My guide to surviving the zombie apocalypse

[CarpeDiem54]

I've always thought it would be very cool to live in a missile silo, ZA or not.

[Irishmaple]

Mine would be a lighthouse.  I don't know why, but I've always loved the idea of living in one.  Foggy coastline and all.

[lawless]

Let's say you go hole up in a cabin in the highest, most remote peaks of the Rockies.  The remoteness would certainly be excellent protection from the initial swell of shamblers coming out of any major city, as well as any marauding still-humans looking for supplies to pillage.

Get a little further on down the timeline, though.  If the walkers start out in the city, they're going to stay there until their food supply is gone - and then they'll leave.  Now, they're not going to say, "well, Denver is shot to shit - bet there's still lots of cornfed honeys in Kansas, though."  They're not going to be leaving a city with a specific destination in mind.  They're just going to start walking in probably a relatively straight line - barring impediments, jostling from other walkers, and path divergences toward the next tasty representative of the Meat Group.  Their numbers will be great enough you'll see a fairly evenly-spread diaspora of zombies radiating out from every major population center.  And they won't get tired, or think "wow, that mountain looks really steep - guess I better go around" - they're just going to keep walking, walking, walking.  Because that's what walkers do.

I have thought about this very seriously because I live at the foot of the rockies outside Denver.  The problem I envision is that there are millions of people in the Denver/Boulder/Colorado Springs corridor, and many would probably have a similar idea, since a lot of people have a house, condo, or cabin up in the mountains to start with.  The problem is that the rockies are super steep and exhausting to hike, and you're not going to get far carrying any significant amount of supplies.  There are very few roads heading into and through the rockies, and they run largely through canyons with steep mountains on the sides of the roads, or drop offs.  There are some other, wider areas, but mostly that's what you're working with.  There are already regular traffic delays and jams on I-70 every Sunday afternoon.  I envision that unless you act very fast and see the warning signs before everyone else, you would quickly get stuck in a traffic jam in which people who had been bit began to turn and then attack their families, friends, and strangers.  Panic and fights would break out, shots would be fired, people would try to flee on foot, and they would have a very difficult time getting away.  All of the noise and the long line of cars leading straight back to Denver would attract more and more zombies.  The advantage would be that zombies might not be able to successfully walk the terrain, though certainly fresher ones might be able to.  And unlike the living, they would not get tired.  Another problem is that water is very scarce up in the high country.  It can be found, but it can be tough.  Also, the altitude affects you even if you're accustomed to living at 5200 feet or so in the Denver area, which gives the zombies an advantage.  Not to mention, but the people who already live in the mountain communities might try to fight off the people fleeing, and barricade roads or blow some critical tunnels and passes.  Again, you'd have to act very quickly to get up there safely, and your cabin would have to be very remote, which is not so common.

 

However, Wyoming, to the north, is dramatically less populated, as is Montana and Idaho.  Wyoming has about the same amount of land as Colorado, but the entire population of the state is 500,000 people.  Colorado is closer to 4-5 million.  If you could get up to a cabin with supplies in the Rockies in those states, and could handle the periodic zombie or small groups, it might be a good option, especially if you could manage to stay up there for awhile.  Undoubtedly some zombies would make it anywhere, but when population centers are so far away, and the terrain is so tough, they might be few and far enough between that you'd be ok.  The downside is the climate is colder and rougher, and you'd have to be pretty good at living off the land or move in a lot of supplies. 

 

I kind of wondered if it would make sense to try to build a community in the Ozarks and use the natural terrain as a barrier against zombies.  I don't know, but it seems like the climate might be better than the Rockies for growing food, because it's not as high altitude. I might be wrong though.

Edited November 8, 2014 by lawless

[CarpeDiem54]

Hey, lawless! I was thinking about you the other day when I watched a show about Mesa Verde. That might be a great place for us to hole up.

But I agree with all you said. I-70 is like the ZA on a good day. Can you imagine being stuck in the Eisenhower Tunnel with a bunch of walkers/crazed humans? And every asshat and their brother would have the idea to head for the hills.

I still like the idea of heading to the Super Max in Florence. An underground prison may work well. But there's not a whole lot of water in that part of the state. I wonder how long before Ft. Carson would be overrun? Or the Air Force Academy? Heading out to the plains may be safer.

ETA - NORAD!!!! That's the ticket!

Edited November 8, 2014 by CarpeDiem54

[GreyBunny]

I've always thought it would be very cool to live in a missile silo, ZA or not.

I was watching Doomsday Preppers (yeah, I know) and a hippie couple bought an abandoned missile silo and the property around it and turned it into an awesome survivalist enclave complete with a greenhouse and a meditation room.  It looked pretty comfy.

 

Living in the PNW I'm not sure where I'd go.  The Cascades are remote with thick forests but that's a problem for those who go into them alive like DB Cooper, I don't think the walkers would have much trouble.  Same with the Olympics to the west.  The best I can come up with is to try for one of the San Juan Islands, help other survivors clear it, and then guard it from incursions by the undead.  They're fairly well sheltered, have temperate weather and rich farmland, and we don't have hurricanes up here.

Edited November 8, 2014 by GreyBunny

[CarpeDiem54]

I was watching Doomsday Preppers (yeah, I know) and a hippie couple bought an abandoned missile silo and the property around it and turned it into an awesome survivalist enclave complete with a greenhouse and a meditation room.  It looked pretty comfy.

A lot of people have converted old missile silos. Some are extremely cool. I also like some of those old 737s that people have converted into homes.

Hmmm. Now I need to look and find some old silos to see how far away they are.

[Cheetosandchoc]

This is everyone's must-have guide to making survival supplies.

Except the blow-gun. That should be on the weapons thread.

http://www.tamponcrafts.com/angel.html

Just for fun I might buy a box of tampons dump them in the middle of the table and tell the kids we are making Angel ornaments with them while acting like it's totally normal.I wonder how they would react. My kids range from age 16 to 6. The littles won't know what they are and my bigs horrified. To take I further perhaps we will bring them I to my mom's assisted living place and offer them. See if anyone notices, and how they react.

I still say no ZA plan is complete without boobie traps.

[Dobian]

I understand what you're shooting for here, but I think you're basing your plans on a fallacy - i.e., that remoteness from civilization will provide a buffer from the effects. That would probably be true in the very initial stages, but not later on, for one simple reason - zombies don't think.

Yeah but you have to look at my premise, that zombies would actually have a short shelf life. If they were walking around for years like in Walking Dead, then it wouldn't be the best plan. But if I think it wouldn't take more than a couple of months to outlast them, I think I could stay remote for that long.

[halgia]

Get a little further on down the timeline, though. If the walkers start out in the city, they're going to stay there until their food supply is gone - and then they'll leave. Now, they're not going to say, "well, Denver is shot to shit - bet there's still lots of cornfed honeys in Kansas, though." They're not going to be leaving a city with a specific destination in mind. They're just going to start walking in probably a relatively straight line - barring impediments, jostling from other walkers, and path divergences toward the next tasty representative of the Meat Group. Their numbers will be great enough you'll see a fairly evenly-spread diaspora of zombies radiating out from every major population center. And they won't get tired, or think "wow, that mountain looks really steep - guess I better go around" - they're just going to keep walking, walking, walking. Because that's what walkers do.

I think this depends a lot on the parameters of the zombies. In most portrayals, they kind of shuffle around aimlessly in the lack of a specific food source or something that they're headed to. In that case, if they're going up a steep hill, they're just naturally likely to unintentionally turn to go across/down the hill; if you're stumbling around without a specific destination, that's just going to be what happens to your feet. I definitely don't see very many walkers just randomly going up a very steep trail that requires lifting your feet a lot.

