Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Time for one of my famous rants which you may enjoy, ignore, flame or otherwise digest at your leisure! (or not)
What does the word "survivalist" mean to you?
If you honestly appraised yourself and your abilities would you live up to expectations?
To me a true survivalist means having and practicing the ability to live sustainably and independently, being highly adaptable to a large variety of circumstances and having the grit to make it though any adverse circumstance that doesn't kill you.
The ultimate "survivalist" would be a jack of all trades; He/she could fabricate anything from houses to clothes, maintain and repair various tools/machines and be reasonably skilled in pretty much everything they do. A true survivalist could be dropped naked in the forest...when you found them after a couple months they would have clothes, shelter, a full belly and a sound, rational mind. A true survivalist could also accomplish the same thing if dropped naked in the center of New York.
Now the kind of people I don't consider part of the club:
"Constitutionalists" An unfortunate term, as it should be good to believe in the Constitution...
These are the kind of people that refuse to get their car registered/insured/licensed because of their "Right to Travel" or refuse to pay taxes because they consider themselves a "sovereign nation" and so forth.
The major problem with "constitutionalists" is they fail to appreciate the nature of power. They try to twist legal logic and mine obscure bits in a ultimately selfish endeavor to beat the Man at his own game...but they never seem to realize they share the world with 7 billion other people who have to live together on the same planet somehow and that ALL laws are made-up in the first place to accomplish that. Laws are valid as per the "law of the jungle" for as long as the powers behind it have the power to physically enforce said made-up laws; you don't have the ability to make up your own laws anymore than you have the ability to dictate the weather or debate with a piece of wood over whether it should catch fire or not.
In other words, a "Constitutionalist" would try to argue with a Grizzly Bear over it's subordinate place in the food chain rather than respect it's power, recognize his actual place in the grand scheme of things and act accordingly. That's NOT a good way to survive, BTW, so just refusing to play the game is NOT survivalism.
Armchair Commandos:
Yep, those guys that own 50 black rifles and haunt you local gun stores everywhere. They make up their own "training exercises" and dream of the day when SHTF so they can be Lord Death, but they've probably never experienced real death and suffering in their lives. They are living in a "Call of Duty" inspired fantasy world that just isn't real life. A true survivalist could get dinner with only the things around them in nature; I know some AC's who couldn't get dinner with an entire arsenal. Survivalism isn't about the gear, it's a toolbox of skills and a state of mind. If you are survivalist, you should do just as good with an old muzzleloader or even a bow as you would with a tricked out SCAR and 10K rounds of ammo.
So where do I rate? I don't think I'm any of the above. I've been LE trained, dealt with plenty of death, adventured across South America, tested myself on several wilderness survival camping trips. and believe I've got the grit from past experience, but I don't know if I'd make it anymore if I was dropped naked in the forest. I like man-toys as much as the next guy, but I don't have the skills or desire to be a commando.(plus it's just not the same when set on semi only ). I'm out of practice too.
I am OK with living within the law, because ultimately it benefits the whole in a increasingly more crowded and tense world and I now live a cushy life in the burbs, have a boring desk job and have gotten fat and complacent over the last few years. I like to think I could just walk away from it all at any time and be OK, but I'm not so sure anymore.
It's hard to be a survivalist when life is so damn easy. Anyway, Whatdayathink?
I think your interpretation of "Constitutionalist" is skewed.
The Constitution has all of the laws you seek to prevent anarchy, without any of the socialist, nanny-pandering fooferaw that has been added to it and 'interpreted' into it, around it, and beside it. I consider myself a strong Constitutionalist. The descriptive words I think that you are looking for when you discuss "constitutionalists" as above are, rather, "anarchistic libertarians" or "laissez-faire libertarians" - those who deny that any law is necessary for the free thinking and independent individual. Constitutionalists desire a return to the Federally-enforced laws solely stated in the Constitution, and a rejection of Federally-enforced egalitarianism. We are NOT all equal, and that is the failure of the liberals who insist that equality is forced by law. We all have different abilities, goals, and talents, and minimal laws such as the Constitution permit success and failure (failure is necessary from which to learn) within each of those unique abilities.
