The Collapse Gap: How the USSR was BETTER PREPARED for Collapse than U.S.

Closing the 'Collapse Gap': the USSR was better prepared for peak oil than the US

(This is a PowerPoint presentation, so if it seems hard to read, that's why-JG)

by Dmitry Orlov

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I am not an expert or a scholar or an activist. I am more of an eye-witness. I watched the Soviet Union collapse, and I have tried to put my observations into a concise message. I will leave it up to you to decide just how urgent a message it is.

My talk tonight is about the lack of collapse-preparedness here in the United States. I will compare it with the situation in the Soviet Union, prior to its collapse. The rhetorical device I am going to use is the "Collapse Gap" – to go along with the Nuclear Gap, and the Space Gap, and various other superpower gaps that were fashionable during the Cold War.



Slide [2] The subject of economic collapse is generally a sad one. But I am an optimistic, cheerful sort of person, and I believe that, with a bit of preparation, such events can be taken in stride. As you can probably surmise, I am actually rather keen on observing economic collapses. Perhaps when I am really old, all collapses will start looking the same to me, but I am not at that point yet.

And this next one certainly has me intrigued. From what I've seen and read, it seems that there is a fair chance that the U.S. economy will collapse sometime within the foreseeable future. It also would seem that we won't be particularly well-prepared for it. As things stand, the U.S. economy is poised to perform something like a disappearing act. And so I am eager to put my observations of the Soviet collapse to good use.



Slide [3] I anticipate that some people will react rather badly to having their country compared to the USSR. I would like to assure you that the Soviet people would have reacted similarly, had the United States collapsed first. Feelings aside, here are two 20th century superpowers, who wanted more or less the same things – things like technological progress, economic growth, full employment, and world domination – but they disagreed about the methods. And they obtained similar results – each had a good run, intimidated the whole planet, and kept the other scared. Each eventually went bankrupt.

Slide [4] The USA and the USSR were evenly matched in many categories, but let me just mention four.

The Soviet manned space program is alive and well under Russian management, and now offers first-ever space charters. The Americans have been hitching rides on the Soyuz while their remaining spaceships sit in the shop.

The arms race has not produced a clear winner, and that is excellent news, because Mutual Assured Destruction remains in effect. Russia still has more nuclear warheads than the US, and has supersonic cruise missile technology that can penetrate any missile shield, especially a nonexistent one.

The Jails Race once showed the Soviets with a decisive lead, thanks to their innovative GULAG program. But they gradually fell behind, and in the end the Jails Race has been won by the Americans, with the highest percentage of people in jail ever.

The Hated Evil Empire Race is also finally being won by the Americans. It's easy now that they don't have anyone to compete against.



Slide [5] Continuing with our list of superpower similarities, many of the problems that sunk the Soviet Union are now endangering the United States as well. Such as a huge, well-equipped, very expensive military, with no clear mission, bogged down in fighting Muslim insurgents. Such as energy shortfalls linked to peaking oil production. Such as a persistently unfavorable trade balance, resulting in runaway foreign debt. Add to that a delusional self-image, an inflexible ideology, and an unresponsive political system.



Slide [6] An economic collapse is amazing to observe, and very interesting if described accurately and in detail. A general description tends to fall short of the mark, but let me try. An economic arrangement can continue for quite some time after it becomes untenable, through sheer inertia. But at some point a tide of broken promises and invalidated assumptions sweeps it all out to sea. One such untenable arrangement rests on the notion that it is possible to perpetually borrow more and more money from abroad, to pay for more and more energy imports, while the price of these imports continues to double every few years. Free money with which to buy energy equals free energy, and free energy does not occur in nature. This must therefore be a transient condition. When the flow of energy snaps back toward equilibrium, much of the US economy will be forced to shut down.



Slide [7] I've described what happened to Russia in some detail in one of my articles, which is available on SurvivingPeakOil.com. I don't see why what happens to the United States should be entirely dissimilar, at least in general terms. The specifics will be different, and we will get to them in a moment. We should certainly expect shortages of fuel, food, medicine, and countless consumer items, outages of electricity, gas, and water, breakdowns in transportation systems and other infrastructure, hyperinflation, widespread shutdowns and mass layoffs, along with a lot of despair, confusion, violence, and lawlessness. We definitely should not expect any grand rescue plans, innovative technology programs, or miracles of social cohesion.



Slide [8] When faced with such developments, some people are quick to realize what it is they have to do to survive, and start doing these things, generally without anyone's permission. A sort of economy emerges, completely informal, and often semi-criminal. It revolves around liquidating, and recycling, the remains of the old economy. It is based on direct access to resources, and the threat of force, rather than ownership or legal authority. People who have a problem with this way of doing things, quickly find themselves out of the game.

