Sorry the posting has been light of late. There are reasons for that, and I’ll get to it some other time. But I stumbled across this today and had to share. Barricade Garage is becoming one of my favorite YouTube channels for the humorous yet pointed way they look at modern issues. I think we would all be better off if we could look inward and examine our own ways of thinking and our own flaws before we attempt to tell everyone how to fix their own. That is true self-reliance.
Category Archives: Expanding Perspectives
Is it worth it?
Ken Jorgustin at Modern Survival Blog takes up the question of whether it’s worth it to invest in self-reliance. He looks at various types of home production, such as raising your own chickens, growing your own garden, or even switching to solar energy all cost money, and often those same products can be obtained commercially for less.
During the process of building their palace, I’ve thought about the money it took to get this done. As well as the ongoing costs of maintaining the small flock, and feeding them. Let me put it this way. You might get depressed to realize the ultimate cost per dozen eggs output compared to the money input!
Ken Jorgustin
I’ve noticed that with gardening. In both places we’ve lived our irrigation and gardening water comes from the same water as our culinary and hygienic water, and the cost can more than double during the summer months. Whatever money we save by growing our own vegetables is more than eaten up in the water, seeds, tools, and fertilizer needed to grow them. We ultimately decided it simply wasn’t worthwhile to try to grow our own potatoes in Idaho.
We also looked at solar power ourselves a few years ago and realized that in spite of what the salesman told us, the system would never pay for itself, even if the power company paid for any excess electricity we generated–which they stopped doing within a few years. While we would like to have been able to do more to reduce pollution and our own energy dependence we just couldn’t justify the expense.
It can all be enough to make you step back and wonder if it’s really worthwhile to take a different path. But, as Jorgustin explains, the answer will be different for everyone. For some people cost is the only consideration, and they’ll likely not bother with many self-reliance measures. For my wife and I, we find home-grown food is usually healthier and better tasting. What’s more, there may be rough times ahead–times when the stores won’t be able to get the stock they usually get. We may very well need to supplement our food supply from our own yard. In the middle of the crisis is not the time to be learning what grows and what doesn’t, or how to lay out your garden, your watering, etc. And as we’ve seen, the price of things can increase quickly when it’s in short supply.
A considerable part of self-reliance, and especially emergency preparedness, is not just having the things you need when things go wrong, but knowing what to do with them. Maybe not everything we can do we should do, but it is worthwhile to consider what things you want to be able to do. And sometimes it just feels good to do it.
Who do we trust our lives to?
I had a brief discussion with a friend on Facebook the other day in which it became apparent we have differing opinions on the role of government. I don’t think either of us will change the other’s mind any time soon, but he said something that stuck with me. It was essentially, “We trust the government with our lives, so why not to distribute wealth?”
I had to stop and think about that. Do we trust the government with our lives? Should we?
Ultimately I suppose we do trust the government with our lives to some extent. I rely on my local city government to provide me safe drinking water–something they failed at not so long ago. I’ve since taken steps to lessen that risk, but truth be told, if there’s something dangerously wrong with my water I may not know it in time unless the government warns me. I have to trust that they’re doing their best.
I also trust the national government to maintain an army sufficient to deter any other country from coming in and killing me. As we’ve seen in recent years they’re not entirely successful in that responsibility, but they’re keeping the risk acceptably low. And they’re also doing a decent job at deterring those who might take shortcuts or act irresponsibly with our food supply. Incidents still happen, but still, the risk is still quite low.
There are, however, many more ways in which to die. In most of those cases the government acts more as a deterrent than a protection. They can’t keep some idiot driver from cutting across four lanes of traffic to make their exit and plowing into me instead. They can’t guarantee my neighbor’s tree isn’t going to fall on my house as I sleep and crush me. They can’t guarantee the airplane I get on isn’t going to crash, nor can they promise me I won’t die during heart surgery at some future point.
All they can do (or perhaps more accurately, are willing to do at present) is tell people what they should or shouldn’t do, and then affix punishments for noncompliance. And for the most part that is enough. Most people don’t act irresponsibly or seek to do deliberate harm, and they wouldn’t, even without those laws. And many more also don’t because they find the potential punishment sufficiently unpleasant.
And yet 90 people per day are killed in car accidents in America. Several million every year are injured, many permanently. Is the government failing or succeeding? If their responsibility is to protect our lives, I’d say they’re failing. We’ve lost over 80,000 Americans to the Coronavirus this year in spite of all the protections government can provide, including some fairly dramatic precautions. At the same time, those measures have cost lives as well, to say nothing of the jobs at least temporarily lost. The long-term impact on lives may not be fully understood for years yet.