In any society of two or more people (yes, even in marriage!) there has to be fairness and the opportunity for fair trade and fair treatment, the ability of two or more cognizant adults to reach a fair agreement as to trade, achievement of goals, and mutual aid toward growth and stablility. Minimal laws enhance, not hamper, these abilities; i.e., you can do what you want, as long as you actively harm no one else's abilities or rights, and as long as you do not ask/demand/require anyone else to pay for it by fraud or by force. Too many rules limit and force people to conform, and take away their freedoms thereby. A marriage contract is, in essence, a Constitution; one that permits each individual their own freedoms and rights wthout infringing on their partner's.
A survivalist, to me, is what Robert Heinlein described in his book "Time Enough For Love" - when you can rub blue mud in your belly button, just like all of the people around you, and swear that you believe in a god that can make light out of swamp mud and food out of thin air - and then walk away and do your own thing efficiently, productively, and underneath the radar - you are a survivalist.
Now the kind of people I don't consider part of the club:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango
"Constitutionalists" An unfortunate term, as it should be good to believe in the Constitution...
These are the kind of people that refuse to get their car registered/insured/licensed because of their "Right to Travel" or refuse to pay taxes because they consider themselves a "sovereign nation" and so forth.
I don't really see how being a sovereign citizen and a survivalist is mutually exclusive, as if one can't be both. That kind of seems to be the implied overtone there.
Many sovereign citizens are not survivalists, or "preppers," as you probably have observed. But yet many of them don't really claim to be that, and I don't think any of them ever really said that simply holding those views makes them a survivalist, in and of itself. Some are only interested in the politics and philosophy thing. Others, however, might be into the survival thing. They are separate endeavors, though survivalist skills can probably serve as much use to them considering they often put themselves in legal jeopardy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango
Armchair Commandos:
Yep, those guys that own 50 black rifles and haunt you local gun stores everywhere. They make up their own "training exercises".....
Survivalism isn't about the gear, it's a toolbox of skills....
A true survivalist could get dinner with only the things around them in nature; I know some AC's who couldn't get dinner with an entire arsenal.
If you are survivalist, you should do just as good with an old muzzleloader or even a bow as you would with a tricked out SCAR and 10K rounds of ammo.
You frame survivalism as a toolbox of skills, but yet you sort of poo poo and dismiss the "gun guys" who buy lots of nifty (if not also expensive) "tacti-kewl" gear, and who spend endless hours doing practice drills which you seem to denigrate.
A skill is a skill.... If they want to train with "cool black rifles," running all kinds of drills like certain YouTubers who shall remain nameless, so what? It's still a skill.... a survival skill, in fact. Specifically, training for either defensive of offensive situations. That's sometimes part of surviving in life in a world filled with people who want to do you harm.
You say that many of those gun guys may lack bushcraft or hunting skills, which more than likely is true enough (most bushcraft and survivalist people probably don't even practice enough - so its not just the gun guys who are guilty of not putting in the required time), if they don't also practice those skills. Some might not. Some do.
But again, just as with the sovereign citizens group, I think a false dichotomy is being portrayed to kind of malign these groups. These things are not mutually exclusive. There's no rule that say's you can't practice both skills, and be highly proficient in both.
"Constitutionalists" An unfortunate term, as it should be good to believe in the Constitution...
These are the kind of people that refuse to get their car registered/insured/licensed because of their "Right to Travel" or refuse to pay taxes because they consider themselves a "sovereign nation" and so forth.
The major problem with "constitutionalists" is they fail to appreciate the nature of power. They try to twist legal logic and mine obscure bits in a ultimately selfish endeavor to beat the Man at his own game...but they never seem to realize they share the world with 7 billion other people who have to live together on the same planet somehow and that ALL laws are made-up in the first place to accomplish that. Laws are valid as per the "law of the jungle" for as long as the powers behind it have the power to physically enforce said made-up laws; you don't have the ability to make up your own laws anymore than you have the ability to dictate the weather or debate with a piece of wood over whether it should catch fire or not.
In other words, a "Constitutionalist" would try to argue with a Grizzly Bear over it's subordinate place in the food chain rather than respect it's power, recognize his actual place in the grand scheme of things and act accordingly. That's NOT a good way to survive, BTW, so just refusing to play the game is NOT survivalism.
