons, but that is being taken care of as we speak.
Link Posted: 5/1/2009 9:47:05 AM EDT
I believe this could work under certain conditions.  Some have touched on it already by mentioning neighboring farms.  

The secret, in my opinion, is not to have a group were everyone has to agree with everything, but to have  rugged individualist as the owners.  Real "Live and Let Live" types.  Everyone buys the amount of property they want and they do what they want with it. There should be no common areas for gardens, ranges, or anything else.   If Joe doesn't want to grow a garden, that's his prerogative.  If Jim doesn't want a bunch of chickens he has to feed, so be it.  If Josh only likes to plink with his .22 and doesn't want to play Rambo with the other boys, who cares?

Everyone does what they see as best for them and theirs.  If anything needs to be spelled out as a community it goes into the deed restrictions before anyone buys anything.  However, this should only be for very basic and  fundamental items like how to handle sewage or how many dwellings can be on one piece of property.  Trying to enforce compliance with things like what rifle everyone will own will meet with no more success than getting a consensus here on the Internet does.

All this worry about who the leader is going to be is just mental masturbation.  The leaders will appear when the followers are ready to be lead.  More than likely there will be no one leader.  Someone will be who everyone looks to for help with their own garden.  One person will be the Go-To-Guy for defense if the need really arises.  Another may step up to the task of schooling the kids for the whole neighborhood.  If a real need arises, somebody will fill it.

Real survivalist tend to be intelligent, independent, and community oriented.  You won't be able to fit them into a pigeon hole with a bunch of rules and regulations, but you will be able to count on them when the chips are down.
Link Posted: 5/1/2009 10:41:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By solution_zero:
Originally Posted By NoStockBikes:

Originally Posted By ZombieHuntClub:
Better to have a nuclear family with their own setup than have this jacked up situation.

Yup. The best bet for a "community" is the autonomous family set ups in relative proximity. Think neighboring farms, rather than community farms. Close enough to help each other and trade when needed, far enough apart to let everyone do their own thing.
 

Exactly my thoughts.

....And make sure the in-law's cabin is on the opposite side of the lot.



but still in range.  just sayin'.
Link Posted: 5/1/2009 1:27:49 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Halffast:
I believe this could work under certain conditions.  Some have touched on it already by mentioning neighboring farms.  

The secret, in my opinion, is not to have a group were everyone has to agree with everything, but to have  rugged individualist as the owners.  Real "Live and Let Live" types.  Everyone buys the amount of property they want and they do what they want with it. There should be no common areas for gardens, ranges, or anything else.   If Joe doesn't want to grow a garden, that's his prerogative.  If Jim doesn't want a bunch of chickens he has to feed, so be it.  If Josh only likes to plink with his .22 and doesn't want to play Rambo with the other boys, who cares?

Everyone does what they see as best for them and theirs.  If anything needs to be spelled out as a community it goes into the deed restrictions before anyone buys anything.  However, this should only be for very basic and  fundamental items like how to handle sewage or how many dwellings can be on one piece of property.  Trying to enforce compliance with things like what rifle everyone will own will meet with no more success than getting a consensus here on the Internet does.

All this worry about who the leader is going to be is just mental masturbation.  The leaders will appear when the followers are ready to be lead.  More than likely there will be no one leader.  Someone will be who everyone looks to for help with their own garden.  One person will be the Go-To-Guy for defense if the need really arises.  Another may step up to the task of schooling the kids for the whole neighborhood.  If a real need arises, somebody will fill it.

Real survivalist tend to be intelligent, independent, and community oriented.  You won't be able to fit them into a pigeon hole with a bunch of rules and regulations, but you will be able to count on them when the chips are down.