[Nashville]

Yeah but you have to look at my premise, that zombies would actually have a short shelf life. If they were walking around for years like in Walking Dead, then it wouldn't be the best plan. But if I think it wouldn't take more than a couple of months to outlast them, I think I could stay remote for that long.

 

But as the zombies (both old and new) fed, wouldn't they tend to be rejuvenated - or re-juiced, at the very least? 

That might throw a wrench into the expiration date calculations.

 

 

I think this depends a lot on the parameters of the zombies. In most portrayals, they kind of shuffle around aimlessly in the lack of a specific food source or something that they're headed to. In that case, if they're going up a steep hill, they're just naturally likely to unintentionally turn to go across/down the hill; if you're stumbling around without a specific destination, that's just going to be what happens to your feet. I definitely don't see very many walkers just randomly going up a very steep trail that requires lifting your feet a lot.

 

I wouldn't assume zombie movements would be subject to the laws of fluid mechanics - if for no other reason than I think surviving a ZA would be a helluva lot more difficult than getting up on a ridge and watching them puddle in the hollows.

[Zahdii]

It would really depend on if a person was able to survive long enough to learn about the capabilities of the zombies.  The show has problems in that area.  Zombies can either barely move or shuffle along fairly quickly.  Sometimes they can climb steps and sometimes the can't.  Usually they just attack and kill, but once in a while they seem to show an evil pleasure in the act.  (That might be a directing choice or the interpretation of the actor.)

 

Now I'm working on a scenario on how all this Zombie stuff started, but that's not for this thread.  I'm having fun though.  I've got avian flu, pig flu, and a prion disease merging in some jungle because an epidemiologist violated protocols and became patient zero.  Is there a thread for where we surmise how all this began?

Edited November 8, 2014 by Zahdii

[LilySilver]

I understand what you're shooting for here, but I think you're basing your plans on a fallacy - i.e., that remoteness from civilization will provide a buffer from the effects.  That would probably be true in the very initial stages, but not later on, for one simple reason - zombies don't think.

 

Let's say you go hole up in a cabin in the highest, most remote peaks of the Rockies.  The remoteness would certainly be excellent protection from the initial swell of shamblers coming out of any major city, as well as any marauding still-humans looking for supplies to pillage. 

Get a little further on down the timeline, though.  If the walkers start out in the city, they're going to stay there until their food supply is gone - and then they'll leave.  Now, they're not going to say, "well, Denver is shot to shit - bet there's still lots of cornfed honeys in Kansas, though."  They're not going to be leaving a city with a specific destination in mind.  They're just going to start walking in probably a relatively straight line - barring impediments, jostling from other walkers, and path divergences toward the next tasty representative of the Meat Group.  Their numbers will be great enough you'll see a fairly evenly-spread diaspora of zombies radiating out from every major population center.  And they won't get tired, or think "wow, that mountain looks really steep - guess I better go around" - they're just going to keep walking, walking, walking.  Because that's what walkers do.

 

My point (and I do have one) being this: if you're still on the contiguous land mass of North America, no matter WHERE you are, eventually a crowd of them is going to wander up to your front doorstep for lunch.  And they're gonna be downright persistent about it.  So remoteness is only a temporary stopgap.

 

Me? I'm thinking missile silo.  Well-barricaded, and redundant infrastructure.  :)

Well, I think it depends on how far you are from larger population centers, and just how far up in the mountains or wilderness you go.  The mountainous wilderness in the western United States is vast beyond imagining.  It's not just a few square miles.  Zombies are focused only on feeding, and would gather and move in groups based on the availability of food (ha. presumably. I speak as if it's a scientific fact.  Well, let's just say, "It is known.")  That a whole group of them would wander up into, say, the Bob Marshall Wilderness, sticking together, shambling along up steep mountainsides for hundreds of miles, finding something to eat that they could catch to keep them going, and continue roving until they found a very small encampment of a very few people seems unlikely to me.  Certainly it would be a much more rare event that what you might see on a lovely old farm outside a large population center.  There are millions of zombies there in a small geographical area to begin with.  In Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, we're only talking a few million--across those three huge states just as one example--to begin with.

 

The trade-off would be the lack of readily available resources for scavenging, and in most remote areas a difficult winter climate.  I think you'd be more likely to starve to death than encounter a horde of zombies up in the remote mountains. Best to be a small group who could feed themselves by trapping, fishing, and some hunting of larger game.

[CloverTracey]

Hello, new to the thread. I haven't seen anyone post about hitting outdoor supply stores like REI. An excellent source of survival gear...also water purification items. SAw a scene inTWD where Carol was filling water bottle from a stream the group was crossing...all I could think of was nasty stuff rotting in the water upstream, for crying out loud, filter that $&@. Probably the reality for ZA survival means you'll have to move around, be ready to adapt to changing conditions, and probably you need to folks you feel safe with. And I'm one who would have a cache or two hidden around in case of emergency.

[Nashville]

REI is the bestest funnest toy store ever.  My annual REI dividend is disturbing.

[CloverTracey]

One other thing I have not seen mentioned, at least for a short term, catch your breath option: sports fields. I have often been struck at the amount of chain link fencing involved in high school sports fields. Yes, even as I was cheering for my sons football team, I was scanning the perimeter fencing, considering the defense possibilities against the approaching zombie hoard. Not much shelter from the elements, I admit...and many sports fields are without fencing...but in my neck of the woods, there are possibilities. Plan "b" anyone?

[maplebrew]

The astroturf sports fields would have fine zombie sight lines. So for short term breath catching like you say, good idea. The down side is humans with rifle scopes. 

[kikismom]

I think I would not want anything that can be seen through; humans would know you have a set-up but also walkers will just pile up at the fence as they did at the prison.

But no one comes after you if they don't know you're there. Choose something man-made or natural with walls. Block sight and sound.

 

Then try to persuade the idiots you live with to stop going outside 5 times a day for bullshit like comic books, stale M&Ms etc. Be content with simple things like safety! water! a place to grow food.! Not so simple after all, it should be enough. I'll be damned if I hole up in a great place with some morons who screw it up and get the Gov. blasting us because they had to go out and get unnecessary batshit like some old man's used Norelco.

[Timetoread]

I'm in the suburbs of DC.  I think that would be a bad and a good thing.  It's densely populated so the herds would be quite annoying.  Almost as annoying as the living people are now.  They tend to herd on the Beltway and I'm sick of it.  That said, there is a LOT of infrastructure and much of it is military and government.  Almost every one of these facilities is outfitted for some sort of disaster scenario so if you can get inside the city, you might be okay.  Also there is lots of water, seafood, and farming areas.  The task would be to find friendlies to commune with.

 

Also, I often wonder why, when at the prison, they didn't start building structures.  Like a crappy mason wall that won't hold much, but the walkers won't push to get what they cant see.  Build the wall right on the interior of the fences.

 

One more thought, I'd think you could make a city on the rooftops.  How cool would that be with ropes and pulleys between buildings.  You could have plants and animals and people could live in the buildings - never needing to venture outside on the ground.  Urban Tarzaning.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Timetoread

[walnutqueen]

Urban Tarzaning

 

 

At first, I read this as Urban Tarzan, and wondered how a long haired Spike realty show "star" could figure into the equation.  :-D

[Zahdii]

This is something that I've suspected that some of the more sociopathic people might consider doing during the ZA, and I'm pleased that so far the show hasn't gone that route.

 

It's pretty disgusting and disturbing, so I'll put it under spoiler tags to give people a chance to avoid nightmares.

 

I could see people using children, the elderly, the infirm, or the unwanted as decoys to get away when too many zombies show up.  Just toss the sacrifices to the zombies and run, hamstring them first if you have to.  Thank Shane for putting the idea into my head.

[kikismom]

This is something that I've suspected that some of the more sociopathic people might consider doing during the ZA, and I'm pleased that so far the show hasn't gone that route.

