1. The Topic of the Month for October is "Make this the Perfect Bugout Location". Please join the discussion in the TOTM forum.

the group moral delima

Discussion in 'General Survival and Preparedness' started by monkeyman, Sep 18, 2005.

  1. monkeyman

    monkeyman Monkey+++ Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Ok we have been doing some discussion on how we would establish a new civilization in a post TEOTWAWKI era and one thing I happened to notice was never discussed and was curious on others thoughts regarding it. We most all agree that there would be no welfare as it exists now but what about those incapable of contributeing? Im not talking about those who are to lazy to carry thier weight, I think we all would agree they could go elsewhere or starve, Im thinking of say a member of the group who has an accident or is injured in defence of the group and for instance gets a broken back and is paralized and to add to the senario we will say they are single. I know the odds of a person surviveing these kind of injuries in a post SHTF situation are slim but we could also look at say a few years down the road and some members are getting old and are no longer capable of the labor and tasks required to provide for them selves or on a more short term thing say a person who badly breaks a leg or bothand will not be able to do for them selves for a couple of months. How do the rest of you figure it should be delt with when people are for some reason truely incapable of doing for themselves due to physical limitations? Dose the group pool resources in a kind of tax form that everyone gives so much to be passed to those who cant get by or is it a volantery thing and what if that person in need was less popular, do we leave it to whoever is willing to take them in or is it like the eskamos that when you were no longer useful you took a seat on the ice and waited to feed the bears so they could get fatter and feed those still useful? Im just curious as to others thoughts on this. Would there be a form of social security disability or are you all on your own if you are hurt and if there was then how would it be set up?
  2. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

    My thoughts on the Group is more as a Family of like minded and of like Morals/ethics.

    Look at what was done for Cousin Jack and phishi here on this board, amongst relative strangers? We help our own and I think as a small group, we don't need a set program of tax or Disability. I'd like to think that if monkeyman needed a new barn built, the rest of the group would come running and raise it in a weekend. We all have a skill that can be traded to others.

    Ithink the bigger dilemma is when someone needs help and only 8 out of the 10 come to his aid. What is to be done with the 2 that stayed at home for no good reason?

    I think these things will take care of themself, the group can open it's arms or dis-associate with anyone that isn't working out. It's possible that some may even need to be asked to leave if it's found that they aren't what they claimed to be.

    good point
  3. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    Excellent question, MM, and one that us Olde Phartes are going to have to consider when the time comes to join or decline an invitation to belong to a group. Those of us that can pull our weight or close to it are probably ok. Those that can't should realize it, and act appropriately. My choice would be to never become a drag. How to prevent that remains a question in my own mind. [beer]
  4. RightHand

    RightHand Pioneer in a New World Moderator Founding Member

    There are many ways in which one can contribute to the group and not all of them are dependent upon physical prowess. This discussion reminds me of a Sociologoly 101 exercise in which the students were to choose from a pool of 50 people, the 10 who would be saved to rebuild the world.
  5. monkeyman

    monkeyman Monkey+++ Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    I generaly tend to agree, there are very few who can not contribute something. A person who has lost use of thier legs may still be a valuable asset as a medical person or as a stratigest for the security force or able to keep track of the stores on hand or help to teach the kids or something and if a member (or say a child of a member) is mentaly retarded they can likely still do grunt work, but I could forsee some instances of say a person to mentaly challanged to be able to comprehend the task at hand or a person who say comes down with altzimers or some other illness that no longer alows them to be productive. While Im sure that say the guy who breaks his leg would be helped untill he could get back on his feet, I could see the person whos body has been broken by age or accident who wont get better getting forgotten after a time or at least ending up not as well cared for as might be hoped if there were not some kind of SOP for dealing with it and at the same time could see the potential (both especialy a concern in a larger group say like a town size) for abuse of the provision for these folks in need just as we have seen grow in our culture over the past few decades. Also I would see it as very benificial to have some plan in place since I could otherwise see a group missing out on some great folks with good skills who are begining to feel some signs of age telling on them and would have to look more at how they would eat or if they would be able to eat if they out lived thier ability to do for themselves.
    Its just something I had been kicking around with no great anwsers comeing to mind since I would truely hate to see in a group or newly rebuilt society a set up to go back to the same welfare state we now have in our country but at the same time feel it is a moral imperitive for any society to care for its members to weak, ill, broken or mentaly retarded or what not to care for themselves, so just figured I would toss it up here to get kicked around and see if anyone else is any better at social enginereing or whatever you would call it than I am or at least if we as a group were any better at it. [beer]
  6. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    That's what being "family" is all about. Any group I looked to live with, eat with, hunt with, etc. would have to be like family.
  7. Quigley_Sharps