Maybe its mental masturbation, but I doubt I’m the only what that saw what? Half a dozen proposals on building a retreat in someone’s land in the last year?
When you are in someone’s home, the owner will sooner or later want to call the shots on important decisions. I know I would.
Last night on TV, I saw a guy tearing down his own masonry house, because he had built it in his sister’s land, a few yard away from her home, and she wanted him out. The guy didn’t want to leave her the house he had paid for, so he was tearing it down with some friends.
If it’s a small community where people have reunions to see how to deal with the common problems they face, then you can accomplish certain things, but in my experience 1% of the people ( of those that even offer help ) are good to go.
I’d go for a small town or subdivision, close enough to a city with basic needs covered, including health, education and employment, and hopefully manage to move somewhere where I already know a guy or two. That way at least I’ll have a couple neighbors I know I can trust.
Other than that, people will more likely than not let you down.

FerFAL
Link Posted: 5/1/2009 4:15:38 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ferfal308:
Originally Posted By Halffast:
I believe this could work under certain conditions.  Some have touched on it already by mentioning neighboring farms.  

The secret, in my opinion, is not to have a group were everyone has to agree with everything, but to have  rugged individualist as the owners.  Real "Live and Let Live" types.  Everyone buys the amount of property they want and they do what they want with it. There should be no common areas for gardens, ranges, or anything else.   If Joe doesn't want to grow a garden, that's his prerogative.  If Jim doesn't want a bunch of chickens he has to feed, so be it.  If Josh only likes to plink with his .22 and doesn't want to play Rambo with the other boys, who cares?

Everyone does what they see as best for them and theirs.  If anything needs to be spelled out as a community it goes into the deed restrictions before anyone buys anything.  However, this should only be for very basic and  fundamental items like how to handle sewage or how many dwellings can be on one piece of property.  Trying to enforce compliance with things like what rifle everyone will own will meet with no more success than getting a consensus here on the Internet does.

All this worry about who the leader is going to be is just mental masturbation.  The leaders will appear when the followers are ready to be lead.  More than likely there will be no one leader.  Someone will be who everyone looks to for help with their own garden.  One person will be the Go-To-Guy for defense if the need really arises.  Another may step up to the task of schooling the kids for the whole neighborhood.  If a real need arises, somebody will fill it.

Real survivalist tend to be intelligent, independent, and community oriented.  You won't be able to fit them into a pigeon hole with a bunch of rules and regulations, but you will be able to count on them when the chips are down.


Maybe its mental masturbation, but I doubt I’m the only what that saw what? Half a dozen proposals on building a retreat in someone’s land in the last year?
When you are in someone’s home, the owner will sooner or later want to call the shots on important decisions. I know I would.
Last night on TV, I saw a guy tearing down his own masonry house, because he had built it in his sister’s land, a few yard away from her home, and she wanted him out. The guy didn’t want to leave her the house he had paid for, so he was tearing it down with some friends.
If it’s a small community where people have reunions to see how to deal with the common problems they face, then you can accomplish certain things, but in my experience 1% of the people ( of those that even offer help ) are good to go.
I’d go for a small town or subdivision, close enough to a city with basic needs covered, including health, education and employment, and hopefully manage to move somewhere where I already know a guy or two. That way at least I’ll have a couple neighbors I know I can trust.
Other than that, people will more likely than not let you down.

FerFAL



Sorry, I should have been more clear.  I was talking about the senario where everyone has their own house on their own property.  I'm talking about a neighborhood, not a commune.  In a neighborhood the leader is not who is appointed by himself or a group.  He is who everyone chooses to follow, perhaps in only one or two areas.  In other areas, someone else may be the leader.  In many cases, no leader is even needed.

I agree that in the senario where a group goes to one persons house, it is not likely to work long term.

David
Link Posted: 5/1/2009 9:18:37 PM EDT
Which basically leads us back to Mel Tappan's idea of just moving to a well situated rural area in a conservative community of 5,000-10,000 people.
Link Posted: 5/1/2009 9:26:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/1/2009 9:27:44 PM EDT by ferfal308]
To that I'd add, close enough to a city ( not NY or other metropolis, but still a large city) with enough social life, education, MEDICINE and job opportunities.
Most people die of diseases as they grow older. Being 15 minutes a way from a seriosu health center is importnat in my opinion.
I've rushed to the hospital too many times to ignore that fact.
Hell, as a matter of fact, now that I think about it again,  if I lived 1 hour away from a hosptial my son wouldn't even be alive right now.