 

It's pretty disgusting and disturbing, so I'll put it under spoiler tags to give people a chance to avoid nightmares.

 

I could see people using children, the elderly, the infirm, or the unwanted as decoys to get away when too many zombies show up.  Just toss the sacrifices to the zombies and run, hamstring them first if you have to.  Thank Shane for putting the idea into my head.

Knowing human nature, how long before betting would start?

 

A Roman Coliseum style entertainment that puts the Governor's arena to shame!

 

Watch out if we see future episode titles like "The Hangry Games" or "The Celebrated Jumping Sheriff Of Helladumbass County".

[matbrojoe]

I've just read through the thread and I'm going to disagree with the thread consensus that an island is a bad idea, it worked in Day of the Triffids, which after all is the blueprint for many modern zombie shows and films, and i think the objections raised would be largely true for any fortified compound you might set up as well.

 

If you want to remove a pervasive existential threat from your environment, one way to make that a whole lot easier is to make your environment smaller. there's no way Rick's group can kill all the zombies in North America, but they could remove them all from somewhere smaller. they can clear the prison, but the walkers are still outside trying to get in, along with assorted nut jobs like The Governor.

 

On an island you have an extended space to rear livestock and grow crops without the immediate threat of a walkerumping out from behind a bush and nibbling you. It's true you have  coastline to defend, but if you're really paranoid there's nothing to stop you having a fortified compound as well, just to be on the safe side, it's true that within the context of TWD someone could die accidently and turn into a walker, but that could happen with any safe haven.

 

Also, in order to attack you, any passing Negans would have to actually know you were there in the first place, and if you were far enough off shore for them not to see the lights from your settlement, who would know you were there anyway? If they did know you were there, it's still much more trouble to get a boat, learn to sail it, get all the stuff you need on board and *then* launch an invasion than it is to just rock up at someone's boundary fence and lay siege to them.

Edited December 29, 2014 by matbrojoe

[Zahdii]

I don't know what a Negan is, but an island would only work if it were big enough to support all of the people on it.  I suppose if it's just you and your family, you could get by with a 2 acre garden, plus what animals you had with you.  I don't think that you'd have a lot of zombies wandering around because they don't seem to be able to plan ahead to get somewhere.  So you might have one wash ashore once in a while, but I don't think they'd be standing on the shore of the mainland and preparing to walk under water to get to you.

 

But back to the island.  Did you just see it and go there?  Was it occupied or not?  Is there a source of fresh water, ground to grow crops (assuming you've brought seeds), room for chickens, pigs, horses or oxen?  Is there already a building present for you to live in, or will you have to build one?  When you've made shore and settled in, what do you do when you realize that you need additional supplies?  You have to back to the mainland and start foraging around the houses and businesses. 

 

You'd also have to be able to deal with bad whether if your island was in the ocean.

 

I'm not saying an island is a bad idea, just that it would provide it's own challenges that many people wouldn't be able to handle during a ZA.

Edited December 30, 2014 by Zahdii

[matbrojoe]

Negan is a character from the comics who hasn't turned up in the TV series yet, apparently he makes the governor look like a sunday school teacher.

 

We're talking about a fictional scenario here, it seems highly unlikely that any of us will have to face hordes of the undead. even if civilisation as we know it does break down, so all this is really just hypothetical but, you know, if we *were* in the same situation as TWD characters then i think initially i'd be looking for some large secure building to hole up in for starters. The thing about a scenario like TWD is that there are very few people left, so resources shouldn't really be that scarce, in fact it's people, particularly people with valuable skills, that are possibly your most valuable asset. (which is the reason the Terminus "I know, let's eat them" model makes so little sense, well, one of the reasons anyway).

 

Making somewhere secure from walkers would be relatively simple, you just need some sort of physical barrier to stop them, a wall, a ditch, a fence, whatever, the question is what else do you need to protect yourself from?

 

One of the key themes of TWD is that the people are more dangerous than the walkers, i'm not convinced that if such a thing came to pass that, as bleak as human nature is, things would end up quite as awful as Kirkman portrays them, surely there would be some people left who were actually pleased to see some fellow human beings?

 

If society really did break down, i'd imagine the biggest fight would be over resources, in which case being somewhere remote, where there would be fewer people to fight you for what bit you do have, would probably be the best bet. I live in the UK. which is fairly densely populated, i have a farm and have the means and the knowledge to feed myself but i'm less than an hour's drive from manchester, a city with over 2.5 million people. If i have food and they don't, it won't matter how big a wall i have round my house or how many guns i have, when they turn up at my gate they're going to take what i have from me. OTOH, if all those people are zombies, maybe a big enough wall would keep them out after all?   

 

 

But back to the island.  Did you just see it and go there?  Was it occupied or not?  Is there a source of fresh water, ground to grow crops (assuming you've brought seeds), room for chickens, pigs, horses or oxen?

 

In day of the Triffids they eventually set up camp on the Isle of Wight, a fairly large island off the south coast of the UK, 380 km2 in size with a population of 145,000, so possibly that would be a tad ambitious for even Rick's group to take on the job of zombie clearing. but the bigger the group you have, the bigger the place you look for. There are remote islands in the outer Hebrides off the coast of Scotland which support small communities now, something like that would be better perhaps. If i were parachuted in to join Rick's group and i didn't know much about American Geography, i'd be looking for a library to find an atlas and see if there was anywhere that fitted the bill within striking distance, i'd be emptying the shelves of some self help DIY type books as well whilst i was at it as well.

 

Is there already a building present for you to live in, or will you have to build one?  When you've made shore and settled in, what do you do when you realize that you need additional supplies?  You have to back to the mainland and start foragin around the houses and businesses.

 

 

I don't think having to go back to the mainland would be such a problem, if you're in a fortified compound you'd have to go out and forage just the same. having to make the boat trip is to my mind a decent trade off for having an immediate wider environment that isn't infested with zombies.

 

Ultimately a lot depends on what you want to do, do you just want to survive yourself and have you and your immediate family / friends live out the rest of your lives as best you can in the circumstances? or do you want to try and rebuild some sort of ongoing society / civilisation?

Edited December 29, 2014 by matbrojoe

[Bongo Fury]

There are remote islands in the outer Hebrides off the coast of Scotland which support small communities now, something like that would be better perhaps.

 

[snip]

 

I don't think having to go back to the mainland would be such a problem, if you're in a fortified compound you'd have to go out and forage just the same. having to make the boat trip is to my mind a decent trade off for having an immediate wider environment that isn't infested with zombies.

 

Any island that is easily habitable (good farmland and an indigenous fresh water source) will already be inhabited. And the more attractive the island, the more heavily populated it will be. And just how receptive do you think the pre-ZA population of said island will be to a sudden influx of mainlanders wanting to live there? In my opinion, not very happy at all to accommodate you. Which leaves you less attractive options, like the isolated islands in the Hebrides, which will offer you a difficult survival opportunity.

 

But OK, say you find an island and setup on it. What are you going to do when other people arrive? Some undoubtedly not as friendly and altruistic as Rick and company. How are you going to get off your island when (when not if) things go bad? Remember, when the prison fell their escape bus got shot up and it became a death trap. None of the survivors from the prison were able to drive away, they all fled on foot. What are you planning for a worst case scenario, having multiple boats stashed all over the island so you can get away? Without a boat it's going to be tough to fet away and start over. If someone got hold of a military tank on TWD, it is not unreasonable to assume someone will get their hands on a Coast Guard gunboat and show up at your island to evict you. Yes, an island provides a nice buffer from the roaming hordes on the mainland, but that same buffer makes escape MUCH more unlikely when things go bad.

