Tag Archive for where is the safest place to live during a disaster

Prepper Relocation Part IV: The Fatal Error of Relocating to an Isolated Region

One of the single biggest mistakes preppers make is that they buy into the myth that relocating to a small region in the North West corner of the United States is their “best” chance of survival.  As you now know from my previous three articles in this series, this theory is inaccurate and is not based on any sound research.  Further, it causes people to unnecessarily incur significant additional costs and difficulties when developing their preparedness plans. However, what you still may not know is that there is a large body of empirical evidence that repeatedly demonstrates people living in isolated, remote areas are often at the greatest risk during wide spread social chaos and collapse.  Not coincidentally, these people also suffer some of the most hardships.  Therefore, with respect to our contemporary situation in the United States, preppers relocating to Idaho with the explicit intent to escape an oppressive government and or are planning to escape widespread instability during a systemic collapse of the system might very well be signing their death warrants.  Instead, contrary to contemporary prepping strategies, it would be better to be closer if not in the midst of a more densely populated area.

I understand what I just wrote probably sent many readers into anger and shock.  Nonetheless, it is far better to get the right information now then to continue along a misguided path to destruction.  No doubt, some readers will immediately discount what I am about to say because they are blinded by their own preconceived biases.  I cannot help those people.  Thankfully, the majority of my readers are intelligent thinking people that will quickly grasp the conclusions to be drawn from the evidence and modify their preparedness strategies accordingly.  In fact, don’t take my word alone, I invite everyone to conduct their own independent research into our prepping assumptions and disseminate their findings.

My theories seem counterintuitive to the premise that the farther from people you are, the farther from harm you are.  This is because the basic assumptions of this safety distance premise are flawed.  As the theory goes, in the event of a collapse or major catastrophe, being located away from people in a remote, self-sufficient redoubt is your best chance.  I have already discussed why the 300 mile rule is a useless metric and that the notion of a “Golden Horde” of refugees fleeing a city and destroying all in their wake is equally unfounded and completely untrue.  The last pillar of this theory is that being isolated conveys additional survival benefits.  To test it accurately, one must evaluate case studies from around the world and then correctly apply them to a realistic scenario domestically.  Read more

Prepper Relocation Part II: The Myth of a 300 Mile Radius and the Golden Horde

In part one of our series on “Prepper Relocation,” I directly addressed a common false logic amongst preppers that led to bad conclusions regarding why one should relocate to Idaho.  Specifically, I challenged the idea that a bunker was a viable long term survival strategy for a major catastrophe many prep for such as nuclear war.  Simply establishing a second residence in a modern first world location like Santiago, Singapore, or New Zealand offer far better options for survival, both physically and economically, than hiding in a hole while a nuclear war is carried out above you.  Today, I continue the slaughter of the sacred cows and challenge the merits of relocating to a site far from other people.  As I previously discussed, relocation isn’t a subject to take lightly.  It may be the single most important decision a prepper makes and therefore any plan should be heavily vetted before time and money is invested in executing it.  Therefore, one must consider counter arguments to contemporary “expert” recommendations.  By leveraging the information in this series, you will be far better prepared to develop a personalized answer to what truly is you “best prepper place to relocate.”

Contemporary prepper logic states that the farther your relocation site is from dense centers of population, the better.  In fact, the magic number often touted is that you must be at least 300 miles from any major population center.  However, is this really the case?  This is very important because if 300 miles is accurate, it severely constrains your relocation options.  If it is not a valid constraint, then suddenly you have many good options for relocation depending on the specific scenario you are prepping for.  As such, let’s examine what that conclusion is premised upon.  Breaking the theory down, you have two main hypotheses to vet.  The first is that 300 miles provides a necessary and adequate buffer from an urban center.  The second is that from said urban area a horde of starving refugees will emerge and overrun your redoubt.

Let me be the first to tell you neither hypothesis constituting this prepper theory, which to date has been held up as prepper law, is valid.  Read more