FerFAL
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 5:44:59 AM EDT
The "everyone buys adjoining land" scenario I have never seen play out WELL in the real world in 23 years of doing this. Back before I moved to our retreat full time (about a decade ago), I found plenty of plots of land that were pretty cheap $300-800. an acre. I shared this with many a like minded friend. Most were professional types- doctors, PA's, business owners, insurance agents, etc. All COULD have afforded it, none bought. I won't go into details but these weren't internet "preppers" either, these were solid guys that really did prep, get out and train, etc.

I do have a friend in PA that's STUCK with a situation like this. He and a long time survival bud split up some land. After some time the bud decided he's not into this anymore, that he and his will be raptured so why prepare, etc. No the real survivalist has spent a LOT of time and money developing that land including cabins, gardens and ponds and non mentionables. Mr. I don't want to PLAY survivalist anymore now brings friends up to HIS part of the land to ride ATV's (tearing up garden plots) and hunt. The real survivalist has asked him nicely to keep these folks off the land but it came down to the "I own it I can do whatever I want with it" deal.

I know everyone poo poos the idea of going to someone else's country place because they feel like they would be "under the thumb." This is the "iron dictator" myth wherein everyone thinks that someone is going to start beating people down emotionally, maybe even physically just because it's their place.

I can see a few instances where this could happen- like for example an ad hoc group. So many times on the net you see these guys mention the "groups" they have, that met ONCE a year, are going to "start" putting up food, etc. That's NOT A GROUP folks, that's a circle jerk. Sorry, no nice way to say it. If your not getting together REGULARLY i.e, monthly working, training and growing together, you don't have a group. You can't have a real group that exists only on the net, that would be a net circle jerk.

So I CAN see a few instances of the "iron dictator" type thing coming into play when it's an ad hoc (i.e, circle jerk) group. Why? Because Joe who has lived in the city all his life probably has no idea what physical labor is. And when it's time to dig irrigation in for a garden, he's going to sit on his arse and watch instead of jumping in and helping. That won't piss people off that are working? Of course it will! That's where the human nature comes into being.

Rules, yes you need rules. They don't need to be extreme but you need common sense "golden rule" type rules. Why? Because NO ONE KNOWS THAT NOW A DAYS. I know that part will piss someone off, but have folks stay at your house for a couple of days, then spend a day picking up after them and tell me it isn't so!

But seriously, if the stuff really has hit the fan, would a smart leader want enemies on the outside AND on the inside of the wire? Exactly. So this "iron dictator" thing probably would not pan out in REAL LIFE. No offense to anyone.

Also, your going to see tendencies to that AHEAD OF TIME, if your group is a real group i.e, not a circle jerk. So Tim who is the landowner starts bitching at everyone that he wants them to mow HIS lawn at his house while he sits and sips a cold beer during a work weekend. Does Tim have the possibility of becoming an "iron dictator?" Bet your arse he does. And you should reconsider grouping up with him.

This is why you absolutely MUST get a functioning group together BEFORE the fact, NOT after the fact. You will see these tendencies and have time to back out.

My next favorite myth is the "what if I show up and the landowner won't let me in?" OK, well let's assume that you are a functioning part of this group, i,e. not some slug that never comes or helps that's just looking for an "insurance policy." This means you train with the group, you help on work weekends, you are keeping up with your preps, staying in shape, getting your family squared away, etc. Why would you NOT be allowed in? Again, common sense here- put yourself in the place of the landowner- here is someone that KNOWS your place, that KNOWS (to a degree) your capability, that has potentially traveled far from home, has no where else to go, probably has stuff at your place, and you tell him to go pack sand? What do you think their reaction will be? Exactly. Congratulations for being an idjit, you just made another enemy!

Now on the other hand, if you viewed the group as just an "insurance policy", never trained with the group, never really got to know the members, NEVER helped with any projects, didn't pre-position anything at the retreat, etc. What are you chances of being accepted in? SLIM AT BEST. Why? Because your an unknown entity and a major liability. In that case, you better be ready to catch up on the WORK you didn't bother to do ahead of time.