 

The more you make trips to the mainland for supplies, the more likely someone will see you and figure out where you are based. On TWD people are always asking each other 'do you have a camp around here', and the answers are always vague and misdirecting. Because it is human nature to improve your lot in life by whatever means necessary. Yes, you can take a pollyannaish attitude and think that people will be more altruistic than on TWD, but TWD is the show under discussion on this forum and that world is the premise which we are trying to survive.

[matbrojoe]

Any island that is easily habitable (good farmland and an indigenous fresh water source) will already be inhabited. And the more attractive the island, the more heavily populated it will be. And just how receptive do you think the pre-ZA population of said island will be to a sudden influx of mainlanders wanting to live there? In my opinion, not very happy at all to accommodate you. Which leaves you less attractive options, like the isolated islands in the Hebrides, which will offer you a difficult survival opportunity.

 

 

 

I think that would depend on the scenario, but as you (and indeed I) pointed out, we're talking specifically about the somewhat unlikely scenario presented in TWD. In TWD one of the key issues beyond the obvious one of there being loads of zombies is that most of the population has died early on, so, you've got all the residual resources left by civilization, but very few people to compete over them. In such a scenario people become one of your more valuable assets. The more people in your group the stronger it is, the more opportunity for specialisation you have and the more likely it is that your group will prevail.

 

Again it depends on what your intentions are, if you're sitting on a cache of supplies and are intending to ride out whatever difficulties you're facing in the hope that someone will eventually come to your rescue, then yes, you're not going to welcome interlopers, but if you're accepted that there is no rescue coming, and that it's up to you to rebuild society, then it's a case of the more people you get with you the better chance you have of doing so.

 

But OK, say you find an island and setup on it. What are you going to do when other people arrive? Some undoubtedly not as friendly and altruistic as Rick and company. How are you going to get off your island when (when not if) things go bad? Remember, when the prison fell their escape bus got shot up and it became a death trap. None of the survivors from the prison were able to drive away, they all fled on foot. What are you planning for a worst case scenario, having multiple boats stashed all over the island so you can get away? Without a boat it's going to be tough to fet away and start over.

 

 

All of these objections are true for whatever kind of secure settlement you create. what are the alternatives? cabin in the woods or some sort of fortified building or compound? cabin in the woods kind of restricts you to personal survival only, you're not going to be nation building because by its very nature you're hiding from the people you could be building your new nation with. fortified compound, no matter how well fortified or defended, could always be overcome with a big enough force.

 

If someone got hold of a military tank on TWD, it is not unreasonable to assume someone will get their hands on a Coast Guard gunboat and show up at your island to evict you. Yes, an island provides a nice buffer from the roaming hordes on the mainland, but that same buffer makes escape MUCH more unlikely when things go bad.

 

 

There are pros and cons to either scenario, but i disagree that an island would be objectively worse, you live on a n island you'd have boats, i can't see that it's particularly worse trying to escape in a boat than trying to leg it from the zombie hordes that have overrun you fortified compound, at least once you're at sea you've got away from the zombies for the tie bing, assuming you haven't got them on the boat with you.

 

The more you make trips to the mainland for supplies, the more likely someone will see you and figure out where you are based. On TWD people are always asking each other 'do you have a camp around here', and the answers are always vague and misdirecting. Because it is human nature to improve your lot in life by whatever means necessary. Yes, you can take a pollyannaish attitude and think that people will be more altruistic than on TWD, but TWD is the show under discussion on this forum and that world is the premise which we are trying to survive.

 

 

That's true if you have a base on the mainland as well though.

 

In TWD Rick initially refuses to let Tyrese's group join them in the prison, but later, they take in the refugees from woodbury, and other survivors they find in order to make their group bigger and hence stronger. This approach appears to be working and only fails because the governor attacks them. Again rick offers to take in the governor's group, which is the correct and logical course of action, it only fails because the governor is stark raving bonkers and he initiates a fight in which both sides inevitably lose.

 

If you set up some sort of functioning society, it is possible that others will attack you and try to take what you have, but the bigger you are the bigger your enemy will need to be in order to succeed, and the more likely it will be that it will make more sense for others to try and join you rather than attack you.

Edited December 30, 2014 by matbrojoe

[kikismom]

Let's use the US east coast as an example.

 

U.S. population on the Atlantic seaboard: 446 people per square mile. (Areas away from the coastline avg. only 105 people per square mile.)

Projected increase in seaboard population over the years 2010 to 2020: 37 more people per square mile, bringing the number to 483 people per sq. mile.

 

If a disaster, plague, or other national emergency reduced the population by 90% ( as posted above "most of the population has died early on")  there would still be 4 X as many people at the coast already.

 

This does not count the number of people inland who would think it's a good idea to head for the coast.

 

65% of America's population lives near the coast, and 39% of the total U.S. population lives on 10% of the land.

NOAA estimated the population of the 'Atlantic seaboard only' at 114 million people. Reduced by 90% would still be over 11 million people alive.

 

The number of recreational boats on the Atlantic seaboard only (non-military, non-commercial) is 17.5 million.

 

 If boats were eliminated for some explicable reason related to the catastrophe--shot up or burned--- at the same percentage of 90% loss, there would still be 1.75 million recreational boats not being used for recreation---but used to look for an island. Also looking for ammo and weapons, medicine, food, tools and parts, maybe women or children.

 

Those people would cross each others paths frequently; for although the coastline is long, only insane people would go much farther out toward the middle of the Atlantic. Weather conditions would also greatly increase the number of boats gathering in safer waters.

 

As far as another statement posted above---"not very many people to compete with"---it's a matter of personal opinion.

To me...millions of people using those 1 and 3/4 million boats is many competitors indeed.

[matbrojoe]

 

If a disaster, plague, or other national emergency reduced the population by 90% ( as posted above "most of the population has died early on")  there would still be 4 X as many people at the coast already.

 

 

Hang on, I thought we we specifically talking about the Walking Dead scenario here, where, as i understand it, over 99% of the population have died? only that brings us down to 175,000 people, (probably much less given the high attrition rate on the series' cast)

 

A scenario where most of the people have died but the majority of the infrastructure of society is still in place is very different from one where society breaks down and all the people are competing for limited resources.

[Tippi Blevins]

My dad got me a survival pack for Christmas. I have no idea why. But if zombies show up and I have to make a run for it, at least I'll have waterproof matches and cubes of vaguely foodlike objects at the ready, along with a mylar blanket and water filter.

 

Realistically, I'd be doomed in an apocalypse, because I'd spend most of my time trying to save my dogs. Stipulating that I somehow managed to keep my dogs alive, and myself, in the first few days of the shit hitting the fan, and supposing I couldn't immediately find a tampon factory as I proposed earlier in the thread, I'd head for a water bottling plant. There's one not far from where I live (Houston) and it's fenced, and the building itself looks pretty sturdy. Obviously, other people are going to try to get in, but since my asshole Jack Russell is still alive in this scenario, he'll probably kill them all off. 

[kikismom]

Hang on, I thought we we specifically talking about the Walking Dead scenario here, where, as i understand it, over 99% of the population have died? only that brings us down to 175,000 people, (probably much less given the high attrition rate on the series' cast)

 

I know Buzzfeed said 'if we assume 99% are dead'...and Reddit did the same thing. On the show, the only reference is Rick Grimes telling the prisoners that 50% of the population in dead.

 

I'd never use the cast's high attrition rate as a measuring stick :-)

Everyone at the quarry was fine till Rick showed up and 14 people--half the group--died.

Everyone at Woodbury was fine till Rick took them in at the prison as an act of kindness---so long, suckers!

It has long been a joke on this forum how even people who meet Rick for 5 minutes---like the fruit hippies--meet the Grim Reaper right after.

 

If 99% of the humans died, out of 312 million in America, that would leave 3.12 million. 39% on the coasts would be 1.216,800 and since the east coast has more people than the west and gulf coasts, say half= 608,400.