These are the generalities. Now let's look at some specifics.



Slide [9] One important element of collapse-preparedness is making sure that you don't need a functioning economy to keep a roof over your head. In the Soviet Union, all housing belonged to the government, which made it available directly to the people. Since all housing was also built by the government, it was only built in places that the government could service using public transportation. After the collapse, almost everyone managed to keep their place.

In the United States, very few people own their place of residence free and clear, and even they need an income to pay real estate taxes. People without an income face homelessness. When the economy collapses, very few people will continue to have an income, so homelessness will become rampant. Add to that the car-dependent nature of most suburbs, and what you will get is mass migrations of homeless people toward city centers.



Slide [10] Soviet public transportation was more or less all there was, but there was plenty of it. There were also a few private cars, but so few that gasoline rationing and shortages were mostly inconsequential. All of this public infrastructure was designed to be almost infinitely maintainable, and continued to run even as the rest of the economy collapsed.

The population of the United States is almost entirely car-dependent, and relies on markets that control oil import, refining, and distribution. They also rely on continuous public investment in road construction and repair. The cars themselves require a steady stream of imported parts, and are not designed to last very long. When these intricately interconnected systems stop functioning, much of the population will find itself stranded.



Slide [11] Economic collapse affects public sector employment almost as much as private sector employment, eventually. Because government bureaucracies tend to be slow to act, they collapse more slowly. Also, because state-owned enterprises tend to be inefficient, and stockpile inventory, there is plenty of it left over, for the employees to take home, and use in barter. Most Soviet employment was in the public sector, and this gave people some time to think of what to do next.

Private enterprises tend to be much more efficient at many things. Such laying off their people, shutting their doors, and liquidating their assets. Since most employment in the United States is in the private sector, we should expect the transition to permanent unemployment to be quite abrupt for most people.



Slide [12] When confronting hardship, people usually fall back on their families for support. The Soviet Union experienced chronic housing shortages, which often resulted in three generations living together under one roof. This didn't make them happy, but at least they were used to each other. The usual expectation was that they would stick it out together, come what may.

In the United States, families tend to be atomized, spread out over several states. They sometimes have trouble tolerating each other when they come together for Thanksgiving, or Christmas, even during the best of times. They might find it difficult to get along, in bad times. There is already too much loneliness in this country, and I doubt that economic collapse will cure it.

(continued)



Slide [13] To keep evil at bay, Americans require money. In an economic collapse, there is usually hyperinflation, which wipes out savings. There is also rampant unemployment, which wipes out incomes. The result is a population that is largely penniless.

In the Soviet Union, very little could be obtained for money. It was treated as tokens rather than as wealth, and was shared among friends. Many things – housing and transportation among them – were either free or almost free.



Slide [14] Soviet consumer products were always an object of derision – refrigerators that kept the house warm – and the food, and so on. You'd be lucky if you got one at all, and it would be up to you to make it work once you got it home. But once you got it to work, it would become a priceless family heirloom, handed down from generation to generation, sturdy, and almost infinitely maintainable.

In the United States, you often hear that something "is not worth fixing." This is enough to make a Russian see red. I once heard of an elderly Russian who became irate when a hardware store in Boston wouldn't sell him replacement bedsprings: "People are throwing away perfectly good mattresses, how am I supposed to fix them?"

Economic collapse tends to shut down both local production and imports, and so it is vitally important that anything you own wears out slowly, and that you can fix it yourself if it breaks. Soviet-made stuff generally wore incredibly hard. The Chinese-made stuff you can get around here – much less so.



Slide [15] The Soviet agricultural sector was notoriously inefficient. Many people grew and gathered their own food even in relatively prosperous times. There were food warehouses in every city, stocked according to a government allocation scheme. There were very few restaurants, and most families cooked and ate at home. Shopping was rather labor-intensive, and involved carrying heavy loads. Sometimes it resembled hunting – stalking that elusive piece of meat lurking behind some store counter. So the people were well-prepared for what came next.

In the United States, most people get their food from a supermarket, which is supplied from far away using refrigerated diesel trucks. Many people don't even bother to shop and just eat fast food. When people do cook, they rarely cook from scratch. This is all very unhealthy, and the effect on the nation's girth, is visible, clear across the parking lot. A lot of the people, who just waddle to and from their cars, seem unprepared for what comes next. If they suddenly had to start living like the Russians, they would blow out their knees.



Slide [16] The Soviet government threw resources at immunization programs, infectious disease control, and basic care. It directly operated a system of state-owned clinics, hospitals, and sanatoriums. People with fatal ailments or chronic conditions often had reason to complain, and had to pay for private care – if they had the money.

In the United States, medicine is for profit. People seems to think nothing of this fact. There are really very few fields of endeavor to which Americans would deny the profit motive. The problem is, once the economy is removed, so is the profit, along with the services it once helped to motivate.