Is a functioning survival group and a working retreat a viable goal? Sure it is. But I'm afraid it's one I've seen a very small percentage of people actually accomplish- less than 1%  I've interacted with literally thousands of like minded folks in the last 23 years and I only know of a handful of real groups. It takes regular work, and most people are just looking for a quick fix now a days, which is why most people's 'groups' don't last.

Just some random thoughts in response to some of this thread. No offense meant to anyone, I'm debating IDEAS here, not people

Lowdown3
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 6:53:21 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Lowdown3:
I do have a friend in PA that's STUCK with a situation like this. He and a long time survival bud split up some land. After some time the bud decided he's not into this anymore, that he and his will be raptured so why prepare, etc. No the real survivalist has spent a LOT of time and money developing that land including cabins, gardens and ponds and non mentionables. Mr. I don't want to PLAY survivalist anymore now brings friends up to HIS part of the land to ride ATV's (tearing up garden plots) and hunt. The real survivalist has asked him nicely to keep these folks off the land but it came down to the "I own it I can do whatever I want with it" deal.

But if you saw this happen with two guys, ( somewhat similar to what I saw with the guy finally tearing down his own home) how would that work in an even tighter situation.
Think of a family. You admit it yourself. Once things get “complicated”, or something happens, one family member, usually the father, shouts what everyone should do, and everyone follows no questions asked. Same for some serious quick decisions of different nature.
Besides, just think about the amount of people that probably thought they were forming a great group without knowing in the end it would end up in a circus.
Just imagine this for a second. Divorce rate is 50% for couples these days, make that 70% if it you second marriage .
“Ok Bill, you know our little survival plan, I want my share, ½ of the BOV truck, ½ of that land we bought for BOL, same for guns, ammo, etc, etc “
There’s one real case that I know of where this is just what happened, but lets not even mention it.
The “Joe who has lived in the city” and wont do hard work, I think that’s not much of a concern. I think that you can easily tell if he’s that kind of guy after meeting and working along with him a few times.
“Hey, I’m building a little root cellar/shooting range/ in laws cabin this weekend, wanna come help and learn how to build it yourself?”
“I’d love too, but my analyst told me not to engage in physical active for  a few years because I may be allergic to it….”

Rules, yes you need rules. They don't need to be extreme but you need common sense "golden rule" type rules. Why? Because NO ONE KNOWS THAT NOW A DAYS. I know that part will piss someone off, but have folks stay at your house for a couple of days, then spend a day picking up after them and tell me it isn't so!

My brother visiting. He leaves clothes on the floor all the time when he comes visiting. I know it would be nearly impossible to live with him under the same roof for extended periods of time… and he’s my brother!
I told him “Serious, bro it’s not cool that my wife has to be picking up all your dirty laundry from the floor all day long, and for the love of God, would it kill you to clean a glass after using it?”
He said ok, ok, but I could tell he was pissed by my ( at least to me) extremely rational request.
Of the few people I know that just get along perfectly, they’ve all failed the test of time, during good times, sometimes with catastrophic results. One couple I know of that was very close (maybe too close) one ran away with the other guys’ wife, and after a year or two the ones left behind married themselves. This was 15 years ago, both couples divorced a few years later. This happened to as friend of mine in school, poor girl went through hell with such sloppy and self centered parents.
There’s some people that tried forming groups in Patagonia. ( land is cheap, lots of water, very low population, so many guys, including Americans tried that here).
Of the two or three groups I know of, none lasted more than a few years, even months.  Maybe a few years is al you need, but still they ended up braking up.
There was this religious group in Chile, they were supposed to be “normal” Christians. They got wackier and they ended up completely nuts, the cops had to take away the kids.
I’m sure not envious of anyone that has a success story with his group, as a matter of fact I’d like to hear some, but in my opinion chances of long term success are very small. I’ll put my bets on the small community that manages to talk about their problems, try finding solutions, etc.
Guess what I’m trying to say, I certainly don’t believe in a “group”, but I believe in networking and helping each other, with people maintaining their independence, or as much of it as they require to be ok.
I’m still not sure about which state to move to, so if anyone has a state or county to suggest that would be great too::)
Anyone has personal stories of group going well? How about networking with other close members of the community or something else in that line of thought?
Guess my experience so far was too crappy and I don’t trust people around me much. At least not when you really need them.