You wouldn't be assaulted by all of them; but as they've said on the show, the only types staying alive after the beginning are the hardcore types. CDB are meeting lots of new people...most of them are homicidal freaks. Surviving by superior force and violence is something CDB has tried and it isn't really working so well. Better to be invisible low profile...and so the last thing I would do is pick the same place/idea that millions of other people come up with as their first obvious choice.

Same for Ft. Benning or any other military base, hospitals, schools, Wal-marts and big box stores. Everybody and his brother already had the same idea and got there first.

[matbrojoe]

I know Buzzfeed said 'if we assume 99% are dead'...and Reddit did the same thing. On the show, the only reference is Rick Grimes telling the prisoners that 50% of the population in dead.

 

 

I was sure I'd seen the 99% figure quoted elsewhere, perhaps it is just speculation, i'd say it was pretty near the mark given how few people Rick's group meet though.

 

I'd never use the cast's high attrition rate as a measuring stick :-)

Everyone at the quarry was fine till Rick showed up and 14 people--half the group--died.

Everyone at Woodbury was fine till Rick took them in at the prison as an act of kindness---so long, suckers!

It has long been a joke on this forum how even people who meet Rick for 5 minutes---like the fruit hippies--meet the Grim Reaper right after

 

 

Yeah, there is that, i think we could agree that staying as far away from Rick as possible would be the best survival tactic in the long run.

.

If 99% of the humans died, out of 312 million in America, that would leave 3.12 million. 39% on the coasts would be 1.216,800 and since the east coast has more people than the west and gulf coasts, say half= 608,400.

You wouldn't be assaulted by all of them; but as they've said on the show, the only types staying alive after the beginning are the hardcore types. CDB are meeting lots of new people...most of them are homicidal freaks.

 

 

Yes they do seem to be unlucky on that score, but TBF The Walking Dead isn't  a documentary, it's a drama, the writers are throwing these difficulties at them because it makes the series more interesting. they had a good functioning community at the prison which should have worked, it only fails (as does Woodbury), because the Governor is stark raving bonkers, there's no real explanation for his behaviour beyond him being nuts, and i tend to think that's a flaw in the writing. It's true that in such a violent and nasty world, violent and nasty people would be likely to be over represented amongst the survivors. but i think you'd be unlucky to find someone quite so hell bent on suicidal self destruction as the governor.

 

Surviving by superior force and violence is something CDB has tried and it isn't really working so well. Better to be invisible low profile...

 

 

but how does keeping a low profile work in the long term? I suppose it depends on whether you're looking at personal survival or you're looking to future 'nation building'. If it's the latter, surely at some point you'd have to get together with a larger group and look towards setting up some sort of self sufficient enclosed community. (what does CDB stand for BTW?)

 

and so the last thing I would do is pick the same place/idea that millions of other people come up with as their first obvious choice.

Same for Ft. Benning or any other military base, hospitals, schools, Wal-marts and big box stores. Everybody and his brother already had the same idea and got there first.

 

 

I think in the initial stages of the emergency that you'd be quite right here, getting away from centres of population would be a good idea. the current storyline is what? 2 years down the line at least ? There appears to be no more people, or walkers in the centre of Atlanta than in rural Georgia.

 

If you'd survived that long, you'd surely be thinking about how you might continue to survive in the long term rather than just day to day. to my mind community has to be the key to long term survival in such a scenario. You'd have to have some sort of safe haven where you could at least move towards being self sufficient in food production which in turn allows specialisation from individuals, so you could have rudimentary medical care, people who make and repair infrastructure etc. You can't live from foraging tinned food forever, do you disagree?

[Bruinsfan]

On that score I'm going to use the strategy Molly Ringwald used to defend her lunch in The Breakfast Club - I won't have that much competition for raw fish and kelp!

[Tippi Blevins]

Yeah, there is that, i think we could agree that staying as far away from Rick as possible would be the best survival tactic in the long run.

 

He's the Sam Winchester's penis of the zombie apocalypse.

[kikismom]

 

 

but how does keeping a low profile work in the long term? I suppose it depends on whether you're looking at personal survival or you're looking to future 'nation building'. If it's the latter, surely at some point you'd have to get together with a larger group and look towards setting up some sort of self sufficient enclosed community. (what does CDB stand for BTW?)

 

If you'd survived that long, you'd surely be thinking about how you might continue to survive in the long term rather than just day to day. to my mind community has to be the key to long term survival in such a scenario. You'd have to have some sort of safe haven where you could at least move towards being self sufficient in food production which in turn allows specialisation from individuals, so you could have rudimentary medical care, people who make and repair infrastructure etc. You can't live from foraging tinned food forever, do you disagree?

That's why I wouldn't want an island; I'd want a self-sufficient enclosed community, and long term survival with food production means the time and energy must be available for that...not so much guarding, fighting defense, etc. I wouldn't even try foraging canned food because I think the possible payoff (a can of beanie-weinies?) is not worth a high risk of death.

But desalinization takes a lot of time as well. Bad weather is always worse when surrounded by water.

 

Near where I grew up, and in a lot of other parts of the country I would say, there are a lot of...how shall I say this?...above-ground gorges. That's a contradiction in terms but there really is no common name. Like a slot canyon, but not down in the earth. Above the ground level.

 

Where the mountains split and rock broke and fell so the sides are straight up sheer smooth walls, higher than many office buildings. But the inside is like a mountain or hill side...sloping earth wooded with trees. Most of these have pure fresh water coming out of holes all here and there; water from deep (sometimes miles) in the earths crust. Mountain and ridge formations came from volcanic activity in prehistory. The superheated volcanoes heated the underground water and created steam vents. Millions of years, the heat cooled, a lot of the water lowered and whats left looks like a cliff. These are always in the same area as real rocky cliffs---just humongous solid rock formations with flat tops that no one goes up.

But a lot are not solid, they have open centers with rich volcanic minerals in the soil, clean fresh water, and good enough for birds and small animals. They often have tunnels or caverns.

People don't know because these places are way too small for a tourist attraction, or some state park. Some are only a few acres inside!( some bigger) but all a lot smaller than a farm like Herschel had. But the walls! Not only could no one drive a truck, a tank, or a freight train through---but it would block sight and sound.

Sound may be even more of a giveaway hazard than visuals

. Gardening---especially vertically---would be successful, raising rabbits, quail, pheasant, etc would be suitable and not as problematic as raising cattle or horses. Most of the water I saw, in springs or streams flowing from the spring, had fish in it. Timber for building. Food, water (potable), safety. Just be able to live simply.

 

CDB means Camp Dinner Bell.  :-D

[Bongo Fury]

I agree with you on one point, the goal should be more than simple survival, rebuilding society is the best long term strategy. To that end, hunkering down on an island with limited resources and depending on subsistence farming does not further that goal. You are forcing yourself back to primitive times ,which means you have a LONG road back. An island itself has no energy sources like coal or gas, etc. You could likely rig up windmills for some power, but that is very limited. And if you're depending on scavenging from the mainland, that pretty much defeats the whole point of living on an island since you're exposing yourself to all the dangers you supposedly are fleeing.

 

I'm not sure if I posted this idea here or back at TWoP, but here is my thought. The first thing you need is a safe place, which is away from large population centers. It hasn't happened on TWD, but all the nuclear plants will not have been shut down properly, so you don't want to be near or downwind of a N-plant in case it melts down. Next you want resources that will allow you to survive; clean water and arable land. Those are the basics and the island scenario meets those minimum requirements. But in order to thrive, a community must have access to power, which opens up technologies that will place your community above any threats/competitors. The current shale gas boom provides just such an easy, plentiful energy source. 