Slide [17] The Soviet education system was generally quite excellent. It produced an overwhelmingly literate population and many great specialists. The education was free at all levels, but higher education sometimes paid a stipend, and often provided room and board. The educational system held together quite well after the economy collapsed. The problem was that the graduates had no jobs to look forward to upon graduation. Many of them lost their way.

The higher education system in the United States is good at many things – government and industrial research, team sports, vocational training... Primary and secondary education fails to achieve in 12 years what Soviet schools generally achieved in 8. The massive scale and expense of maintaining these institutions is likely to prove too much for the post-collapse environment. Illiteracy is already a problem in the United States, and we should expect it to get a lot worse.



Slide [18] The Soviet Union did not need to import energy. The production and distribution system faltered, but never collapsed. Price controls kept the lights on even as hyperinflation raged.

The term "market failure" seems to fit the energy situation in the United States. Free markets develop some pernicious characteristics when there are shortages of key commodities. During World War II, the United States government understood this, and successfully rationed many things, from gasoline to bicycle parts. But that was a long time ago. Since then, the inviolability of free markets has become an article of faith.



Slide [19] My conclusion is that the Soviet Union was much better-prepared for economic collapse than the United States is.

I have left out two important superpower asymmetries, because they don't have anything to do with collapse-preparedness. Some countries are simply luckier than others. But I will mention them, for the sake of completeness.

In terms of racial and ethnic composition, the United States resembles Yugoslavia more than it resembles Russia, so we shouldn't expect it to be as peaceful as Russia was, following the collapse. Ethnically mixed societies are fragile and have a tendency to explode.

In terms of religion, the Soviet Union was relatively free of apocalyptic doomsday cults. Very few people there wished for a planet-sized atomic fireball to herald the second coming of their savior. This was indeed a blessing.



Slide [20] One area in which I cannot discern any Collapse Gap is national politics. The ideologies may be different, but the blind adherence to them couldn't be more similar.

It is certainly more fun to watch two Capitalist parties go at each other than just having the one Communist party to vote for. The things they fight over in public are generally symbolic little tokens of social policy, chosen for ease of public posturing. The Communist party offered just one bitter pill. The two Capitalist parties offer a choice of two placebos. The latest innovation is the photo finish election, where each party buys 50% of the vote, and the result is pulled out of statistical noise, like a rabbit out of a hat.

The American way of dealing with dissent and with protest is certainly more advanced: why imprison dissidents when you can just let them shout into the wind to their heart's content?

The American approach to bookkeeping is more subtle and nuanced than the Soviet. Why make a state secret of some statistic, when you can just distort it, in obscure ways? Here's a simple example: inflation is "controlled" by substituting hamburger for steak, in order to minimize increases to Social Security payments.




Slide [21] Many people expend a lot of energy protesting against their irresponsible, unresponsive government. It seems like a terrible waste of time, considering how ineffectual their protests are. Is it enough of a consolation for them to be able to read about their efforts in the foreign press? I think that they would feel better if they tuned out the politicians, the way the politicians tune them out. It's as easy as turning off the television set. If they try it, they will probably observe that nothing about their lives has changed, nothing at all, except maybe their mood has improved. They might also find that they have more time and energy to devote to more important things.




Slide [22] I will now sketch out some approaches, realistic and otherwise, to closing the Collapse Gap. My little list of approaches might seem a bit glib, but keep in mind that this is a very difficult problem. In fact, it's important to keep in mind that not all problems have solutions. I can promise you that we will not solve this problem tonight. What I will try to do is to shed some light on it from several angles.

Continued....



Slide [23] Many people rail against the unresponsiveness and irresponsibility of the government. They often say things like "What is needed is..." plus the name of some big, successful government project from the glorious past – the Marshall Plan, the Manhattan Project, the Apollo program. But there is nothing in the history books about a government preparing for collapse. Gorbachev's "Perestroika" is an example of a government trying to avert or delay collapse. It probably helped speed it along.



Slide [24] There are some things that I would like the government to take care of in preparation for collapse. I am particularly concerned about all the radioactive and toxic installations, stockpiles, and dumps. Future generations are unlikely to able to control them, especially if global warming puts them underwater. There is enough of this muck sitting around to kill off most of us. I am also worried about soldiers getting stranded overseas – abandoning one's soldiers is among the most shameful things a country can do. Overseas military bases should be dismantled, and the troops repatriated. I'd like to see the huge prison population whittled away in a controlled manner, ahead of time, instead of in a chaotic general amnesty. Lastly, I think that this farce with debts that will never be repaid, has gone on long enough. Wiping the slate clean will give society time to readjust. So, you see, I am not asking for any miracles. Although, if any of these things do get done, I would consider it a miracle.