FerFAL
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 10:26:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/2/2009 10:28:37 AM EDT by protus]


The secret, in my opinion, is not to have a group were everyone has to agree with everything, but to have rugged individualist as the owners. Real "Live and Let Live" types. Everyone buys the amount of property they want and they do what they want with it. There should be no common areas for gardens, ranges, or anything else. If Joe doesn't want to grow a garden, that's his prerogative. If Jim doesn't want a bunch of chickens he has to feed, so be it. If Josh only likes to plink with his .22 and doesn't want to play Rambo with the other boys, who cares?






Ok....



So you buy 10 acres next to Joe and Sam.

YOu come up twice month, on your off time. You have a well dug, planted and tried to maintain some garden space and even built a small cabin/home.

Sam on the other hand hasnt done jack, and Joe shows up to just "train" and get drunk on weekends ot get away from his wifes shopping sprees.

But you guys all know why you bought the land, you all do go out and train practice etc with your multi cam,molle and carbines etc and talk about that damn NWO and how da man is holding you down.
yes im being smart!





Now... the SHTF for real.

They show up. with family in tow...( what about about friends they brought up that you dont know about..." dude i got this kick ass place for shtf you should come check it out..."



Now what?



YOU have the garden, YOU have the Well and YOU have the home....They dont have JACK.





Now your stuck havng to provide for them....do you not think they wont come asking for help, for food,water,shelter.

Yes well will help freinds, but to beh onest if i put in all my $ and free time in making "my retreat" susutainable, and they have not do you think i just wanna hand it over!



Would you ?



Can i showup right now and expect you to feed,protect and shelter me?
Lets use L/O for example.



What if 4 families refused to DO what the rest of community wanted to? then what. kick them out,,let them get killed ( Oh well thats johhny section of wire,,screw that..lets wait tillthe MZB's hit main and 5th)



Im playing devils advbocate here ...





some thoughts,,,ramblings etc.
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 12:04:12 PM EDT



Originally Posted By protus:



The secret, in my opinion, is not to have a group were everyone has to agree with everything, but to have rugged individualist as the owners. Real "Live and Let Live" types. Everyone buys the amount of property they want and they do what they want with it. There should be no common areas for gardens, ranges, or anything else. If Joe doesn't want to grow a garden, that's his prerogative. If Jim doesn't want a bunch of chickens he has to feed, so be it. If Josh only likes to plink with his .22 and doesn't want to play Rambo with the other boys, who cares?






Ok....



So you buy 10 acres next to Joe and Sam.

YOu come up twice month, on your off time. You have a well dug, planted and tried to maintain some garden space and even built a small cabin/home.

Sam on the other hand hasnt done jack, and Joe shows up to just "train" and get drunk on weekends ot get away from his wifes shopping sprees.

But you guys all know why you bought the land, you all do go out and train practice etc with your multi cam,molle and carbines etc and talk about that damn NWO and how da man is holding you down.
yes im being smart!





Now... the SHTF for real.

They show up. with family in tow...( what about about friends they brought up that you dont know about..." dude i got this kick ass place for shtf you should come check it out..."



Now what?



YOU have the garden, YOU have the Well and YOU have the home....They dont have JACK.





Now your stuck havng to provide for them....do you not think they wont come asking for help, for food,water,shelter.

Yes well will help freinds, but to beh onest if i put in all my $ and free time in making "my retreat" susutainable, and they have not do you think i just wanna hand it over!



Would you ?



Can i showup right now and expect you to feed,protect and shelter me?
Lets use L/O for example.