We all have a right to our own opinion and interpretations (for now), but your view of a "Constitutionalist" is obviously from a Liberal's POV. There may well be folks out there as you describe. They may even claim to be "Constitutionalists." From my POV, they are not. There is something more to that mindset. In fact, it sounds to me more like a liberal hippy from the sixties. Or the Lafferty brothers (living in Utah, you may remember them).
My idea of a "Costitutionalist" is simply someone who still believes in the US Constitution and its intent/philosophy. And it is my opinion that most of the US of A either no longer believe the document to be worth the paper it's written on (especially most of our government officials on both sides--they've more than proven it over the last twenty years), really don't understand the document at all, or never learned of it in school (a good chunk of our populace--they've been too busy learning how to put condoms on twinkies and have no time for such unimportant balderdash as freedom and liberty).
The Constitution DOES grant the individual the right to be captain of his/her own destiny. It does NOT grant the right to trample on the rights of others. For some reason our modern overconsumption-n-entitlement generation have it in their head that liberty=hedonism/selfishness/egoism. Like some Billy the Kid type. That bull**it. If you are restricting others' liberty in the name of your own liberty, you don't understand liberty. My favorite little jingle is "live and let live." Too bad it's so out of style.
BTW, I don't have to register my car if I don't want to. I simply don't have to drive (although, in this case, I DO drive, so I abide by the rules of the game I volunteered into). I don't have to be radiated or molested in an airport. I simply don't fly. I don't have to abide by an HOA. I simply don't live in one. I don't have to be forced to buy insurance by the government. I simply live on what I've earned in the past and make less than poverty-level wages starting in 2014. Etc, etc, etc, etc... See how it works? Ghandi was onto something. I don't have to be a radical toting an AK to get out of something I don't wish to comply with. There's more often than not a passive way out. Folks just aren't smart enough to screw one another absolutely and permanently.
The ultimate "survivalist" would be a jack of all trades; He/she could fabricate anything from houses to clothes, maintain and repair various tools/machines and be reasonably skilled in pretty much everything they do. A true survivalist could be dropped naked in the forest...when you found them after a couple months they would have clothes, shelter, a full belly and a sound, rational mind. A true survivalist could also accomplish the same thing if dropped naked in the center of New York.
OK, I'm with ya on the Constitutionalists and the Armchair Commandos...insofar as neither of them have anything to do with survivalism. Some survivalists may ALSO be in those camps, but it has little/nothing to do with their being survivalists.
But I really disagree with your definition of a "survivalist". Part of it describes what someone can "fabricate" or "repair", and the other just describes Rambo, or Jungle Jim/Tarzan stuff. There's no reason any of us would be dropped naked either in the forest or "the center of New York" (which is Central park, if you mean Manhattan). All of that stuff is just silliness and romanticism. Far worse things than that may be headed our way!
I'll give you MY definition of survivalism: Caring enough about oneself and one's family to stay informed about possible threats, preparing to minimize the impact of any threats, to be disciplined about saving funds in order to purchase supplies and extra food, clothing, gear, etc; to learn how to protect loved ones from those who would hurt them (whether using firearms or pepper spray), and to live a low-key lifestyle that almost makes you disappear into the fabric of society and not stand out in any way.
In short, my definition of survivalism is about LOVE -- for life, for freedom, for family, for neighbors, for the nation and all that it stands for. Without love, we are all a bunch of selfish whiners who care only for ourselves. With love, we can collectively overcome just about anything that man, beast, or nature can throw at us. With love, we can protect what is important to us. Care for the soil, and it will produce for you. Care for your gear well, and it will work for you. Care about the next guy, who may not be doing so well, and he will repay you in spades. If he doesn't, someone else will.
I just demand the same rights we had right up until the 1970's almost everywhere, and still have in some areas of the USA. Insisting on having basic property rights is often put down by serfs who cant stand to see freedom and personal responisbilty in action.
As far as the consitution goes a world class creep, the late Chairman Mao of China does think all power resides in the state via the barrel of a gun.
He is a POS and you work around him.
Click here: Jerzy Kosinski - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia wrote some very good novels where theme is getting around and over statist goons in the old Eastern Block. It can really be entertaining how he gets into the mind of the goon. He then goes to the USA and picks up where he left off.