Slide [25] A private sector solution is not impossible; just very, very unlikely. Certain Soviet state enterprises were basically states within states. They controlled what amounted to an entire economic system, and could go on even without the larger economy. They kept to this arrangement even after they were privatized. They drove Western management consultants mad, with their endless kindergartens, retirement homes, laundries, and free clinics. These weren't part of their core competency, you see. They needed to divest and to streamline their operations. The Western management gurus overlooked the most important thing: the core competency of these enterprises lay in their ability to survive economic collapse. Maybe the young geniuses at Google can wrap their heads around this one, but I doubt that their stockholders will.



Slide [26] It's important to understand that the Soviet Union achieved collapse-preparedness inadvertently, and not because of the success of some crash program. Economic collapse has a way of turning economic negatives into positives. The last thing we want is a perfectly functioning, growing, prosperous economy that suddenly collapses one day, and leaves everybody in the lurch. It is not necessary for us to embrace the tenets of command economy and central planning to match the Soviet lackluster performance in this area. We have our own methods, that are working almost as well. I call them "boondoggles." They are solutions to problems that cause more problems than they solve.

Just look around you, and you will see boondoggles sprouting up everywhere, in every field of endeavor: we have military boondoggles like Iraq, financial boondoggles like the doomed retirement system, medical boondoggles like private health insurance, legal boondoggles like the intellectual property system. The combined weight of all these boondoggles is slowly but surely pushing us all down. If it pushes us down far enough, then economic collapse, when it arrives, will be like falling out of a ground floor window. We just have to help this process along, or at least not interfere with it. So if somebody comes to you and says "I want to make a boondoggle that runs on hydrogen" – by all means encourage him! It's not as good as a boondoggle that burns money directly, but it's a step in the right direction.



Slide [27] Certain types of mainstream economic behavior are not prudent on a personal level, and are also counterproductive to bridging the Collapse Gap. Any behavior that might result in continued economic growth and prosperity is counterproductive: the higher you jump, the harder you land. It is traumatic to go from having a big retirement fund to having no retirement fund because of a market crash. It is also traumatic to go from a high income to little or no income. If, on top of that, you have kept yourself incredibly busy, and suddenly have nothing to do, then you will really be in rough shape.

Economic collapse is about the worst possible time for someone to suffer a nervous breakdown, yet this is what often happens. The people who are most at risk psychologically are successful middle-aged men. When their career is suddenly over, their savings are gone, and their property worthless, much of their sense of self-worth is gone as well. They tend to drink themselves to death and commit suicide in disproportionate numbers. Since they tend to be the most experienced and capable people, this is a staggering loss to society.

If the economy, and your place within it, is really important to you, you will be really hurt when it goes away. You can cultivate an attitude of studied indifference, but it has to be more than just a conceit. You have to develop the lifestyle and the habits and the physical stamina to back it up. It takes a lot of creativity and effort to put together a fulfilling existence on the margins of society. After the collapse, these margins may turn out to be some of the best places to live.



Slide [28] I hope that I didn't make it sound as if the Soviet collapse was a walk in the park, because it was really quite awful in many ways. The point that I do want to stress is that when this economy collapses, it is bound to be much worse. Another point I would like to stress is that collapse here is likely to be permanent. The factors that allowed Russia and the other former Soviet republics to recover are not present here.

In spite of all this, I believe that in every age and circumstance, people can sometimes find not just a means and a reason to survive, but enlightenment, fulfillment, and freedom. If we can find them even after the economy collapses, then why not start looking for them now?

Thank you.

FOR THE RECORD

In no way, shape or form am I endorsing nor showing love to the former/current USSR.

The reason they were better prepared to cope with an economic collapse is because it is easier to drop from 2 to ZERO than 100 to ZERO. We are a nation so fat, so lazy, so corrupt and inept that when it falls, it will be harder. The observations this speaker made caught my eye and I felt this might be a good thread for debate on all issues regarding our future, politically and economically.....

wheres Troke?

would like to hear his angle on this article,

the other thing that hit me about the whole article, is,

we live alot higher on the ladder than alot of russians did, hence

we have alot farther to fall off the ladder when the day comes,

alot of interesting points made though

cooter said:

would like to hear his angle on this article,

the other thing that hit me about the whole article, is,

we live alot higher on the ladder than alot of russians did, hence

we have alot farther to fall off the ladder when the day comes,

alot of interesting points made though

Click to expand...

I'd like to hear everyone's take. The guy does raise some valid points. The part that's terrifying is that if we splinter as a nation like the USSR, there's nukes all over the place and the difference is, us Rebels would use 'em.

FOR THE RECORD

In no way, shape or form am I endorsing nor showing love to the former/current USSR.