 

I live near Pittsburgh Pa and the fracking boom is in full swing here. So I'd head north east of Pgh about 100 miles, outside of the drift zones of the nearby N-plants and I'd secure a natural gas well as the center of a community. I know several people who have natural gas generators in their homes to provide electricity when the power goes out, so securing such generators would not be too difficult. And once your community has ample electricity, light and heat and all sorts of electrical devises are available to your community. Natural gas powered vehicles are somewhat rare, but they could be scrounged, or regular vehicles could be modified. This means your community can use tractors and other farm equipment to vastly increase your ability to grow food. I believe an acre of land was originally defined as the amount of land one man and a horse could plow in a day. That is a hell of a lot of hard physical labor, as opposed to a tractor which could plow exponentially more land in the same time frame. And without the back breaking labor, the people won't need to eat nearly as much to replenish their energy. Access to electricity also lets your community build machine shops and other workshops to build and maintain advances devices. If you can weld and grind metal, you can manufacture all sorts of zombie slaying weapons, and fabricate armor. So clearing the surrounding area is easier and more efficient. Who need an ocean around your island to keep the walkers away when your community sends out daily patrols of hunter/killers to actively assure your safety?

 

What you say about specializing your population will indeed lead to greater success. But by forcing your community to build itself up from a near stone age technology, you've chosen the difficult road. Safety is important, no denying that. But energy is the key to maintaining as much of our current society as possible, so energy sources should be a prime focus of surviving and recovering from a ZA.

Edited December 31, 2014 by Bongo Fury

[Irishmaple]

How do you rebuild a community, though?  Even in the early days of Camp Dinner Bell, there were divisions in the small group.  Ed, as an abuser, was a flashpoint for everyone.  What do you do with someone like him to avoid causing friction?  Do you exile him to keep the peace or arrange a discreet accident to solve the problem?  What happens if his family refuses to stay without him?  Do you exile his wife and kid/s too?  Once CDB got to the farm, there were more issues.  Lori and Andrea clashed over division of labour so how do you avoid things like that, which often force others into choosing sides?  How do you integrate people like Rick and Abraham and, had they survived, Shane and Phillip?  All are accustomed to leading their groups and making the big decisions for better or worse, and at least three of the four are hotheads as well as epic grudge-holders (Philip in particular)  A council arrangement didn't accomplish much at the prison, but what do you do with people like Carol who sit on council and then work their own agenda behind its back?  The Grady Memorial people habituated themselves to the roles of exploiter and victim, to the point that the women kept as companions for the police officers appeared to choose to stay.  Can people who exploited women and vulnerable people (an elderly man, a kid like Noah) be trusted in a community?  If you find out a member of your community came from Terminus or from a predatory group like Joe's or Randall's, what then?  Can they be trusted with a second chance?

 

The level of complacency shown at communities like Woodbury honestly surprises me.  Everyone just seemed to settle back into life as they knew it, which I know was Philip's strength as a leader, convincing everyone that things were just fine as long as he was in charge.  I just can't see myself settling into something like that.  After five seasons of The Walking Dead life, I can easily see myself twitching with paranoia, malnourished, overtired and mistrustful of everyone not in my immediate group, excluding people like Tyreese and Father Gabriel that I already don't trust.  Don't I sound like a fun person to have in the community!

[kikismom]

How do you rebuild a community, though?  Even in the early days of Camp Dinner Bell, there were divisions in the small group.  Ed, as an abuser, was a flashpoint for everyone.  What do you do with someone like him to avoid causing friction?  Do you exile him to keep the peace or arrange a discreet accident to solve the problem?  What happens if his family refuses to stay without him?  Do you exile his wife and kid/s too?  Once CDB got to the farm, there were more issues.  Lori and Andrea clashed over division of labour so how do you avoid things like that, which often force others into choosing sides?  How do you integrate people like Rick and Abraham and, had they survived, Shane and Phillip?  All are accustomed to leading their groups and making the big decisions for better or worse, and at least three of the four are hotheads as well as epic grudge-holders (Philip in particular)  A council arrangement didn't accomplish much at the prison, but what do you do with people like Carol who sit on council and then work their own agenda behind its back?  The Grady Memorial people habituated themselves to the roles of exploiter and victim, to the point that the women kept as companions for the police officers appeared to choose to stay.  Can people who exploited women and vulnerable people (an elderly man, a kid like Noah) be trusted in a community?  If you find out a member of your community came from Terminus or from a predatory group like Joe's or Randall's, what then?  Can they be trusted with a second chance?

 

The level of complacency shown at communities like Woodbury honestly surprises me.  Everyone just seemed to settle back into life as they knew it, which I know was Philip's strength as a leader, convincing everyone that things were just fine as long as he was in charge.  I just can't see myself settling into something like that.  After five seasons of The Walking Dead life, I can easily see myself twitching with paranoia, malnourished, overtired and mistrustful of everyone not in my immediate group, excluding people like Tyreese and Father Gabriel that I already don't trust.  Don't I sound like a fun person to have in the community!

Excellent post.

It does remind me of how many prisoners can't make it on the outside; they get used to a world where even the bad stuff is somewhat regulated. You know the boundaries and who to avoid and what you can/can't do to a very simplified but reliable pattern. The outside people don't know not to bump into you on the street or they expect you to roll with the changes, the outside world has too many variables and decisions to make.

As you pointed out, the sheep are not the problem. The alpha males are; and crises seem to bring out the alpha male in a lot of people.

 

I do think one helpful tactic is to rotate duties. I know there are specialized people with better skill levels than others. However:

• Rotating improves the life of everyone by having all members of the group capable with a gun, or going on runs, or raising animals, doing medical care, etc.
• Having multi-skilled people can lessen power plays---no one can "hold up" the others by saying you have to put up with my shit because I'm the only car mechanic. Think of Eugene who made everyone do it all: provide food, fight walkers, do driving even...because God forbid the science guy gets hurt.
• Rotating may lessen the 'I know better than you'  crap when people learn each others jobs, they may develop more respect for the others whose work they dismissed. It may also humble some egomaniacs (Shane) by giving them a taste of being tasked with something they aren't a bigshot expert at.
• Rotating may increase good group dynamics because you have no choice but to ask others for instruction, or teach others so when it comes back to your turn the whole armory/solar bank/goat farm isn't fucked up beyond repair. Yelling "You can't make the tough decisions" is a lot harder when you have to go back 5 minutes later and ask how the lift station/blood pressure cuff/hay tedder works.

 Rotating may stop one person from saying you're all dependent on me and start making everyone say we are all dependent on each other you ain't no special snowflake.

At least then, if you get a hard case like Ed, he'd look around and see he has no support and his wife and child had unified support so he better shape up or get thrown out alone. (?)

[Bongo Fury]

How do you rebuild a community, though?  ...

 

In my experience, most people are followers and are quite happy being in an organization where they have a defined role and someone tells them what to do. Overall the best system is therefore a benevolent dictatorship. Unfortunately there are very few people who have true leadership abilities. Oh, lots of people THINK they can lead, but true leadership is rare. Rick had is basically right with his Rictatorship, but unfortunately at the time he didn't have the self confidence , and he hadn't completely grocked the post ZA world.

 

The other communities we have seen on TWD have basically followed the dictator model; the Vatos, Woodbury, Terminus, Grady, even the Claimers had Joe as boss. I think Woodbury is a fine example showing how people are basically sheep, willing to follow a perceived strongman and remain blissfully unaware of the reality of their situation. Maybe it's just that appearance of strength that people are looking for. Witness Abraham and his dogged insistence on going to DC, and how that sense of purpose, that single mindedness attracted people to his cause. So the potential 'dictator' has to maintain their aura of strength, of purpose to maintain the support of their followers. Abraham lost all his leadership qualities when Eugene came clean, Abraham was shattered because his purpose was gone. And at Grady, when a leader lost their aura of strength, and just as importantly lost their vision and hence had no purpose for their community, there was a bloody change in power. Dawn was a bad leader because her purpose was for Grady to 'hold on'. That is not inspired leadership. And it's not going to get people to follow you.

