Sunday, May 16, 2010

Scenarios, Part One

I'd like to preface this by saying that I don't like Rawles. Him and his acolytes are the kind of people who, if they found you wounded on the side of the road one day, would lean over you, bayonet extended, and ask quietly "Y'all love Jesus?" And no matter what you answer, they'd prolly bayonet you anyways for not believing in his specific version of Jesus. I mean he hates on Mormons often enough...okay. Back on topic. But yes, his ideas about an economic end to the world seem valid enough. I'll give him that.

So, my thinking has revised about the end of civilization as we know it. While flu pandemics are certainly possible, an economic collapse is certainly looking equally likely at the moment. And that shit doesn't just fall out of the sky. Alright, so the way I see it, even during an economic disaster like postwar Germany there was a part of the populace with jobs and livelihoods left. As a general rule, when things go south, the first to go are the young single males. And when you get a lot of young single males angry, unemployed, and unable to get jobs, there's often large spikes in crime. The way I see it, once they get sick of looking for jobs that aren't there, they'll turn to theft and drugs to support themselves. As things get worse, they'll form into gangs or fold into political organizations.

So, when I imagine looters now, I imagine small roving gangs taking what they want by force and not a monster, angry mob. Which means that you have more options if you find yourself in their crosshairs. I need to sleep on this one, I think.



  1. So, seeing as you're a single young male, should I shoot you on sight?

  2. I think in any breakdown / civil unrest scenario, the biggest threat is usually close to home. In a situation of utter savagery people turn on their own neighborhoods with disturbing frequency. The scariest possibility is that after a few days of starvation you will actually know the people in your crosshairs.

  3. I didn't say you should shoot me on sight, Phil. I'm suggesting that when time get tough, generally the older, calmer employees who if they were fired would have a better chance to get another job won't be turned out on the street. Last I checked, the Latin Kings and Crips generally don't have much membership in their 30s and 40s.

    Scumfuck, your comments are actually address in the following post.

  4. >the Latin Kings and Crips generally don't have much membership in their 30s and 40s.

    Not outside the jails, anyway. Most are dead or doing life terms by them.

  5. "I'd like to preface this by saying that I don't like Rawles"

    Holy shit, I was starting to think I was the only one!