The reason they were better prepared to cope with an economic collapse is because it is easier to drop from 2 to ZERO than 100 to ZERO. We are a nation so fat, so lazy, so corrupt and inept that when it falls, it will be harder. The observations this speaker made caught my eye and I felt this might be a good thread for debate on all issues regarding our future, politically and economically.

Click to expand...

Well said.

The welfare culture will be a sight to behold as things unravel.

re: USSR better prepared for collapse than USA.

The closer you are to the ground, the less you've got to fall.

Also - the USSR has "been there, done that" before - more so than the USA.

on this

The welfare culture will be a sight to behold as things unravel.
__________________


can we say NOLA X 1000

Ruckmanite said:

Well said.

The welfare culture will be a sight to behold as things unravel.

Click to expand...

It's not just the welfare culture. It's the "I'm entitled to it" mentality of so many of our citizens.

That mentality is one reason why I'm buying myself another firearm for Xmas. I just can not trust what the sheeple will do when everything falls apart.

Entitlements

Gotta agree there John. The entitlement culture has permeated our very core as a nation.

My favorite is my wife's grandmother. Her steadfast dedication to the democratic party was purely on the line of "at least the democrats give you something". The rest of the family agreed with this matriarch. Not that the stupid party is much of an alternative, but it at least tries to mask its socialsitic/communistic leanings.

My response was "why is it my responsibility to fund your medical and financial needs and not your own?" Needless to say, it was not well received.

We have lost our once fierce independence to the incessant bleatings of the entitlement generation.

NOLA X 1000 indeed.

Very interesting article - it makes a lot of thought-provoking points. Thanks for posting it, John.

Several large differences between US and the former USSR I can think of:

1) We have a system that, in it's untainted form, mostly works as it works with, rather than against, human nature such as reward for achievement etc.
They had a system that in it's purest form worked against human nature - equal outcome no matter how much work was put in, not just equal opportunity (which thus discourages work, etc).

2) They had a long history of invasions, bad leaders, famines, etc and it seems ingrained in their cultural memory as a national prep mindset. Americans think nothing can go wrong, Russians think not only can it go wrong, but it probably will and a lot of their products seemed to reflect that.

Even their software is like that, from what I've seen. I worked with several Russian programmers a few years ago and I've never seen such complete and pessimistic error-checking in my life It was collossally overbuilt compared to code I've seen that was produced by American programmers.

How these differences will play out in a collapse I don't know. If we rise to the occaision and clean up our system, it will be ok. But we may be too weak as a society now. Whereas the Russians had a weak and faulty system but a strong populace hardened by repeated hardship.

Tweak

John - I posted this about a week or so ago here:

http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?t=220104

But, it looks you're getting a better response.

M

If you read this carefully, all this guy is arguing is that the Socialist system is better in the long run. It prepares people for economic disaster because living in it is already a continuous disaster.

So when the real disaster strikes, hardly anybody notices.

He is sure right there.

Maher said:

John - I posted this about a week or so ago here:

http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?t=220104

But, it looks you're getting a better response.

M

Click to expand...

You know, there's something screwy going on. I do searches and pfft. Nothing's showing up even with the keywords. I've asked the mods to merge my thread with yours. There are way too many good postings in your thread to miss.

Troke said:

If you read this carefully, all this guy is arguing is that the Socialist system is better in the long run. It prepares people for economic disaster because living in it is already a continuous disaster.

So when the real disaster strikes, hardly anybody notices.

He is sure right there.

Click to expand...

That was not his total point, IMHO. He was arguing that those who are held down, having nothing, expecting nothing (communism) have little to lose. We have everything to lose, but because we abandoned our system, capitalism circa 1776 to 1913, and tried to adopt parts of theirs into ours, we are now such a diluted nation our system could not handle a cyclical shock.

Thus when the next major shock hits, it probably will be fatal.

Tweakette said:

Very interesting article - it makes a lot of thought-provoking points. Thanks for posting it, John.

Several large differences between US and the former USSR I can think of:

1) We have a system that, in it's untainted form, mostly works as it works with, rather than against, human nature such as reward for achievement etc.
They had a system that in it's purest form worked against human nature - equal outcome no matter how much work was put in, not just equal opportunity (which thus discourages work, etc).

2) They had a long history of invasions, bad leaders, famines, etc and it seems ingrained in their cultural memory as a national prep mindset. Americans think nothing can go wrong, Russians think not only can it go wrong, but it probably will and a lot of their products seemed to reflect that.


How these differences will play out in a collapse I don't know. If we rise to the occaision and clean up our system, it will be ok. But we may be too weak as a society now. Whereas the Russians had a weak and faulty system but a strong populace hardened by repeated hardship.

Tweak

Click to expand...