    Quigley_Sharps The Badministrator Administrator Founding Member

    Anyone remember the "Grange Hall Days" when they closed those, America started the first part of the final slip down hill in life.
    Nobody cares for their neighbors anymore.
    I think when the time comes and the group is small it is a natural affect of taking care of the members. The Family instincts kicks in.
  8. monkeyman

    monkeyman Monkey+++ Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Thats true that in a small group it tends to not be likely to be a problem. I guess I was thinking more in terms of if it was a larger group or even say once it comes a time that folks started trying to rebuild society on a larger scale than the groups to form towns and such. Once you get a few hundred folks then there are going to be those who kept to them selves enouph that no one gets that close to them or thinks to take it on them selves to look out for them when there are a few hundred other folks that they figure some one else will be doing it. So granted on a short term (a few years) where its still just the tribe then it wouldnt be likely to be an issue so much, I was thinking more in terms of if several tribes merged to have more numbers to get things done and for security and such or like I say once it would get back to the point of mid to large towns rather than the small villages.
  9. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    The dilemma remains. The larger the group, the greater chance of finding a disability of some sort. And also the larger the group, the more likely it is that something can be found productive for any given disability excepting a case where the mind is totally gone. And, the larger the group, the lower the percentage loss of production. In a small group, one loss is potentially disastrous. One out of a group of 10 is major, especially if a permanent loss. One out of say 50 is another question. Making an economic analogy, what is the cost to the tribe in terms of lost productivity or burden? Not an easy question even for philosophers and ethicists.

    There is a branch of mathematics that deals with this sort of thing, symbolic logic. If the right coefficients are applied, the equations tell you all you need to know. What it tells you might go against morals, but it is supported by ethics. I don't want to go there. It takes a hardened decision maker, nearly a sociopath, to follow thru.
  10. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

    It would need to be addressed. Another one to ponder is the Guy who shows up to the Regional BO Rendevous with 50 of his extended Family, Friends and Co-Workers.

    Let's say that they were all Woefully underprepared. I'm sure that a Group of us 10 will amount to a much larger group if the balloon goes up but, How to handle this case would be a hard one. Much of my preps entail "Over-buying" goods to help with the influx of unprepared newbies. But How do I tell ghrit, (an example only), that he can't possibly expect us to Absorb his 49 strong group of refugees that have nothing but the shirts on their backs. They have just walked 500 miles to boot and are hungry, sick and cranky.

    What happens then? In some ways this is a more immediate SOP that needs to be settled. Maybe once the Regional Groups are formed, Members submit or relay a list of those expected to travel with them. Numbers are calculated and the Logistics officer can determine How many the accumulated Stocks can support ofr a Year. dunno
  11. monkeyman

    monkeyman Monkey+++ Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    I would almost think that if it was by the time they had moved 500+ miles and were still on thier feet let alone by the time they made it across the country that it would tend to indicate that they were well enouph able to produce by scrounging and such (especialy when on the move) that they would be able to be worth thier weight. After all 'travle' came from the word 'travail' since in most times and certianly in a case of a post SHTF senerio moveing across the distances is highly difficult and dangerous but being stationairy is a lot easier. So IMHO, I would figure the ones able to come across the country would be less of a problem than those who showed up at the ralley points from the reasonably local areas that were unprepaired and/or unwilling to work, not to mention not resourceful enouph to take care of themselves. In general I would tend to figure as long as they could contribute to the group, even if it was through grunt labor, then the numbers could be helpful and if they dont work, by choice, they can starve or in the first encounter with hostile forces they can be sent out as the alwayse useful cannon foder. What can I say, while I have great compasion for those who are incapable of doing for themselves, I dont figure those unwilling to work are worth stomping on if they are on fire (if not on fire maybe though) and can see the advantages to numbers for dealing with those kind of times.
  12. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    You are correct sir, in that the initial group size has to be a known thing to a reasonable plus or minus. Meaning some sort of organization has to exist ahead of need. The organization has to have some (at least) rudimentary SOPs, and that includes a rejection mechanism. It is fine to meet incoming folks with a smile and a drink of water, but the rest of the welcoming committee has to be behind the greeter, locked and loaded.

    For what it's worth, ghrit could show up with as many as 7. (I think my grandotter isn't ready to contribute too much.) Not a body more without a thoro vetting of preparedness, talent, and supplies to contribute. We all have that responsibility to the core group. This again would be hard to do, to tell close friends and relatives you are about to disappear for the duration, wish them well, and get outa dodge without a backward glance. For the good of the few, and the detriment of the many? Not an easy decision, not at all. How selfish (shall we call it) can we be?
  13. jim

    jim Monkey+++ Founding Member

    If I may, some indian tribes had a tribal law that the Chief couldn't eat until the widows and orphans had food. Not making any judgements here.
  14. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    You may, indeed, and welcome!!

