To the OP:
I absolutely could handle fallout conditions until I died of fallout conditions.
Couldn't have said it better, and I was wondering how to respond to this thread, because it's something we've often wondered. But, well put!
To the OP:
I absolutely could handle fallout conditions until I died of fallout conditions.
I don't have much attachment to the idea of surviving for surviving sake.
You're assuming that those police officers and soldiers are selfless idealists. I think that most of the cops and troopers are nothing else than mercenaries working and risking their lives for social benefits as high salaries, or vision of early and well paid retirement perhaps. I think that huge nuclear conflict between any of major nuclear powerhouses will be followed by global economy collapse. Look at USA today - there are huge incomes generated by American companies on global market, yet your economy can't maintain itself without billions of dollars lent from China. Cut the global market off and your developed economy is effectively crippled, which means no more money for government, no more money for cops and army, teachers, physicians..Not really. There are still going to be large areas that are self-suffecient and unaffected by the nuclear attack. The worst-off areas are going to be large cities and towns, which will effectively be under martial law if they are not hit directly.
I don't think so. All you need to do is to take down ten or twenty major power plants in any modern country and whole electrical grid start falling apart. It's carefully balanced network, designed for certain outputs. Take few of the key powerplants down and you're facing global blackout; which means no more refrigerators for your food, for instance. Turn off the refrigerators in any modern big city for 24 hours and your food supplies are fucked up - deep frozen meat depreciated, bacterial contamination of dairy products, you name it. There's no way how to supply any modern big city with food in case of global blackout and people will turn to wolves pretty fast without food.For one to have a true "Fallout 1-2 apocalypse", so much nuclear material would have to be detonated that it's suggestible that the atmosphere itself would not be able to maintain its currency.
Agreed. According to people from BBC working on Threads movie back in 1984, big nuclear conflict will throw any directly affected countries back to the middle ages (cca 1400 AD) in terms of social structures, industry, agriculture, or medical care. Which means no more machinery for food production, only our bare hands and will to survive.The worse case scenario that we can go towards, is Europe during the dark ages, between 400 AD and 1100 AD.
This is what The Dopamine Cleric mentioned - social relationships will become much more important in post-apo world and I think he's right, they'll become one of the main reasons for moving forward. Helping own family members or friends to survive can be really strong reason for living... I don't have much attachment to the idea of surviving for surviving sake.
Yeah i'm just wondering how you would handle a nuclear war e.g mentally, physically. Of course we don't know how we'll handle the horrific conditions of a post-apocalyptic environment, but we can speculate. Discuss to your comfort.
*don't give me nightmares*![]()
The biggest gripe I have with people on this topic, is the assumption that people will act lawlessly and like animals once society collapses. I'm sure some will, and if pushed, people will do what it takes to survive.
However, as a whole, people are social creatures "As stated by welsh" who value themselves in relation to other people. Even when 2 countries go to war with each other, it has been set up in a social and cultural construct to subjectively shoehorn the proposition.
No country invades another country for oil, they invade countries due to ideology, that is fueled by the oil.
Food becomes more plentiful when there are more people around, due to surplus being gathered. These people, however, require social roles that make them gather food. That is why places like Africa and India are fucked. It is not the material environment they live in "Which doesn't help with its scarcity", it is the social norm of inequality and domination that causes this food shortage.
The worse case scenario that we can go towards, is Europe during the dark ages, between 400 AD and 1100 AD. That period itself was not so "Dark" as people make it seem, but it did have its horrors. That period itself was an apocalypse. The people themselves, were living in the ruins of the former Roman Empire. There were bathhouses, temples, sewers, aquifers, middle class wealth, that all degraded but was in some ways maintained by the people of Europe.
Feudal food-based economies would dominate for a period, and education would be far far more complex than it was in the middle-ages. Those people didn't have a clue that the earth was round, ect. We would atleast have the idea and information within the landscape we exist in. The only way that would go away is if a certain society destroyed that information on purpose, and that society would be dominated by the more advanced society that embraced its advanced nature.
You also have to understand that the most powerful and influential ideology that would be present during this time period would be to change the world back to how it was before the apocalypse.
No, it would not be an easy "I can lay in bed today, browse facebook, and play with myself." paradigm like we currently live in, but it won't be ridiculous either.
I think in some ways, socializing and relating to other people would be easier because of the necessity of doing so. The idea of having children, in the typical modern western sense, would more than likely be elevated to more preferable since the "Single independent post-modern sexual person" paradigm requires the infrastructure to go about that lifestyle.
rowanherb10 said:A lot of people forget about religion and how important that is in a world of cold, with religion large groups of people reside together and have something to work towards. They all believe in the same thing all using the same law/code, this is a simplistic civilization that works. But it does have some limitations.
I would get bored fast.
Surviving, finding food etc gets boring fast. Also I wouldn't have company so.. well, boring life. Exciting for a while, yes. Extremely risky, yes. Tiring, yes.
But my training will probably help.
Also I'll try to get a tank fast, to convert to a mobile command post. Until I run out of fuel, in which it's a static command post.
I would get bored fast.
Surviving, finding food etc gets boring fast. Also I wouldn't have company so.. well, boring life. Exciting for a while, yes. Extremely risky, yes. Tiring, yes.
But my training will probably help.
Also I'll try to get a tank fast, to convert to a mobile command post. Until I run out of fuel, in which it's a static command post.
If you secure a generator, then you don't need to be worried about being bored.
Personally people wouldn't even acknowledge a war is about to take place, i'm not sure if the government would talk about to avoid mass riots & murder; if there's any reason to keep it from people anyway, we'll probably die in the blast. From experience, a people without a leader becomes lawless and primal; even if there was civilization
a uneasy truce is worse than war. Imagine being on edge of violence 24/7 365 day's a year. No fucking way it will be easy! Cheers Vault 11.
Let's face it, none of us would survive because we're all huge nerds. /thread