Troke If you read this carefully, all this guy is arguing is that the Socialist system is better in the long run. It prepares people for economic disaster because living in it is already a continuous disaster.

So when the real disaster strikes, hardly anybody notices.

He is sure right there.

Click to expand...

Tweak and Troke, you two summed it up as succinctly as possible!

Theoretically our system puts more responsibility on the individual and the Soviets on the state. However, while the Russian state had more direct control over their citizens lives, (an area where we are closing 'the gap') the Russian citizen made a habit of taking every opportunity to care for himself. "If you see a line of people you go and stand in it. If you can buy cheese when you get to the front of the line you buy it."

As a matter of experience our citizens are much like the caricature of the docile crowd member we imagine the Russians to be.

I believe a collapse here would be much more ugly than than the Soviet Union was and outside help will be scarce.
Shadow

PS Maher, I'm sorry I missed the importance of your thread but it didn't have the pretty power-point pictures to get my feeble attention!

As much as I hate to admit it, he makes some good points. I'm assuming that in his mind he's comparing a system never far from collapse, and thus relatively prepared for it, to one that allowed human potentional to flourish, but poisoned its own well (thanks in large part to the kind of economic tinkering that characterized the former system). America has blessed the world many times over with discoveries and inventions that have made life more tolerable for millions of people; the Soviet Union discovered or invented very little of lasting benefit, and enslaved or killed millions. We should have dropped the A-bomb on Moscow back when we had the chance. But that was not in the plans, was it?

Still, he makes some good points worthy of thought. If and when things begin to truly unravel here, it will be a spectacle unmatched in human history. Adds a bit of oil to the prep wheels.

Thanks John and Maher,

a very good post. Clearly the are some very valid points made in the presentation.

Need to start workinh on those 'survival skills!', gonna need them someday soon.

This one is worth a bump!

bv

Yes, he does do some cheerleading for Socialism. Nonetheless, the mojority of his observations are spot-on.

My thoughts are that the USA will not "crash", but rather, that we will "degenerate".

NOLA X 1000 indeed. I think Mad Max and Road Warrior, as well as the most recent Dawn of the Dead, should be viewed as tutorials. I shudder to think what a place like L.A. will look like a month after the Welfare checks, fuel tankers, and grocery trucks have become a distant memory.

This is what your odds are going to look like when the masses figure out that there isn't ANY food left in their cupboards OR in the grocery stores, and YOU get identified as "hoarding".


If Hurricane Katrina taught our nation nothing else, it was that the veneer of our "civility" is far thinner than imagined. "We" couldn't even handle the chaos in one city. Imagine what will happen when it is EVERY city in the nation. Say hello to the Dark Ages again.

At least my wardrobe will finally come back into style. Post-apocalyptic fashion has always been so much fun. I have always wanted to sport sections of studded motorcycle tire on my duster; that stuff has got to make pretty good armor against most "bloody weapons"...

Mark D said:

Yes, he does do some cheerleading for Socialism. Nonetheless, the mojority of his observations are spot-on.

My thoughts are that the USA will not "crash", but rather, that we will "degenerate".

NOLA X 1000 indeed. I think Mad Max and Road Warrior, as well as the most recent Dawn of the Dead, should be viewed as tutorials. I shudder to think what a place like L.A. will look like a month after the Welfare checks, fuel tankers, and grocery trucks have become a distant memory.

This is what your odds are going to look like when the masses figure out that there isn't ANY food left in their cupboards OR in the grocery stores, and YOU get identified as "hoarding".

If Hurricane Katrina taught our nation nothing else, it was that the veneer of our "civility" is far thinner than imagined. "We" couldn't even handle the chaos in one city. Imagine what will happen when it is EVERY city in the nation. Say hello to the Dark Ages again.

At least my wardrobe will finally come back into style. Post-apocalyptic fashion has always been so much fun. I have always wanted to sport sections of studded motorcycle tire on my duster; that stuff has got to make pretty good armor against most "bloody weapons"...

Click to expand...

Okay gang, we've all pretty much agreed, it's going to suck as it disintegrates.

So now the big question:

Who gains control of the strategic weapons or does it become a regionalized power grab with military districts controlling so much of each under a martial law scenario?

I lean towards a corporatocracy in some regions, military districts and just plain anarchy in others.

JohnGaltfla said:

Okay gang, we've all pretty much agreed, it's going to suck as it disintegrates.

So now the big question:

Who gains control of the strategic weapons or does it become a regionalized power grab with military districts controlling so much of each under a martial law scenario?

I lean towards a corporatocracy in some regions, military districts and just plain anarchy in others.

Click to expand...