 

It's best if the group dictator is benevolent, someone who legitimately cares about the people in their group and always works to the best interest of the group. Clearly, the coo coo for coco puffs dictator like Brillip or Gareth doesn't work for the long term. The strength and the vision/purpose are the things that the 'dictator' gives to the group, as well as their ability to take quick decisive action when necessary. But power sharing is also important, because we are all Americans after all, and we like to have the illusion of inclusion in power. So power sharing or a council is also good for a group leadership. Those individuals are great at leading the group through the routine daily operations of life. But when the shit hits the fan, like when Brillip showed up at the prison with a tank, there was no doubt who was calling the shots at CDB.

[kikismom]

. But when the shit hits the fan, like when Brillip showed up at the prison with a tank, there was no doubt who was calling the shots at CDB.

Which is why they ended up so fucked. (IMO)

I hear what you're saying, and you make a lot of truthful points. Still...

 

People may be more comfortable being sheep. Survival isn't about choosing what's most comfortable. Frankly, I'm most comfortable lying on the sofa watching TV but if I don't make money and pay the bills I'll be sleeping in my car.

You may have to teach people to adjust/adapt/accept that in a scenario like this you don't get to just do the things you like. Once people start seeing rewards of effort it gathers momentum.

In a dictator/sheep dynamic, what happens when the dictator dies? Goes missing? Gets weakened by injury or illness? That's when bloody coups start, and you don't need an outside enemy; the group self-destructs. I thought the group did better when Rick was a farmer.

 

Rick was calling the shots when Brillip attacked; unfortunately Rick is known to dither too much. Others--even Carl--said they should strike first. But no, must wait for Rick.

Who waited till Herschel got whacked and then called for fire.

They should have had a rapid reaction training because it didn't matter that they don't know the Gov. is back. He attacked once, they got attacked by walkers at the quarry, they got overrun at the farm...how many times before you start making drills for sudden emergencies before they happen?

 

They should have had a code word, so only the group would know a signal to begin firing---first---before they started losing people.

They should have talked about tanks and trucks and snipers and being surrounded and all possibilities and who shoots at distance best, who needs help with a handgun, train all on different weapons in case one goes down, etc.

 

I like when Erin said on BlueBloods how her dad taught them all that if they were grabbed by a bad guy, and her dad said please don't hurt my family, that was the phrase for her to bend over and duck because it really meant here come the bullets!

 

Dictatorship is faster and easier to organize. But it doesn't just make the sheep weak. Rick missed Brillip's most important statement, that he had to take the prison.

Even if it was stupid. Because he couldn't agree to another man's idea even if it was smarter. Because he'd look weak...and if he looked weak he'd lose everything.

So even a dictator becomes more vulnerable when everyone puts all the weight on him, they force his hand, force him to walk away from a smarter solution that would really save them all.  If they were all involved in the information and decision making, they would have voted to take Rick's solution of each group getting one side of the river and leaving each other alone.

[Bongo Fury]

Which is why they ended up so fucked. (IMO)

I hear what you're saying, and you make a lot of truthful points. Still...

 

Don't confuse characters acting stupidly in service of the plot with a flawed command structure. So much of what the people on TWD do is head scratchingly stupid and there's NO logical reason they should be doing what they're doing, other than servicing some plot line.

 

CDB did best when Rick was a farmer, because NOTHING stressful was happening. It was just normal day to day living in the ZA, which I specifically said was an aspect a council could manage best. Rick supplied the vision to the group that they could make the prison their home. Rick pushed them to clear it out. Rick led the defense of their home. And when it came time to admit new members to their society, it was Rick who invented the three questions. And once things were established and setup, Rick took a less prominent role and let others manage day to day operations. But when things got hot again, Rick stopped being the farmer ...

I think it is exactly the type of command structure.

 

And as I said, most off the other groups from the show have had a similar setup. Can you give an example of the organization you are talking about? 

[kikismom]

Don't confuse characters acting stupidly in service of the plot with a flawed command structure.

 

And as I said, most off the other groups from the show have had a similar setup. Can you give an example of the organization you are talking about? 

In terrorist investigation teams for example, fire, police, fbi will all take command of the same case they are working together; same for CERT (community emergency response team) you will have to follow ideas and commands by different people depending on how the situation shifts.

 

A really good example is on the wonderful hospital ship known as the Big White Ship-- Doctors and surgeons clean the engine room or swab the deck, data entry workers cook the meals or drive a forklift. It is very strongly designed that there is no elite, no inner circle, and everyone needs to know how to do the other jobs. It is also eminently successful

 

As far as characters acting stupidly, that is similar to people being stupid sheep isn't it? It may be in service of the plot on TV, it may be in service of their own laziness or wish to avoid reality in a real situation, but any command structure has to start with some dumbasses. On TWD they make the same mistakes over and over, but so do many people in real life.

 

Didn't Rick get the 3 questions from Morgan Jones?

 

 

ETA: Everybody---even if you aren't interested in a friendly debate about command structure, please read this if you have time you may find the story very interesting thanx

 

http://doingmercy.com/dr_parker_-_readers_digest_.pdf

Edited January 2, 2015 by kikismom

[Bongo Fury]

... same for CERT (community emergency response team) you will have to follow ideas and commands by different people depending on how the situation shifts.

 

A really good example is on the wonderful hospital ship known as the Big White Ship-- Doctors and surgeons clean the engine room or swab the deck, data entry workers cook the meals or drive a forklift. It is very strongly designed that there is no elite, no inner circle, and everyone needs to know how to do the other jobs. 

 

As far as characters acting stupidly, that is similar to people being stupid sheep isn't it?

 

Didn't Rick get the 3 questions from Morgan Jones?

 

I've done disaster relief with the Red Cross for years, and all over the country, in my experience the roles are clearly defined. For example, the RC is tasked with managing sheltering in a disaster situation. FEMA, DoD, etc have no role and don't interfere with the RC in that aspect of the operation. The RC has to work with local governments and school districts to find suitable locations and sign agreements for usage, but sheltering is the sole realm of the RC. I've been in shelters where local politicians and once even a US Senator tried to tell us how to run things and I politely told them that we would take their suggestions under consideration, but this was a RC shelter and we had our own (time proven) protocols to handle such situations. In my experience with CERT the organizational structure is very well defined.

 

On the white ship they are simply dividing the menial chores amongst everyone. You don't have the cooks performing surgery, the nurses don't navigate the ship, anesteologists aren't handling the accounts payable, the mechanic doesn't decide what port they are going to next and then negotiate with the local government so that they can perform their mission, ...

Each individual still has a specified role and each is contributing in the manner they are best suited, it is only the unskilled tasks that are shared. And I am sure it is done that way because there is limited space on such a ship and they cannot afford to dedicate space to 'service' personnel (if you take along a cook, that is room for one less surgeon), so the trained professionals share those duties. It's simple practicality, not some revolutionary command structure.

 

No, the people acting stupidly on TWD has nothing to do with people being willing followers. The prison was a wonderful, safe place for people to live, yet inexplicably they did nothing to secure the fence from walkers building up along it. They didn't attempt to reinforce the fence (until the walker buildup was out of hand), they didn't build an outer barrier like a simple ring of cars to keep the walkers from getting to the fence, they did nothing. Why? Because they were all sheep? No, because then we could get the dramatic scene with the walkers breaking through and Rick and Carl get to have the great bonding moment as they save the day. Why did the prison folks only find out that the Gov was at their front door with a tank only after the tank had started shelling the place, shouldn't there have been people in the watch towers keeping guard? Was that incredible stupidity a failure of Rick the dictator, or the Prison Council who was running things there? Or was it another example of forced stupidity in service of the plot?