What if 4 families refused to DO what the rest of community wanted to? then what. kick them out,,let them get killed ( Oh well thats johhny section of wire,,screw that..lets wait tillthe MZB's hit main and 5th)



Im playing devils advbocate here ...





some thoughts,,,ramblings etc.
You're absolutely correct, which is why there has to be more autonomy, more space. Need water, sure, I've got a well. Come and get all you can carry. Everyone needs to be self reliant first and foremost. Nobody has a section, nobody has any responsibility to the group except for good natured cooperation, quid pro quo, mutually beneficial type stuff. Help me do this, I'll help you do that, etc. As soon as it becomes a "It's your turn to...", then it's goatfuck time. Sure there will be redundancy, but with self reliance comes the ability to say "Fuck you" to anyone who is not helpful. Security will arise on an as needed basis. I love my pioneer analogies. The Indians weren't constantly attacking. If the need is truly there for squad tactics training, then people will do it. Or stay home and smoke weed, in which case, fuck them.



I think I've told the story on here about the small town in SoDak that lost power for a couple weeks. A couple guys had generators and they drove around and let their neighbors run their refrigerators, furnaces, etc for a bit. Except for the people who didn't help other people out. They got skipped.





 
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 12:34:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By hammerkill:
A religious group is the way to go because they would all be on the same team.


Until the army sets your compound on fire and drives into it with tanks
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 1:04:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By protus:
The secret, in my opinion, is not to have a group were everyone has to agree with everything, but to have rugged individualist as the owners. Real "Live and Let Live" types. Everyone buys the amount of property they want and they do what they want with it. There should be no common areas for gardens, ranges, or anything else. If Joe doesn't want to grow a garden, that's his prerogative. If Jim doesn't want a bunch of chickens he has to feed, so be it. If Josh only likes to plink with his .22 and doesn't want to play Rambo with the other boys, who cares?



Ok....

So you buy 10 acres next to Joe and Sam.
YOu come up twice month, on your off time. You have a well dug, planted and tried to maintain some garden space and even built a small cabin/home.
Sam on the other hand hasnt done jack, and Joe shows up to just "train" and get drunk on weekends ot get away from his wifes shopping sprees.
But you guys all know why you bought the land, you all do go out and train practice etc with your multi cam,molle and carbines etc and talk about that damn NWO and how da man is holding you down. yes im being smart!


Now... the SHTF for real.
They show up. with family in tow...( what about about friends they brought up that you dont know about..." dude i got this kick ass place for shtf you should come check it out..."

Now what?

YOU have the garden, YOU have the Well and YOU have the home....They dont have JACK.


Now your stuck havng to provide for them....do you not think they wont come asking for help, for food,water,shelter.
Yes well will help freinds, but to beh onest if i put in all my $ and free time in making "my retreat" susutainable, and they have not do you think i just wanna hand it over!

Would you ?

Can i showup right now and expect you to feed,protect and shelter me?



Lets use L/O for example.

What if 4 families refused to DO what the rest of community wanted to? then what. kick them out,,let them get killed ( Oh well thats johhny section of wire,,screw that..lets wait tillthe MZB's hit main and 5th)

Im playing devils advbocate here ...


some thoughts,,,ramblings etc.






You don’t even have to get that extreme.
Think 4 or 5 families, each with their kids. Everyone gets along well, even the wives and teenage kids.
Lets suppose they bought the land all together, each paying their %, everyone is happy with the distribution, everyone trains, the wives get along great, so do the kids. No one gets drunk or invites strangers.
So far so good, right? Well, this scenario is pretty much impossible but lets keep supposing everything is great.
The things start getting just a bit rough, as of now (the current situation) , people getting fired, people loosing their jobs. You grow some of the food, but you need and want more than food, not to mention, we now have 20 people to feed including kids.
Security? Out of the 20 persons, lets suppose 10 are fit grown ups. We’ve discussed the amount of people you need for realistic based security, and with 10 persons you are getting close but not there yet, not if you want serious 24hs. security. We’re talking half of the fit adults spending their time on security, with rather long shifts.
You quickly see, you need more than 10 people, and even if you can find them, can you afford to house them and feed them, even pay them, or are you planning on them working for free?
So after a few months one of the guys gets a real good job offer, and we’ll it’s been great guys but this is too good to pass. It includes a house in a gated community with professional hired security, the place is great, the family decides to move.
Another guy gets tired and decides to retire to Costa Rica, things are relatively well there in spite of everything and they’ve always liked it. Their money there goes a much longer way, and their saving would allow them to retire and live well. They are gone.
Another family talks about it, and they decide they want to move back to their old neighborhood. SHTF or whatever you want to call it isn’t quite what they expected, no MZB or zombies around, and they decide to go back, the kids want to go to college there.
And you are now barely managing to keep the family fed, barely managing to keep you insurance and other bills paid, you no longer have real security, and crime is bad enough people you previously considered good neighbors are now either asking for some spare stuff you may give them, or their kids are just helping themselves from your crops.
Lets not forget we got here on an extremely positive makeup situation. More than likely a few wives, or some of the guys will have problems, problems will get worse, and things start braking up, families fight and people start getting divorced. Teenagers and young adults say thanks, but no thanks, and go their own way.
How does that sound?