The strategic weapons will remain under the control of the "central" government. A vestige of todays power makers living in heavily armed seclusion, will still exercise a degree of international pull simply because they have all the toys that glow in the dark. I expect that many of our current military reservations will morph into luxury (compared to outside the wire) accomodations for the rich and powerful. Places like Fort Lewis/McChord AFB will become military cities.

The rest of us will be left to endure in one fashion or another.

Mark D said:

The strategic weapons will remain under the control of the "central" government. A vestige of todays power makers living in heavily armed seclusion, will still exercise a degree of international pull simply because they have all the toys that glow in the dark. I expect that many of our current military reservations will morph into luxury (compared to outside the wire) accomodations for the rich and powerful. Places like Fort Lewis/McChord AFB will become military cities.

The rest of us will be left to endure in one fashion or another.

Click to expand...

True. There are some seriously nice military reservations that will be just fine.

I just wonder, what if units start picking sides. Florida vs. Maryland. Michigan vs. Oklahoma. Will fights ensue battling over limited resources and those states which control the pipelines and food supply create a new Amerika?

I refer back to an excellent read, which I might break out again some time soon, The Nine Nations of North America , a book I think is going to have some major bearing on our future, unintended of course.

Well I'm a gonna think twice about buying some Google stocks at $500 a pop now!


Great article. I think what the USSR went thru was semi-planned and their way of morphing into a more capitalist friendly type state to acquire much needed funding from World Bankers. I also think the World Bankers realize the future doesn't lie with the U.S., we aren't their safe investment haven or big brother bodyguard anymore. People need to understand the globalists allegiance lies solely with PROFITs not nations, that's why the U.S. is currently being inventoried and liquidated.

In a social regression scenario, Russia could actually be decades ahead of us, in that they'e gone thru the shift changes, while we are still clinging to our old ways.

And yep to the higher you climb the farther you fall.

JohnGaltfla said:

True. There are some seriously nice military reservations that will be just fine.

I just wonder, what if units start picking sides. Florida vs. Maryland. Michigan vs. Oklahoma. Will fights ensue battling over limited resources and those states which control the pipelines and food supply create a new Amerika?

I refer back to an excellent read, which I might break out again some time soon, The Nine Nations of North America , a book I think is going to have some major bearing on our future, unintended of course.

Click to expand...

I can easily see where certain jealous or greedy functionaries would be prone to conflict with other functionaries who were viewed as threatening competition, or vulnerable resource holders. Although, that kind of behavior is virtually unknown amongst the halls of power in our country, so it would probably take a long time for that kind of hostile activity to manifest itself.

Mark D said:

I can easily see where certain jealous or greedy functionaries would be prone to conflict with other functionaries who were viewed as threatening competition, or vulnerable resource holders. Although, that kind of behavior is virtually unknown amongst the halls of power in our country, so it would probably take a long time for that kind of hostile activity to manifest itself.

Click to expand...

You're right Mark. Probably at least 8 weeks without network television at least.

Last month I made a lengthy argument for the rise of Feudalism in our country on another board. I was largely shot down, but I think time will prove my point.

It is the single most consistent form of governance the planet has ever know. The last two centuries have been a gross anomaly.

In truth, I think we are already there, it just that the PR sytem is so good, that most folks don't recognize it. Joe Six-Pack will shout, "I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free!" even in the face of a limitlessly powerful central government at the county, state, and federal level.

Um Joe??? You aren't "Free". You are regulated and granted privledges by the local lord. Our "elections" might change some of the faces, but the position of "nobility" endures, and the influence of our country's "royalty" only continues to grow.

Mark D said:

Last month I made a lengthy argument for the rise of Feudalism in our country on another board. I was largely shot down, but I think time will prove my point.

It is the single most consistent form of governance the planet has ever know. The last two centuries have been a gross anomaly.

In truth, I think we are already there, it just that the PR sytem is so good, that most folks don't recognize it. Joe Six-Pack will shout, "I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free!" even in the face of a limitlessly powerful central government at the county, state, and federal level.

Um Joe??? You aren't "Free". You are regulated and granted privledges.

Click to expand...

Well, I won't dispute you on that point. We pay "tribute" annually to the state and local governments in the form of property taxes. No different from yielding percentages of your crops on the land you sit on to the king.

We pay tribute to the Federal Government in the form of IRS exacted income taxes and in some states also.

We pay for the right to live here, yet our founding fathers had no intent for taxation to be used for the programs and projects developed with the original documents of law.

Feudalism is what we have now, a stricter form is where we will end up. The difference in my opinion is that some will follow a socialist corporatocracy model while others will follow a military-oligarchical model. So in some regions, Lockheed may dominate with their structure while a military dictatorship in others.

On the positive side, true, unfettered capitalism could re-emerge in the "free" or anarchy ridden regions. That's where I would prefer to be, despite the risks to personal safety, it will be the freest and emerge the strongest in the long run.

JohnGaltfla said:

On the positive side, true, unfettered capitalism could re-emerge in the "free" or anarchy ridden regions. That's where I would prefer to be, despite the risks to personal safety, it will be the freest and emerge the strongest in the long run.

Click to expand...

Ding ding ding ding! Give me unfettered risk over secure exploitation any day.

Always the fundamentals come back to The Right to Life; The Right to Liberty; The Right to Property.

The SU was doomed due to ignoring all that, and concentrating on The Big Lie - which is, 'We Own You'.

The West is also doomed, due to ignoring all that, and concentrating on The Big Lie - which is, 'We Own You'.

Both got away with it for 70+ years, due to holding each other up as huge fearsome spectres to their citizens.

Russia transitioned despite having bad foundations to reorganise itself on (it is still not in a solid setup, and that will continue until the reality and sheer practicalities of Life, Liberty, and Property, sink in).

America has massive strengths. One of the most critical, to the whole World, is agriculture. But there are Etc's.

The Right to Life; The Right to Liberty; The Right to Property, are entrenched as the only viable and solid foundations. That WILL make an unimagineably positive difference, as long as enough people recognise that, and struggle for that.

Whatever the 'side' it has to be grasped that exploiting and abusing human beings, is never viable for future stability, or the creation and working of a Market that 'cannot' be bucked.

We have needed a major economic crash for a way past due number of years (there is a very good reason why they are cyclical - it's called Moderation of Consequences). Trying to avoid Reality kicking us in the derier, only-makes-things-worse when the inevitable Crunch Time finally does arrive.

When it does arrive, the widely used Russian anaesthetic for falling off ladders (Vodka) may not do any good, but at least you won't feel anything.

And when you do sober up, things may be past the worst.

ETA: I read the above 2 posts of John and Mark after writing this, and I have to agree with both their sentiments.

Also, something to think on, due to the activities of organisations like Animal Rights Groups, we are well on the way towards the reintroduction of Forest Laws.

Feudalism utterly sucks, and is no formula for a successful anything.

Okay gang, we've all pretty much agreed, it's going to suck as it disintegrates.

So now the big question:

Who gains control of the strategic weapons or does it become a regionalized power grab with military districts controlling so much of each under a martial law scenario?

I lean towards a corporatocracy in some regions, military districts and just plain anarchy in others.

Click to expand...

There's a common assumption among survivalist types that the government will somehow disintegrate when the next great calamity occurs. While it may not survive in its present form, I think it's a mistake to assume government will either cease to exist or fractionalize to the point of being ineffective. In a certain sense, government has always derived its powers, be they "just" or otherwise, from the consent of the governed.

This being the Age of Entitlement, I cannot imagine the vast majority of Americans preferring the uncertainties of individual self-determination to the relative "security" of a police state. In other words, I think that in any scenario short of a major nuclear war, the government, in one form or another, will remain very much in charge, though it's form will not resemble at all what is prescribed by the Constitution.

Bump

Fisher said:

Bump

Click to expand...

Thank you for bumping this! Now looking back say 5 years later knowing that Bernake, Madoff, and many, many others are ALL first generation americans of russian "immigrants" so on and so forth, will anyone be able to follow the money trail to Russia? Where did all the money go? Russia.

Thanks for posting this John. Four to five years later; and the similarities/differences are just as applicable today.

I did not see it mentioned, but a major difference is that our currency is the reserve currency of the world. This means that the collapse will be total. This also means that, unlike the USSR and Argentina, there will be no other currency that we can fall back on; other than gold/silver.

From: 12-07-2006

Troke said:

If you read this carefully, all this guy is arguing is that the Socialist system is better in the long run. It prepares people for economic disaster because living in it is already a continuous disaster.

So when the real disaster strikes, hardly anybody notices.

He is sure right there.

Click to expand...

^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^

"...In other words, I think that in any scenario short of a major nuclear war, the government, in one form or another, will remain very much in charge, though it's form will not resemble at all what is prescribed by the Constitution. .."

I keep telling you guys that we will go to a system where everybody has a place, everybody will be in that place, and there will be no pushy people trying to get out of their place. Wage and price controls and 'allocation of scarce resources' will be the first step.

Reagan was the last POTUS to roll back a socialist program. (Jimmuh's price controls and eventual rationing of gasoline) I doubt we will see another POTUS that does that.

This thing is to out of date is to be absurd. He is stuck in 1980's.
Modern day Moscow is a mirror image of US. Free housing? Are you kidding.

Wow, I thought Jn Galt had come back. I was going to tell him I missed him since TOL banned me from their site. Can't even get in.

Thanks for the bump. Some of the points reminded me of the "Alpha Strategy"


http://simplefinancialfreedom.com/the-alpha-strategy