So I guess one question to ask ourselves is whether or not any government can guarantee us our lives. Can a government eliminate all risk? And would we like it if they did? What would our lives be like? I see plenty of examples all around right now of people starting to push back against government control over their lives as the governmental restrictions put in place to save lives from COVID-19 continue in effect well into the second or third months. I live in a state that imposed less strict restrictions and perhaps coincidentally, perhaps in correlation with other factors, has the fourth lowest death rate in the country. I’ve pretty much willingly complied with those restrictions.
But when I hear of some of the other states’ more extensive efforts to control the virus by controlling people I am particularly grateful to live where I live. I fully understand why those states are facing popular backlash. Clearly, even if a government could keep us all from dying, most people feel those all-controlling restrictions would make life no longer worth living, especially when there is no end in sight.
In fact, history seems to prove that a restrictive government, even in the name of protecting life, tends to fall sooner or later. Human nature tends to lead governments to go too far, and usually for decreasingly benign reasons. They may start out well-meaning, but soon grab more and more power simply for the sake of hanging onto that power.
But then let’s look at the alternative. A total lack of government tends not to work very well, either. While I don’t entirely subscribe to the “Lord of the Flies” theory of humanity, a complete lack of common law–or the enforcement thereof–tends toward disaster. People will usually work out some sort of pact, a set of rules for maintaining peace, property, and ensuring basic rights. But as demonstrated by certain parts of our current world, the rule of “might makes right” is more common than we’d like to think.
Humanity needs government. It’s even part of my religion’s basic tenets. Governments that ensure basic rights and basic rules governing human interaction are essential to maximize productivity, cooperation, and peace. But in all cases it falls upon the governed to govern themselves to some degree. The value of traffic laws to a victim is not in the enforcement of those laws, but in the threat of enforcement. It does me precious little good if I’m dead knowing the idiot that decided to continue through the red light at 50 miles an hour to broadside my car will be heavily fined and potentially jailed. The hope is that, knowing he could be heavily fined and jailed, the person will choose not to speed and run red lights in the first place.
And yet we still lose around 40,000 Americans to car accidents every year. If we apply the same logic to cars I’ve been hearing about the coronavirus, we should all be voluntarily getting rid of our cars or agreeing to cap our speed at ten miles an hour. We’re not, and we won’t. Deep down even the strongest proponents of government protection in all area of life seem to accept that communal rights must be tempered by individual rights. We’re willing to accept responsibility for protecting ourselves in order to avoid our own inconvenience.
In fact, as a society in America, we still retain far more personal responsibility for our own protection, prosperity, and happiness than we surrender to government. There is constant pressure from some to push more and more of that control to government, but much of it seems to be due to some mistaken belief that such power could never be abused, or that the other party who we distrust/hate so dearly will never actually hold power, giving them the opportunity to abuse the power we want to hand the government when under our side’s control.
That’s why I tend to believe that we need to be self-reliant rather than government-reliant, especially when it comes to protection. The deterrent power of government is important, but they can’t (and probably shouldn’t) be everywhere. As the saying goes, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. Ultimately we can’t completely avoid all danger in life. But we can take responsibility for our own safety.
Hopefully every one of us who has taken formal drivers education has been taught to be aware of what’s going on around us in order to anticipate threats. Hopefully none of us, seeing that idiot in the far left lane who suddenly realizes they should be in the far right lane, just continues on at the same speed, staring straight ahead, trusting entirely in the law to protect us. We slow down. We start looking for room for evasive action. We do our best to make sure we are not in their path.
Most anyone who is looking after their financial future recognizes the inadequacy in America of the government safety net to support the retired. Even assuming Social Security will survive all the political wrangling around it, most retirement plans include coming up with funds well above and beyond what we can count on from the government. Similarly, during the two years I spent on unemployment, had I needed to rely on that alone my family would have really struggled.
We can’t anticipate everything, but we can take reasonable precautions in much of what we do. We can take steps to reduce negative impacts on those we love. We can act morally and responsibly in our interactions with others. We can think before we act.
I think, whether we like it or not, so long as we choose to live within society, within the bounds of modern infrastructure we’re going to have to trust government at some essential level. If we don’t trust in our social structures to at least some degree we will spend the majority of our time and resources trying to eliminate any and all dependence on government and other people, effectively pushing us to the lowest level of Maslow’s Hierarchy, and that’s not where we should be. We need to be able to trust that a vast majority of the time when we turn on our faucet, when we flip the light switch, when we set out to drive to work we’re going to have a predictable, quality experience.