 

As I recall, it was Rick who invented the three questions. After the Woodbury attack but before he became Farmer Rick, after he had come to the realization that they needed to open themselves up to new comers. Rick established the protocol and then others followed that lead even after Rick stepped to the background.

[kikismom]

Your years of experience will make you very valuable in a ZA group.

 

• How would you deal with the alpha male problem? Glenn had smarts, but no one listened...because he was not a strutting loudmouth like the other guys.

          Andrea tried to help, but she peed sitting down so she couldn't be taken seriously. Even Herschel (Herschel 2.0 that is) with all his wisdom could just

          barely get Rick or the Gov. to hear him speak, but not really listen or take his advice.

 

• Just out of curiosity, can you give a real-world example of a benevolent dictatorship? Not being snarky, I would find it a very interesting model if it could work. I believe decent people would like the offer of it as it seems to provide someone who wants responsibility but looks out for their wants and needs. The problem is that it's hard to continue when---sooner or later---some people's wants and needs directly block other group members.

 

           I remember Herschel telling Rick that Michonne and Merle wanted to attack the Governor first; and he (Herschel) and Carol wanted the group to take their

           chances on the road. When you can't have it both ways, and you need to order one choice to be followed---the dictatorship part of the job---some of those

            people stop seeing you as benevolent.

           When Carol was talking in the car to Rick about killing Karen and David, she said "somebody had to do it you weren't going to".. It's not about whether Carol

           was right or wrong; it's about people only supporting the BDship as far as it serves their purposes. It would be great if people were big enough to accept they

           can't always have their way. But I fear it's human nature for people to take it as time to make their own unilateral decisions. That's when it starts to fracture.

 

• Rick, Daryl, Michonne, Maggie, and Glenn were the people who always went out on runs. Or who did the shooting and dangerous work. That clearly defined role seems sensible, except what if they don't come back? It wasn't just making the same people always take the risks; it was leaving the group unprepared for the worst. Sasha was reluctant to take Bob out, even when Glenn reminded her that he was an army medic. They never took Beth or Carol or Dale etc which may look like a more effective plan but they don't get better and make the group stronger if they don't get experience.

 

         It's a bit like the parent issue; you can take the risk away by doing it all yourself easier and faster. But if your kid never had a cut or scratch because he's 18

        years old and you still carry him in a Snugli, that's defeating the purpose of keeping him safe till you're gone.

 

          A BDship sounds efficient; but the downside may be if it's encouraging people to say not my job description---not my problem.

[Bongo Fury]

• How would you deal with the alpha male problem? Glenn ...

 

• Just out of curiosity, can you give a real-world example of a benevolent dictatorship? 

 

That's when it starts to fracture.

 

• Rick, Daryl, Michonne, Maggie, and Glenn were the people who always went out on runs. 

 

          A BDship sounds efficient; but the downside may be if it's encouraging people to say not my job description---not my problem.

 

Some of the Alpha male issues on the show are a problem of bad writing. Witness how at one time Rick turns the rescue of the group from the department store totally over to Glenn, but at other times Glenn was marginalized. Part of it is bad writing, but AM issues are certainly a problem, us guys simply MUST get into dick measuring contests from time to time. And those are most pronounced when no clear Alpha has been chosen by the group. When Rick and Shane were vying for the role, when Rick and the Gov squared off, etc. Lack of a clear BD is the cause of those issues. And I'm not saying that the Alpha (the BD) has to be a male, in the comics 

Maggie is the leader of one community and she is essentially their BD.

 

As far as an example of a BD, the one that comes to mind immediately is Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. He acted unilaterally, he suspended habeas corpus, he took actions without consulting with congress. And when the Supreme Court Chief Justice objected, Lincoln threatened to have him arrested. Lincoln was not the president, he was the dictator of the union. You could also say that the pope is the BD of Vatican City. Or many modern monarchies (Monaco for example) are benevolent dictatorships.

 

Just because someone is the dictator of the group doesn't mean that they don't have to be worried about maintaining support from their group. Remember when Carol objected to the Rictatorship and tried to get Daryl to leave with her, but then later (at the start of S3 I think it was ) she changed her tune and acknowledged that Rick had kept them alive. Martinez and Shump abandoned the Gov after the massacre because he has lost their confidence. And Dawn had trouble holding onto power because some of her people had lost confidence. The leader is a dictator, but they can only lead effectively with the support of their people.

 

You take your best fighters out on runs because runs are dangerous and you don't want to endanger people, especially when your group is small and a death hurts the group more. Look what happened when the took Herschel along to clear the prison, he got bit and Rick had to chop his leg off (though this may again be a plot device). When the group got bigger, other people did go on runs. Beths utterly forgettable boyfriend (you know, whathisname) is an example of that. You need specialization when times are tough and the group is small.

 

In a post apocalyptic scenario you need the people in your group to be totally committed, survival mandates it. If someone is going to slack off because 'it's not my job', then they need to be shown the door, of maybe they need to be told to 'smell the flowers'. There are no free rides, fish or cut bait.

Edited January 2, 2015 by Bongo Fury

[ChipBach]

Re-watching season one on the marathon...  Remembering how I cannot believe they couldn't find an RV sales floor (sporting the new models or newer used models) instead of having to rely on Dale's piece of crap, always breaking down RV.  I hated that NONE of the core group could find a single NEW vehicle (or better yet an armored Humvee) and all of them had an average age of 15 years.

 

I really shouldn't be yelling at the TV set again, I've already lived through the ZA D-day +60...

[walnutqueen]

If you ever worked in the vehicle maintenance field like I did, you'd know about old timers and simple engines that could be fixed without a fucking computer generated "diagnostic" tool.  Give me a VW bus with a camper pop up for the ZA.  :-)

[kikismom]

A lot of people have converted old missile silos. Some are extremely cool. I also like some of those old 737s that people have converted into homes.

Hmmm. Now I need to look and find some old silos to see how far away they are.

 

 

I was watching Doomsday Preppers (yeah, I know) and a hippie couple bought an abandoned missile silo and the property around it and turned it into an awesome survivalist enclave complete with a greenhouse and a meditation room. 

 

I remembered these posts when I saw this in the news:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2876325/Last-Cold-War-relics-Britain-s-secret-nuclear-bunkers-turned-houses-vets-surgeries-recording-studio-laser-tag-arena-half-demolished.html

[Nashville]

As I recall, it was Rick who invented the three questions. After the Woodbury attack but before he became Farmer Rick, after he had come to the realization that they needed to open themselves up to new comers. Rick established the protocol and then others followed that lead even after Rick stepped to the background.

 

From this article:

 

In a later segment on the Talking Dead, showrunner Scott Gimple explained that it's not just Rick that asks potential new group members the three questions. The three questions were implemented by the governing council and even Daryl has to ask them.

[Cheetosandchoc]

Do we k ow how walkers handle freezing weather? Would it preserve thier carcass bodies, or cause them to freeze, become brittle and break? I hate the idea of the Dakotas or Wyoming in the winter, but it might have benifites. These peoe never left Georgia, for all we know there are thriving communities all over.

I agree woth the idea that a dictator type ruler needs to keep his people happy and must depend on their support, so he cannot get too crazy or he will be taken down. I love near Chicago, so I'm pretty much screwed, no coasts, freezing winters, horrific humidity, terrifying violent storms in the spring and fall, the threat of tornadoes lingers, blizzards ect. I wonder how hard it would be to get very far from where I am.

The concearn about the islands as already pointed out would be everyone else having that idea. I think you would constantly be on the lookout for intruders. A large island would be difficult to protect.

[Nashville]

I love near Chicago,

If you count the Mile High Club, I've loved near Chicago as well. ;>