Why is there such a stigma associated with survivalism/survivalists? (farm, prices)

[TRex2]

Originally posted y LT.D.Morris early this morning:Where self-sufficiency was put to the side and came to be confused with self-dependence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_Age"][/quote]
Spam?
The preferred canned meat of preppers LoL!

[Brucifer]

I blame Enkidu for starting the whole thing.

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by vatacvalves

Why is there such a stigma associated with survivalism/survivalists?

Because modern collectivist society does not trust, nor do they wish to tolerate individuality, or more generally, anyone who is (or aspires to be) capable of a largely independent existence.

Generally speaking, this nation has gone from the individualist ideal of the past to the collectivist ideal of the present. Those firmly in lockstep with the modern collective sees an individualist at best as regressive and at worst as a threat. Also there is a bit of an "aren't we good enough for you?" attitude coming from the collective. The answer from the self-sufficiency oriented individual is, of course, "No. No you are not." That causes a lot of folks to get all bent out of shape.

[Versatile]

The stigma comes from the paranoia they reek of.

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by Versatile

The stigma comes from the paranoia they reek of.

So then, your stance is that those who attempt to grow their own food, live off-grid, have their own water supply, build their own homes/homesteads, can or freeze-dry their own food, hunt/fish for their own food, store foodstuffs as was common and accepted only a hundred years ago, attempt to be less dependent on electronics and high-tech, live a low-profile less environmentally impactful (yeah, I just made that word up) lifestyle... are paranoid.

Sweet. To each his/her own. Sounds a little close-minded to me, though.

[Mikala43]

Originally Posted by ChrisC

Because modern collectivist society does not trust, nor do they wish to tolerate individuality, or more generally, anyone who is (or aspires to be) capable of a largely independent existence.

Generally speaking, this nation has gone from the individualist ideal of the past to the collectivist ideal of the present. Those firmly in lockstep with the modern collective sees an individualist at best as regressive and at worst as a threat. Also there is a bit of an "aren't we good enough for you?" attitude coming from the collective. The answer from the self-sufficiency oriented individual is, of course, "No. No you are not." That causes a lot of folks to get all bent out of shape.

I disagree with why you think others find some survivalists "off putting." Though the whole "you are not good enough for us" adds to the general list.

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by Mikala43

I disagree with why you think others find some survivalists "off putting." Though the whole "you are not good enough for us" adds to the general list.

No doubt, a better way of stating that thought would have been, "What, isn't our collective good enough for you?" asks the collectivist in chorus with his/her hive.

"No, no it is not," answers individualist.

The wording of the original comment was actually quite unfortunate and it's too bad I didn't catch the potential miscommunication as I wrote it--careless of me because I typically choose my words quite carefully and ponder them before the fact. I didn't actually mean to imply that those who believe in being prepared for an emergency or who wish to live an independent life necessarily think they are better than everyone else. Some do, I'm sure, just as some people in general do, but it's certainly not true in my case or for those I know personally. I simply want to do things my own way and the status quo on any given matter may or may not be to my liking. As such, that really has nothing to do with the "worth" of a person relative to another. It only pertains to my perceived worth of a social condition or lifestyle choice relative to another social condition or lifestyle choice.

[TRex2]

Originally Posted by Mikala43

I disagree with why you think others find some survivalists "off putting." Though the whole "you are not good enough for us" adds to the general list.

I am sure your husband would have loved having people with no interest in what he was teaching drop by his classes to announce that he is just teaching people to be scared of things that will never happen and that his training classes are a waste because the students will die just like everyone else. That it is cool to have outdoor skills as a hobby but your husband just wants people to suffer calamity so he and his students can prove their skills, and that he is a cult leader who is pretending his students can cheat death and that none of them can survive because he is teaching them to never need anyone else. He shouldn't be teaching his students that they are better than everyone else, since he is just plain arrogant. They cannot survive because they cannot possibly know what they will encounter when the time arrives. Oh, yes, and he is teaching them to be criminals because he allows them to have access to weapons.

Well, I am only though the trolling we saw in the first 60 posts, but I am tired of this negativity. I, for one am thankful for people like your husband, who teaches survival, but I am not thankful for those who ridicule us for learning, nor am I thankful for those who enable and support them.

[Mikala43]

Originally Posted by TRex2

I am sure your husband would have loved having people with no interest in what he was teaching drop by his classes to announce that he is just teaching people to be scared of things that will never happen and that his training classes are a waste because the students will die just like everyone else. That it is cool to have outdoor skills as a hobby but your husband just wants people to suffer calamity so he and his students can prove their skills, and that he is a cult leader who is pretending his students can cheat death and that none of them can survive because he is teaching them to never need anyone else. He shouldn't be teaching his students that they are better than everyone else, since he is just plain arrogant. They cannot survive because they cannot possibly know what they will encounter when the time arrives. Oh, yes, and he is teaching them to be criminals because he allows them to have access to weapons.

Well, I am only though the trolling we saw in the first 60 posts, but I am tired of this negativity. I, for one am thankful for people like your husband, who teaches survival, but I am not thankful for those who ridicule us for learning, nor am I thankful for those who enable and support them.

In all fairness, you have to consider how the individual comes across. DH's classes wear surviving behind enemy lines, surviving by being dumped in various terrain, things like that. I think survival skills are awesome..... (remember, I will die, so I have no vested interest....).

I'm up really late with insomnia, so coherence is kinda lacking..... The concept of survival skills is not wrong (there is honor in learning any skill), the practice is not wrong, preparedness is not wrong.... some of the attitudes are off putting though.

[TRex2]

Originally Posted by Mikala43

... some of the attitudes are off putting though.

As are the attitudes of the anti prepper crowd. And the ones whose plan, if things get bad, to come to our door, expecting us to take care of them, since they spent their time, money and energy on recreation.