    Your observation, we'll take as true, tho' not known to me. The fallacy of that approach seems clear. If the strongest and wisest are allowed to do with less (or none) in favor of the (putatively) weaker and less productive, then the leader will be (potentially) too weak to lead properly. A tough call, for sure. Exception: If the Chief is a figurehead, a ceremonial chief only, then the case is easily made.
  15. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

    That is a great idea Jim. Keeps things in check and fair
  16. Quigley_Sharps

    Quigley_Sharps The Badministrator Administrator Founding Member

    Sure does, unless he has all the widows and orphans killed :eek:
  17. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    Wow,These are extremely tough and important questions usually lost in the .223 vs. .308 mode of "survivalists" A fascinating take on "democracy in action" and the "lifeboat game" at the same time...My .02:

    I am lucky enough, I can rely on my spouse (though she's not really too gungho on preparing)
    The extended "family" will be the basic glue holding any group of survivors together
    the group/team will evolve depending on the morals and ethics shared... I'll not fall in with any groups
    whose morals equate too: "Tough noogies, I got mine"...
    So I expect any injured or aged will be cared for within their immediate families, But group donations would be a natural outgrowth of working and pulling ones weight as long as possible ( never mandatory, never demanded, or entitled). Think "amish societies". Even a double amputee can work at light gardening or man an observation post or comm center. I don't really expect to be putting anyone out on any icefloes...If the situation ever got that brutal; I think the icefloe solution would make itself obvious as "necessary".
    As far as folks showing up with more than a just a "few" completely clueless "friends", The friends should be directed to the nearest government (where they placed their faith , in the first place) shelter.
    Though greater numbers of folks are useful; as additional labor to expand manual farming acreage. Unabashed fuedal serfism is gonna eventually result in "peasant" revolt. Against theauthority of the "king" and his "knights of the roundtable".
    Man, I dunno , keep thinking...
    Or we all just get on the Ray Nagin memorial FEMA bus and toss them the keys to the gate( riiiiiigghhhtt.....)????:D:D:D
  18. jim

    jim Monkey+++ Founding Member

    If I may, the lack of modern medications will eliminate a lot of folks no matter how hard we try to save or care for them. For my part, I'm lucky enough to have a large enough family to take care of this basic problem. No answer is perfect, and we have to think ahead to see what options are available to us.

    For me, turning away desparate begging strangers would be hard to do. Demanding strangers would not pose a problem though. Kids and old folks are the hardest hit and hardest to refuse.

    How will some react if a family offers up their teenage daughter to that group for "whatever" just to keep them alive? These choices will happen in the future as in the past. I don't relish making the decisions on this.

  19. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    Interesting ,but this one is easy, obtain custody of the teen to separate her from her slave running parents, feed everybody.. daughter gets her life back. in or out of the group. Any parents willing to sell their kidsfor "whatever" forfeit their right to reproduce, and are not welcome in the "new" world.Sometimes the gene pool needs alittle chlorine.judge jury and executioner? In my yard you don't take advantage of people especially chilfdren or the infirm. (game over)[elim][whistle2]Big talk anyway....but that's just wrong.
  20. poacher

    poacher Monkey+++ Founding Member

    I had someone who felt obligated to take his whole family when he went. The whole family consisted of his mom, two brothers their wives and kids, his sister and husband and her two kids, his mother in law and current boyfriend and the boyfriends adult children. Not to mention his family as well.
    After having a long talk we agreed that it would be better to have him setup his own deal with the understanding that we could share some tools and equipment as well as manpower. This gave us both extra security because now we have ready help for pretty much everything and he can take who he pleases.
    Taking care of people that are part of your group is somthing that you just do. If they were important enough to bring in then they are important enough to take care of. As far as taking passerbyers in. Not unless they can really show they have a trade or somthing that makes them a solid member.
    Lastly everybody I know understands that they are to bring the number they stated. If you have commited to 10 then it's 10, not 12. If you see a reason to change that number the time to address it is before the solid waste material hits the open air oscellator... Not after. Yes it's kind of a chicken way out but they have to make the selection on who to bring. You may love your Aunt "B" but if she is on an air tank because of CHF and she has diabetes you have to figure out just how far is she going to make it and truly how much of a liability is she going to be.
    It's not a good feeling making these decisions but it's better to do it now than when stress levels are 10 times higher.
    Take care Be safe Poacher.
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary