Why does everyone talk about bugging out to the countryside when

>>32641631
Using the Rhodesian war is a terrible example. If you can't understand why cities are total shit in survival situations that's on you.

>>32641658
>Argentina during the economic depression
>most South American shitholes like Colombia
>Former Yugoslavia during the breakup wars
>Arizona & New Mexico before Apache raiders got BTFO
>northern Mexico 's countryside right now
>Britain vs Constantinople during the Roman Empire's collapse

Literally endless historically verifiable examples of the backwater sticks being one of the worst places to be when things go to hell.

Guess I need to state the obvious, cities are terrible to stay in during a survival situation because of so many different reasons, the raw amount of people leaving, lootings, and limited supplies that is enclosed with a abundance of scared, hungry people.

Rural areas close to cities will have the same problems because of all the people that left the city, the lucky ones.

The more rural, miles away from cities, will take longer for starvation and things of that nature to settle in.
Not to mention war parties will form in cities, hording whatever they can get their hands on. This includes military

>>32641717
Looking at actual history and current events it's obvious the exact opposite happens. Everybody abandons rural areas and bugs out to vital cities to get away from the bandit raids, lack of supplies, and collapsing infrastructure. Seriously, look at the worst parts of Africa right now.

Somebody has been reading FerFal's SHTF articles.

>>32641631

because survivalist scenarios are escapist wish fulfilment fantasies for loners

the big ''zombie apocalipse nuclear race war'' thing is just a excuse, or a way to objectify fear, the real goal is to isolate oneself in a cozy tree fortress and never have to ever leave again

same goes for anons that think theyl run for the hills and live innawoods, or ones that build bunkers and stockpile canned tomatoes, its all the same kind of escapist fantasy, its all about that one guy, and maybe his family if his wife dosent leave him, sitting on a mountain of canned beans and 5.56 rounds somewhere -safe- where -nothing bad can possibly happen-

notice how they never do logical things like plan for distribution centers or organising collectives, most often they dont even involve the extended family let alone their neighbours or gods forbid any sort of organised group of people

Because SHTF "planning" is masturabatory fantasy

Either along escapist lines
>>32641849

Or edgy Day Z IM GONNA KILL EVERYONE lines

>>32641894

the best part would be when others figure out someone is keeping a stockpile of food secret while they starve, and then linch him

>>32641849
>>32641894

Hit the nail on the fucking head. It's basically LARPing. Notice how you almost never hear survivalists talk about things like passports and offshore bank accounts that are life savers in actual government-collapsing tier emergencies? If you're going to bug out, your best bet is doing what countless ancestors have done and hopping on a plane or boat to some country doing way better than yours.

>>32641975
>your best bet is doing what countless ancestors have done and hopping on a plane or boat to some country doing way better than yours

You have to go back, Achmed.

>>32641975
If they had the means to travel they probably wouldnt desperatley wishing for society to end so that they could finally be a hero with their PSA AR

>>32641999
See the ancestors of most white Americans.

The silence of the survivalists is deafening.

I live in a rural ish area now, moved there to be closer to family. One of whom was talking about how if Hillary got elected they'd be safer out here than the nearby metropolitan city. I told her she wouldn't, to which she responded something like this
>we'll be safer from the feds here
>not really
>yes everyone here has an "unregistered"(we fucking live in TX dumbass) firearm
>plus they all deer hunt and can shoot very well
>did you take into account how fat and out of shape everyone is?
>or how no one keeps enough ammo on hand for a basic range day much less a war?
>we could loot them from dead feds
Then I tried explaining how out in the country side where there is no collateral damage the govt would just use predator drones or planes and bomb the areas they thought rebels were. Something akin to send out a patrol in mraps, take fire, then rain down arty on the fudds who are too fat to run away.

Yeah, I'm a survivalist LARPer myself but I can actually run more than a quarter mile without dying, and run/do calisthenics when I have time off from work.

>>32644502
Plus, populations of wildlife like deer are currently massively inflated by tons of food people waste, fact that industrial farms grow so many crops they write off animal scavenging, and hardly anyone hunting.

When that changes and suddenly saving food is a much higher priority + heavy hunting by people trying to supplement their diets with wild game, populations absolutely crater. My grandfather was a teenager during the Great Depression, and large game animals were practically wiped out. He lived in what's now prime Texas hunting country and didn't see a deer in the flesh until the 1950s. Locals practically took quail and turkeys to the brink, and squirrel were starting to get thin out there. Now remember that human populations are way higher than they were then. Relying on hunting is a great ticket to malnourishment.

>>32641706
>most South American shitholes like Colombia
>Arizona & New Mexico before Apache raiders got BTFO
>northern Mexico 's countryside right now

I agree that some semblance of order will be restored in cities well before it can be enforced over all of the countryside. You're safer from guerrilla movements and the like there. However, you have to first survive the immediate aftermath of the collapse for that to matter. Cities, especially with the rise of just-in-time delivery, survive off long, complicated supply chains. In the event of a major disaster, these supply chains cease to exist until the city's inhabitants have restored enough order to impose it on the countryside that grows their food and whatnot. The farther away the food-growing regions are, the harder this becomes.

Consider New Orleans after Katrina, or Port au Prince after the 2010 earthquake. Are they generally safer than an anarchic countryside? No question. But for those first few weeks, they're death traps.

>>32641631
>Safest place near the cities

AHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH

>>32641631
I have lived in both and there is major safety difference. In the country you have to worry about weather and wild life. Everyone is armed to the teeth, property crime is rare.

Inna city all bets are off, you're in for a surprise on the 92 LA riots scale and there is nothing you can do about it but hope they lube you up first.

>The cities will be full of roving packs of rapemarauders so we're gonna be in the country where it's safe and all the food grows
>what happens when the roving packs of rapemarauders leave the cities due to being the focal point of government and international response to look to the general anarchy of the countryside, where nothing can stop you except the individuals guarding each house, and at its absolutely most organized, some type of militia?
>That won't happen. The cities will be chaos and the country will be fine because the world is stereotypes

You know how all those "shtf" writers talk about how being a lone wolf is a death sentence? Yeah, if your nearest neighbor is a mile or two away and you come up against any sort of determined armed bands you probably can't hope for much more than taking a few with you.

And, as OP has said several times, there's plenty of precedent for this exact thing happening.

>>32646599
As one of the few people that has actually survived a war and SHTF situation, being near the city will be a death sentence, your odds are much better innawoods, even with thousands of other people trying the same thing. Cities will be sniper havens among other activities.

>>32641631

it is very different, the armed rhodesian farmers were facing large hoards of rural darkies seeking to take their land. I the US of A, there are few or any rural darkies, who are all congregated around cities for the easy givemethat

My take on it: if shit hits the fan in the US we'll be facing other advanced nations without much interest in being polite. There's nothing to say WMDs wouldn't be used. I'd rather be somewhere with very little strategical value and low population, like south western Vermont.

>>32646599
If by a few you mean a few stepping in punji stick traps while bubbas with hunting rifles are shooting at outsides with no legal repercussions they are going lose quite a few.

>>32646618
And yet there are numerous examples in this very thread where being in the country was a death sentence.

Don't get me wrong, you DON'T want to be in the city when infrastructure starts to fail.

But there's this pervasive idea in prepping that the country will somehow be immune to that chaos, rather than subject to its very own (sometimes much worse) brand of chaos.

I'm not shitting on your experience by any means but there are plenty of examples of rural farmers/landowners getting steamrolled by waves of evacuation. The idea that food production centers would be less subject to chaos (though it would be a secondary wave of chaos, after cities had gotten truly bad) doesn't hold to historical precedent. Especially when things get bad enough that there are warlords in the mix.

>>32641631
Because in order to survive, all you have to do is not be around brown people.

When disasters hit, whites in small towns volunteer, organize, work hard (effectively,) and have civic pride. Brown people in major urban areas do not have those attributes nor do those things.

>>32646703
New Orleans vs. literally every small town in every other parish after Katrina.

>>32646703
>plenty of examples of rural farmers/landowners getting steamrolled by waves of evacuation
Like what?

>>32646703
If it's SHTF it's chaos everyone and you're fooling yourself if you think otherwise. I know exactly what you're talking about because I experienced it. We left because when the Serbs came they surprised us and not only that by the locals turned on us too, combined with the fact we weren't armed and they were it made for a bad situation. They also had tanks and personnel carriers. We had to cross minefields, trench front lines, forests filled with dead people, etc. The reason why country and innawoods is best is because population density is lower, but that doesn't mean that you travel alone. Traveling alone is near suicide in SHTF because one wrong mistake and you're dead. The problem is if you're in the country or innawoods is that you don't want to be alone because it only takes one small group to take everything you have.

>>32646218
So Hunt short term and grow food long term?

>>32646803
Both. You're going to need every possible avenue available to live comfortably.

>>32641631
>not living in a rural area
>not establishing your own militia during SHTF
>not becoming a well known Warlord both feared and loved
>not negotiating for an important seat of power or autonomy when the State comes to reclaim what is theirs

>>32646782
Point of order: Yugoslavia was a low-trust tribal confederation masquerading as a country. It had more in common with the Middle East than any sort of functioning civil society.

File: Moving_goalposts.gif (1MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x180px

>>32646858

>>32646883
If you actually think big-city Americans are going to turn into roving warbands of killers, you're delusional. If you think rural Americans are going to turn into paranoid murderers, you're delusional twice.

Niggers will nig, the Mexicans and Asians will likely hunker down in their own communities like they did back home, white trash will get shot, and rural types will pitch in and help anyone who seems worthy of it and warn off the rest at riflepoint. You know it and I know it. We still have the remnants of a high-trust civil society, despite the best efforts of the metrosexual Left.