At the same time, where the absence of that predictable result threatens our lives, we need to be prepared to shoulder that burden ourselves, if only for a short time. I’ll drink tap water, but I’ll make sure I’ve got a reserve supply in case I can no longer trust that water. I’ll enjoy all the daily benefits of electricity, but have other options available in case it fails. I’ll do my best to assume every moment I’m in my car that other drivers may not abide by the law. Government is very good and beneficial for many things. But over-dependence on them can be deadly. Our own safety and happiness must always be our responsibility.
COVID Confusion
I found this in our local monthly/marketing newspaper in a humor piece of things the author learned from social media during the COVID-19 quarantine:
In effort not to get sick we should eat well, but we should not go out to get healthy fresh food when we run out and eat whatever pre-packaged food we have on hand instead. However, we should order out at our local restaurants to help keep them in business. Then it’s okay to go out to pick up the food. Your food might be prepared by someone sick that doesn’t know they are sick, but that’s okay if you pay by credit card and take the food out of the container. However, you should avoid going to the grocery store at all costs because you might get sick.
Joani Taylor, “The Social Media Scandal – What I Learned During Quarantine”, Sandy City Journal
If there is anyone left out there who still believes there’s a perfect response to a pandemic, especially one where the details about the virus aren’t really known…well, they’re probably on social media telling the rest of us what we should be doing. I’ve been fortunate enough to live in a state that took a somewhat moderate approach, while managing to keep the death rate fairly low, but the nags and scolds have been everywhere all the same.
Sure, I get it. People are scared, and fear makes people thrash about desperately in search of some way to feel in control. For many people that means lecturing everyone else. But the rest of us, when faced with conflicting information, reach a point where we just have to decide for ourselves which advice we can keep and what risks we are willing to take. Here are a few of the things I’ve learned (or re-learned) from all of this:
- Preparation buys time. We were not as prepared as we wish we’d been, but we still had at least several weeks worth of all essential items. Even though we weren’t sure how long our toilet paper supply would last, we had enough to hang in there until more started appearing. We didn’t need to panic, spend exorbitant amounts of money to secure the essentials, and could put off even shopping for groceries until things calmed down.
- People don’t want or can’t handle fresh. When we did go shopping we had no trouble finding fresh fruits and vegetables. Do people just not buy the more perishable items in an emergency? It’s not like we were without power. Veggies keep for weeks in the fridge. Or do people just not know how to prepare fruits and vegetables anymore? Not that I’m complaining. We’ve been able to eat healthy while everyone else, from the look of the store shelves, are existing on flour, pasta and beans.
- Savings are essential. I am one of the fortunate people who can work from home, even if it’s not my preferred way to work. But even I had been furloughed or laid off we would have had savings to get through this.
- Flexibility and resilience help. When things like this happen we can sit back and complain over every inconvenience or difficulty, or we can relax, take a deep breath (or two or three), and deal with everything one step at a time. This is easier to do if you’re not worried about basic survival.
- Cut everyone some slack, including yourself. I’ve had to continually remind myself that people are experiencing widely varying levels of stress right now. On the other hand, if there were people whose stress was causing me stress, I’m not obligated to keep absorbing their stress. There are some where I hit the “social media snooze button” so I wouldn’t have to deal with them until things calm down again. For the most part people have been keeping things on an even keel, and when they aren’t I would try to be kind and remember where they’re coming from.
- Even introverts need people. While introverts across the world have been cheering about this being the moment they were born for, the truth is, introversion does not mean we don’t need anyone else. Introversion/Extroversion is more a matter of where we get our energy from. Extroverts get their energy from being with others. Introverts get theirs from being somewhat isolated and quiet. We can enjoy social interactions, and even get some energy from particularly enjoyable ones, but most drain energy from us, and sooner or later we need to get away and recharge. Being shut up at home hasn’t been particularly difficult for me, but after a couple weeks I found myself reaching out to people much more than I usually do. I miss the depth, breadth and variety of my normal interactions.
- Focus on what you can do. This crisis quickly revealed where our family is not as prepared as we should be. The problem is that some of that just can’t–and perhaps shouldn’t–be fixed right now. We found we were least prepared in our supplies of paper products, baking supplies, and a few other food categories. And yet if we’ve learned anything about shortages, it’s that running out and stocking up just make things worse for everyone, so we’ve had to resist that urge. Instead, we identified some things we can procure right now, and we’ve focused on that. We have a much better water storage now, and we’re better prepared for the next power outage (and in our area, there will be one). I feel satisfaction and accomplishment at having done something useful, even if I can’t solve all of the problem just yet.
- Have a plan for the rest. As I said above, there are some preparedness deficiencies we can’t fix yet. But I’ve learned from sad experience that if I don’t have a plan in place for when we get back to normal-enough I’ll likely forget to do anything at all. I can take this time now to at least come up with a plan so that I know the next steps to take once we can take them.
