Survival in Tough Times: Don’t let bad or destructive people onto your island
Fight or Flight
We have instincts that have served us well over the past few thousand years. We’re adaptable creatures, capable of evaluating situations, adjusting them or adjusting to them, or fleeing them. There must have been a cave-dwelling ancestor who opened one eye on a Thursday morning and began to evaluate the noise he could hear outside the entrance. Maybe these were his thoughts: “How big a stick was it that snapped? Can I hear it breathing? Was it something we sometimes eat, or that sometimes tries to eat us? Where’s that stone axe? I wonder if Dug over in 4A heard it? Maybe Dug is out early? Is everybody from our clan still inside? Durn fire burned down again. Did I bring firewood in last night? Where’s the spear? If it’s a saber tooth tiger, we’ll have to make a stand here where we’re protected on three sides. If it’s a hungry saber tooth tiger, we’ll run a goat out into the brush, then run like the wind to shelter with the folks over at the big camp on the river. If it’s nothing, I’ve got to work on a better supply of hatchets and rocks. Maybe I should think about just moving over to the river camp anyway.”
Figure the odds to help decide if it’s time to fight or run
In other words, do we choose fight or flight? There’s a variation we’ve all heard: You have to know when to hold ‘em, and know when to fold ‘em. There’s also FTO, figure the odds. Figure the odds to help decide if it’s time to fight or run.
We make these calculations every day, but usually life and death doesn’t enter into it. Those are the easy days, when the choice is more like rye or whole wheat, chicken or meat loaf, fried or mashed, crackers or chips, Ginger or Mary Ann?
There are times when we have no choice, that is, when there’s no avenue of escape. When we’re trapped, our backs against the wall, when we’ve crossed the Rubicon, when it’s fight or die.
Because we live in very strange times, the fight or flight option can sneak up on us. What happens when the culture becomes frayed? What happens when the foundations, the assumptions, become weak or undermined? What happens when the fabric is tattered?
There are societal assumptions and shared beliefs that bind us together, allowing us to think about things other than survival and living until next week. When we notice that those old assumptions, cherished by many, are increasingly ignored by others, then there is a growing concern. If we notice patterns pointing toward societal breakdown, the concern may grow into a sense of alarm, then dread for what might come next.
These days there are many ways to gauge public sentiments. It used to be that political figures had an instinct for knowing what large segments of the public wanted. They shared the assumptions about the social contract and what held the country together because they had come from the same place. They often had humble origins, allowing them to understand the public on a firsthand basis. Those humble origins were far away from the seats of power. In rural or small town places, people have to deal with other people on a daily basis. People know who you are and where you went to school. Polls and lobbyists came later, after politicians had their common grounding out in the real world.
The years went by, however, and more and more political figures came from places where they didn’t rub elbows with common folks so much. Sometimes these political types grew up in family dynastic settings or in the seats of power themselves. Some figures came from semi-humble settings, but quickly adjusted to wealth and privilege, forgetting their average origins. Still more came up with wealth and privilege in family dynastic settings in the middle of the seats of power.
We hear of the need for term limits on a regular basis because with term limits, there would, presumably, be much less opportunity for people of wealth and political privilege to spend lifetimes in Ottawa or Washington, DC, dictating to people out in Russell, Livingston, and Peoria how they must change their lives to conform to the demands of the people in the seats of power.
When presidents and prime ministers seem curiously unconcerned about public reactions or public hostility, when they only act concerned about elections, but aren’t really
It used to be understood that big time politicians could propose crazy policies but the public, sooner or later, would be able to vote to have their say. After all, that’s what ‘democratic republic’ and ‘parliamentary commonwealth’ used to mean. The whole idea was that the people would ultimately decide, and the politicians would have to just deal with it. That assumption has been growing much weaker over the years in many Western countries.
When presidents and prime ministers seem curiously unconcerned about public reactions or public hostility, when they only act concerned about elections, but aren’t really, then people begin to wonder what’s going on. After all, it has long been the nature of politicians to worry a great deal about how the voters view them. If they aren’t worried about what the general public thinks, then what does that tell us?
Have certain politicians decided to fight because they have FTO and don’t think it’s possible to lose? Have certain “opposition” politicians in Ottawa and Washington decided the odds are better throwing in with those already in power because they want to be on the side of those who have made sure they can’t lose?
When we learn that major institutions like the media and the press, education and teachers, public health leaders, social media giants, and opinion leaders rather suddenly show outright disdain for the public, it’s going to make people wonder what’s going on.
More and more people have noticed this trend. In quiet voices and with faces lined with concern, they raise the issue with others they know and trust.
In the current political climate, what’s the best choice, fight or flight?
There’s no telling what’s actually coming in the months and years ahead, but plenty of people think it doesn’t look good. Everybody has an opinion. Because there are lots of unusual events and trends these days, perhaps some prudent planning is in order.
In the current political climate, what’s the best choice, fight or flight?
No matter what happens, we will need people to be sane and stable. So first, work to create an island of sanity and stability where you are. When that’s in place and all buttoned down, work secondly to link your island of sanity to the islands of others. If it becomes necessary or advisable to flee, plan to take the components of your island of sanity with you.
Plan for a storm, and hope it never comes. With luck, your biggest concern will be rotating and using food in the pantry.
Here are some projects to consider that will help bring stability and sanity to your island. Do some research on your family’s history. Plan a garden and make some steps toward actually starting it. Find some good garden tools, order seeds, buy a freezer or a canner. Get some notebooks if you write by hand, or set up a couple of documents on your computer to jot thoughts when they occur to you. Write the thoughts out more fully and save them. Develop correspondence with family or friends. Share articles and cartoons and memes with people who share your values. Locate trusted sources of news. Develop other means of communication besides phones and computers. Take photos of beautiful things, intriguing things, routine things. Save them to more than one place and share them.
Finally, don’t let bad or destructive people onto your island.
Dr. Bruce Smith -- Bio and Archives
Dr. Bruce Smith (Inkwell, Hearth and Plow) is a retired professor of history and a lifelong observer of politics and world events. He holds degrees from Indiana University and the University of Notre Dame. In addition to writing, he works as a caretaker and handyman. His non-fiction book The War Comes to Plum Street, about daily life in the 1930s and during World War II, may be ordered from Indiana University Press.