FerFAL
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 11:04:03 PM EDT
Location where I grew up was kinda similar.

About four miles east of town (a college town of about 50,000) on a highway connecting the town to the interstate (interstate was a good 10-miles away). Anyway, off this highway was one road heading back into farmland about three miles. About half a mile in were two different parallel roads off the main road and connected on the back side making a "loop." There were about 100 houses in this neighborhood all on half acre lots. Not exactly what was described in the story, but a bit similar enough, story made me think of the ole neighborhood.    
Link Posted: 5/3/2009 5:20:12 AM EDT
Couple more misconceptions about groups-

Communal- not sure where this idea came about but a lot of folks seem to think that "survival group" = "commune." Two very different animals guys! I have yet to see ONE group that was operated under the auspices of what is yours is mine and what is mine is yours. It just doesn't happen. This idea that you arrive, chuck all your ammo, med supplies and food in one big pot with everyone is nutty. NO ONE DOES THAT (at least that I've seen in 23 years).

The way it (typically) works- most groups will "require" that a family have a certain amount of supplies- i.e, a year supply of food. Why is that "required?" Because some people WILL slack. A real group will typically want to see a prospect gather a certain amount of supplies before even TALKING TO THEM! Why? Because people that are serious in this are serious about food storage. I've never seen someone who didn't take food storage seriously make it long term as a survivalist (long term meaning say a decade or so).

Now what's the flip side to this? The flip side is that someone may be able to join the group with the "minimum" amount of food storage and never go much further than that. Here's where group encouragement and conformity come into being. I've heard people tell others- "Listen Frank I love you and your family, but your coming with 5 different flavors of AR's but have done nothing with your food storage, I ain't going to feed you later on."

Now the ONE thing that I have seen work that CAN doesn't have to be, done with group involvement is a group food supply. This is usually over and above any personal requirements for storing food. I.e, the individual families still have to store food on their own. However a couple times a year each family kicks in $30 or $50. and the group puts up a pile of food with that combined money. The idea being a group backup food supply. If you used grains and legumes you could put up a pile of food quickly, even in a small group. It's made perfectly clear that having this "backup" does NOT negate any family from storing food on their own. What it does is it covers Johnny FNG that only has the minimum 3 month supply if TSHTF right after he joins. It also gives the group extra food as backup, for barter, charity, whatever they want to do with it. The most important thing is that is solves the "Joe isn't storing food" dilema if it comes up.

The other myth seems to be that EVERYONE will be living together under one roof. Pictures of 40 people hobbled together in a barn or in a fallout shelter come to mind. Again, from what I've seen and witnessed, this is far from reality.

Shelter is a big survival priority whether we are crashed in the Andes, lost near Gila Bend or waiting out SHTF in the woods. I would expect any decent survivalist to have several layers of redundancy for shelter. Over the long term, as a retreat gets established, the landowner might allow group members to park RV's and campers there, build small cabins, etc.