- It’s difficult to be prepared for everything. I’ve been a homeowner for over twenty years. In this part of the world we have to be on guard against mice. Right before our state went into quarantine we discovered something entirely new: rats. Mice we could have dealt with. Nothing we had worked on rats. And even after some online research and a curbside pickup purchase it took a long time to figure out what would work.
I could probably go on, but I’m hearing too many heads hitting keyboards already, so I’l spare you. This quarantine experience has certainly given us a lot to think about, and a lot of time in which to think about it. Right now the biggest question we should all ask is, “What do I do about it?” What are we going to change as a result of our experiences? Set a goal, make a plan, and get it done.
Diogenes and self-reliance
The story is told of Alexander the Great visiting Diogenes and finding the philosopher laying in the sun. Alexander approached him and asked him if he could anything for him. Diogenes replied, “Yes, stand a little out of my sun.”
Kyle Eschenroeder examines this exchange in more detail and analyzes what Diogenes tells us about self-reliance in his article, “A Man’s Guide to Self-Reliance” from The Art of Manliness website.
Diogenes’ simple, ascetic lifestyle may seem to exemplify self-reliance, but these externals are not its essence.
Rather, self-reliance is a mindset, an approach to life that can be adopted whether you live in a wilderness cabin or a “little box” in the suburbs. Self-reliance is about living a life in which you make decisions and opinions with primary respect to your own experience of the world. You trust yourself. You’re true to yourself.
This doesn’t mean living in a void, it just means that we’re conscious about our relationship to the world and other people. It’s not rejecting external advice outright, but trusting ourselves enough to sift through which advice is worthy. We’re aware of the agendas of others, and don’t let them sway us from our self-determined path. Self-reliance doesn’t necessarily mean rejecting all established customs and values, it just means experimenting with them so we know if they work for us. It’s putting stock in our inner wisdom.
There’s a lot to unpack in this, but the last paragraph is especially of interest to me, especially these two lines: “It’s not rejecting external advice outright, but trusting ourselves enough to sift through which advice is worthy. We’re aware of the agendas of others, and don’t let them sway us from our self-determined path.” Put simply, we need to think for ourselves.
Far too often these days we are expected to buy into an ideology and follow it to the exclusion of all else. If we relate with an identity group we must think a certain way to remain in step with our fellows. Our news media, where once they would simply report the facts and let us decide what those facts mean, increasingly tells us what to think of those facts as well. Anyone who disagrees needs to be beaten down. We get our information from headlines and proceed as if we know and understand not just the details, but the nuance.
But how can we? Why should we? Why should we blindly accept another person’s “truth?”
The short answer is, “We shouldn’t.” We need to question, to seek to see as broad a perspective as we can, to measure what we’re being told against what we have learned through our own experience. We need to seek to verify, not just accept. We have far too many examples of history where terrible wrongs were committed under the cover of “I was just following orders,” or “It didn’t want to go against the crowd.” If we are to be judged and sentenced we should at least be so for our own beliefs, not for someone else’s.
Intellectual self-reliance is not an easy path. The world is a complex place, and it takes time and effort to sort through that complexity. But while we need to question, we can’t afford to continually question everything. We need some solid ground to stand on before we can move forward. We should be willing to adjust as we discover new information and encounter new perspectives, but be prepared to stand firm on our own foundation when a choice must be made.
Perhaps most importantly, even when we come to reject a particular philosophy or ideology, we need to resist the easy temptation of “that which we cannot believe we must despise, must hate.” We can oppose, but even when our own thinking in solid we can still learn much about ourselves and our beliefs through associations with those with whom we disagree. Someone with whom we can disagree, yet still respect and listen to, is invaluable in this world. It’s far too easy these days to dismiss anyone who thinks differently, but such intellectual reactionism is as wrong and dangerous as those who follow the herd. From Eschenroeder again:
In fact, there may never have been a time when developing this type of self-reliance has been more important. We’re over-politicized and polarized. Advertisements are creeping further and further into our content, making them less obvious. The Internet has given us two or two-thousand sides to every story. Social media feeds allow our peers to weigh in on our every decision. The comment section of a blog post allows us to see what other people thought of an article before we’ve formed our own opinion. It’s increasingly difficult to live a life that is inner-directed rather than other-directed.
In order to operate effectively in this kind of autonomy-sapping environment, developing a strong sense of self-reliance is crucial.
To be truly self-reliant may mean we not only stand firm, but that we stand apart. To follow the crowd too closely, however well-intentioned, is to invite disaster. As anyone in a mob or riot or Black-Friday frenzy understands, if you stand in the middle of any crowd it can be extremely difficult to escape before they run headlong off the cliff. Keep an intellectual distance, and trust in yourself to decide what is best for you.