As far as guns go they are tools like a set of wrenches.
All good rebuttals... I'm not trying to prove or argue any particular point here, just start a conversation.
It does go to show that everyone has their own idea of what is and isn't a survivalist, constitutionalist, ect. and I'm no exception. Keep 'em comming...
Random musing: Defining concepts is always interesting. We are often under the impression that most people view concepts the same way we do (even if they oppose them). Then when we go through the exercise of trying to define it, it's often interesting to see that people define things differently, and it makes one wonder if other people really see it the way we do at all.
Either (a) people view concepts much more differently than we had ever expected, else (b) the difference is accounted for not so much because people view the concept differently, but because articulating the concept is a challenge insofar as it is hard to reduce the sum total of ones understanding of the concept in a brief description.
Anyway....
Survivalism means to me, the acquisition of knowledge ("skills") in conjunction with either the creation or acquisition of physical tools, with the objective of being able to use those skills and tools to:
(a) attenuate or eliminate the negative effects of myriad types of exigent circumstances (typically beyond ones agency), and which
(b) can aid in the adaption to elected lifestyle changes where one removes themselves, either substantially or in full, from a state of dependency upon others for most needs and wants (particularly for biological needs) such that a situation which would otherwise be considered exigent if one did not possess such skills, becomes much more tolerable (if not also preferential and pleasant).
You just pegged me to a T, but I do it for grins and giggles for something to do.
This: "To me a true survivalist means having and practicing the ability to live sustainably and independently, being highly adaptable to a large variety of circumstances and having the grit to make it though any adverse circumstance that doesn't kill you.
The ultimate "survivalist" would be a jack of all trades; He/she could fabricate anything from houses to clothes, maintain and repair various tools/machines and be reasonably skilled in pretty much everything they do. A true survivalist could be dropped naked in the forest...when you found them after a couple months they would have clothes, shelter, a full belly and a sound, rational mind.
But I sure wouldn't want to in NYC!
The times I would not want to start naked is in say the middle of January, Feb, or March. Being started Naked in the other 3 seasons would be ok.
I consider myself a Consist, but I don't think of automotive registry as anything that is as you say. On the other hand the fees charged these days are way out of line. The Feds have grown fat off the labor of the common man.
It's time for term limits, and the end of the Professional Poly Tic.
I can and have survived in multiple situations all over the world. I can, and have adapted and overcome using whatever is available in situations from broken down cars far from assistance to war zones.
A survivalist is someone who can walk out the far side of hell after making the scenic tour with mind and body intact.
A Constitutionalist is just what the name implies, someone who belives in the founding document of this country without the legal garbage that has be "interpreted" by political factions to be contained within it.
Example, "A well regulated militia being nesessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" doesn't mean that only certain people, or armies, or whatever the current political party in power says, it means that the people have the right to keep and bear arms. They have the right of assembly, the right of free speech, the right to worship as they see fit, to vote, to be free of an overbearing government searching and seizing your property without due process, and a multitude of other things specifically noted in the bill of rights.
The Constitution does not limit the rights of the people, but does limit the powers of the government and their ability to impose political agendas on the people of the individual states united by law to create the United States Nation.
Liberals, Libertarians and old hippies are the ones that belive they should be able to do anything they want, to anyone they want, that everyone should conform to their ideas, and anyone who doesn't must be destroyed by any means necessary.
I could survive New York, wouldn't want to, but could, I have survived by my wits and hard work and the skills I have accumulated over the years, in the wilderness, and in growing/raising/hunting/gathering my food. I can rebuild an engine, wire a house or build one. I prefer my bow and arrows to black rifles, but have medals from shooting them.
I am a staunch beliver in the Constitution and took an oath to defend it against all threats foreign and domestic many years ago, and I still will defend it. Not the president, not the senate or house, but the constitution. I may not be in the military any more, but the oath still holds as far as I am concerned.
And yes, I still have the scars from my trips through perdition, and I am still walking tall and have enough presence of mind to understand the laws of the land I love, and the integrity to not kow-tow to those who would destroy my way of life.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). I'm out of practice too.
All of that stuff is just silliness and romanticism. Far worse things than that may be headed our way! 
Consitutionalists and Soveriegn Citizens
Viewpoints vary. That's mine.