Yes, living together under one roof long term would really SUCK! Fernando's story of his brother staying with them represents just the tip of the iceberg!  Yet if every family had their "own" space that hopefully they have worked on and for (thereby developing some sense of responsibility about) things would be different. That being said, TSHTF is well, TSHTF, not a weekend slumber party, people would have to be flexible and learn to work together- hence why I keep stressing the "ahead of time" preps not the ad hoc net circle jerk idea.

The land ownership thing has it's pluses and minuses-

The pluses-

*People will be more willing to dig their feet in and defend it, because it's THEIR'S.
*People (in theory) will be more willing to care for and develop it, again, because it's THEIR'S.

The minuses-

*It tends to make people haughty, prideful and selfish. Look at my example of my buddy up north, his "no longer wants to play survivalist" friend got haughty and selfish- "well it's MY property too"- despite the fact that they had talked extensively and agreed long ahead of time that the property would be a survival retreat, NOT a drunken hunt/atv camp. Pride ruins more relationships than anything else.

*Opsec issues- Some people can't help but brag. "I just bought 30 acres in Arkansas, it's 2 miles from Bull Shoals, big hill overlooking the White River." Next thing he's organizing a hunting trip there on the weekends against the previous agreement made with the co-owner.

Ferfal brought up some good points on an economic slowdown (the media calls depressions recessions up here so as not to scare the sheep)  Very few people would probably bug out that far ahead of time. Should they bug out that far ahead of time? That's for you to decide. I "bugged out" 10 years ago and never have regretted it. That being said most people would not. Therefore having an older guy that's maybe retired to live on the site, or as I've talked about before, meeting up with country bound survivalists who already live in safe areas and gathering up with them would work also. That way someone is always "minding the fort."

On the flip side, let's say a member loses his job. He's messed around and is in debt up the ying yang (Bad survivalist, no arfcom for you) , he loses his house or gets kicked out of his rental, etc. Well guess what, the one thing he did do right was stay in good standing with that group. Now he's got a place to go and live. I'm sure it's not the Chipboard McMansion he just lost in the suburbs, but it's a place he can probably stay for a while for free or pretty darn close. Perhaps he "pays" the group some trivial amount like $100. a month to live at the retreat plus keeping the place up while he lives there, etc. Between this and his supplies, what he can garden, etc. he can LIVE. Perhaps the job situation is better near the retreat anyways. The point is, he has OPTIONS now versus living under the overpass.

Will and attitude- another misconception is that once you join a group, your opinion, feelings and will go out the window and crash land somewhere else. Again, I've NEVER seen a functioning group that was like this. Now is their a time when sitting down and discussing things as a committee isn't possible, yes of course. Here again is where competent leadership that people trust to make good decisions that move the group forward comes into play. Yes everyone thinks they know better as Ferfal stated and I agree with this 100%. The only ways you overcome that is with time and experience.

I remember hearing one very heated dispute over where to put a firewood shed in proximity to a team house. One very vocal guy wanted to put it directly next to the house (a stick frame house). He wanted this because he was very lazy and even walking 20 yards to get wood was "work" to him. He was the kind of guy that could sway "weak minds" and people would give into him just to get him to shut up (like any other spoiled child). His argument seemed to make sense- who wants to get shot walking out to get firewood right? It was discussed "in a committee" LOL and the point was brought up that 7 cords of firewood (this was up north) right next to a stick frame house constituted a major fire hazard, also bugs could be present in the wood that would affect sanitation issues that close to the house. Once that was discussed, everyone understood why it had to be a little bit away from the team house.

In other words, communication solved that problem without (too much) drama. The landowner could have played his trump card ("it's my place and that's where I want it") but he didn't, he clearly demonstrated the tactical and health advantages to NOT having it stacked alongside the house.

This being said, it's important for folks to realize that when you are joining an established group, the responsibility to conform rests on you. Oh "conform" bad word right? Not talking about koolaid here, talking about actions, attitudes, etc. If everyone in the group is friendly and thoughtful to others, and you come in rude and selfish, how long do you think you will last? You can only bullshit so long, most people can see through "masks" fairly easily.

Lowdown3
Link Posted: 5/3/2009 5:40:19 AM EDT
Top Top