daily ad

Sunday, July 16, 2017

tribal totem


TRIBAL TOTEM

Okay, awhile ago I’m desperately trying to find another doomer site as the old ones fell away from entropy and attrition, and while happy as hell because I’m pretty much the longest running e-pub out there survivalist wise ( my e-mail newsletter started before the end of last century ) I need more input, always more input and hence am willing to settle for reading drivel and puff pieces, so I ruin an entire morning, time I’ll never get back, looking at one of those “fifty best prepper sites” lists.  Out of fifty, I think about three or so were even worth bookmarking and revisiting to see if they are worthy of my time.  That quickly fell away to about one and he is on the Double Top Secret Probation list and will soon be booted if he stays busy cashing in his military pension and Social Security checks rather than writing a friggin article already.  Hey, I understand this writing stuff is hard, but what are we paying you for ( sadly, I think the worst bare bones info regurgitater is getting paid too much from advertisements )?

*

At the end of that morning, you are very welcome everything I do for you all, I was simply astounded at the mediocrity and general worthlessness of the prepper publication crowd.  I could stick a pencil up my ass and write more interesting stuff.  You might think that is actually how I produce my articles.  However, one good thing that did come out of my pain and suffering was this article idea.  It was one of those “Survivalist Arsenal” articles and really all it did was heap so much scorn and loathing on every single firearm except for semi-auto carbine and battle rifles that the bias was crystal clear to even someone as slow and Special Ed such as myself.   For instance, if you were to have a bolt action, you would surely die as you couldn’t shoot fast enough.  That was it-their only argument.  Okay, granted, that is one consideration, but the argument and considerations are shallow and vapid.  I won’t continue for thousands of words in that vein, we have covered it ad nauseam.  For you new tight fisted frugal bastards ( hey, no judgment-I wave the same flag ) that are just now reading me, you’ll have a time of it finding any specific article as I have always mistitled in an attempt at cuteness or misdirection, I’m not sure which, so you’ll have to slog through the last five years of blog entries to find anything.  But since you need to and want to catch up anyway, there you go ( if you are new, you’ll also discover my endearing habit of run on sentences.  I tell you, it just keeps getting better ). 

*

I will just mention that there is no gun you couldn’t use as a survival gun, granting such exceptions as Derringers or similar that simply require too close of range with far too little damage potential.  You can of course assume that a piece of equipment is far more important compared to skill or intelligent application, but I do not.  At the outside, you can always use a inferior weapon as an Acquisition Gun ( snipe or ambush and procure a better weapon ).  The AR folks have always played the game of “equipment makes the warrior”.  What kind of warrior is open to question of course.  Remember when Dirty Harry was released in the theatres?  Suddenly the 44 has the cats meow, the bees knees.  Just like someone who wears sunglasses thinking he’ll turn cool, owning the 44 did not make you macho.  Unless you were the gun buyer of course.  That was purchasing a totem to import mystical and magical powers.  Well, the M16 has had this kind of Dirty Harry imparted magic propaganda since its early adaptation.  Think back on all the Hollywood badassery associated with it. 

*

One almost believes that this is a modern version of the Spear Chuckers being given a ritual to make them bulletproof.  Poof, now go run into the ranks of British mass fire.  You’ll survive just fine.  Now it is, poof, you don’t need skill or courage, this gun will magically grant you these qualities.  Suckers.  This article on “semi only to survive” got me thinking on yet another article on Best Survival Gun, but after flogging my brain and losing a bit of sleep I stumbled on this better subject ( better if for no other reason than it wasn’t the Same Damn Thing Redux ).  Guns as tribal totems.  The uninformed assume that the M16 by itself assures victory.  Why, look at all the shiny glittery unicorn sparkles.  Extra shiny bullets go boom many times and the barbarians beshat themselves in fear!  Those with experience over in foreign sandlots assume the M16 AND lots of practice assure victory.  While at least this isn’t as retarded as assuming tactical superiority with a piece of equipment alone, it still assumes business as usual.  Shiny boom-booms last forever, like fracking oil!  Mighty warriors, with practice, cause barbarians to beshat themselves!

*

Obviously there needs to be a lot of beshatting barbarians around in these folks futures.  If you look at all the sites Western Rifle Shooter covers, you get a sense of White folks barricading themselves in a frontier cabin as vicious Indians ( Blacks and SJW’s and Muslims ) attack.  No wonder the semi-auto is so superior to them-there be a lot of Injuns to kill off.  The AR represents a return to White Bread Ville.  Their tribe of White Separatists ( not that there is anything wrong with being a separatist instead of a supremist,  just that they should be voting with their feet instead of their ammo purchases ) is as exemplified by the AR as they would have been by the Confederate Flag prior to being such a vilified emblem.  You can’t talk to these people about the inferiority of their rimfire round, or the fragility of the weapon or the field unreliability.  This is their tribal totem and it is sacred, by gum.  I wonder what my irrational love of the Lee-Enfield symbolizes.  Here would be a good time to not be throwing stones in glass houses.  Am I an Imperialist in the Victorian fashion, assuming the White Man’s Burden?  Kipling’s verse in the background as I engage in volume fire for more than my fair share of colonial spoils?  I would imagine prior reading might suggest this, but there is also something in over analyzing every situation.  Do you have a slave fetish wish if you like the serf issued Mosin-Nagant?  See?  Over-analyzing.

*

All of this just to suggest that you can’t argue over the merits of a weapon if the other party is using markers rather than marksmanship as the deciding factor.  When these yahoos beat the dead horse of “AR’s Or Nothing, Bitches!”, they aren’t going to listen to alternatives.  The AR is their witch doctor granting them immunity from death, or at the very least a flag for their team of choice ( “Murica, love it or leave it, military shall never be defeated, military uses M16, I love America by using the same gun” ).  I could sit here and agree with a lot of their selling points, granted.  Accuracy is great, IF you use a twenty inch barrel.  Spare parts are everywhere so it almost doesn’t matter if the thing keeps breaking in the field.  If used as a mid range sniper it won’t jam up from fouling.  You will be served well enough by the weapon if it is your choice.  I’m merely asking you to examine your conformational bias.   Are you loving it because of what it represents, or for what it can do? 

*

I could also refute most of its selling points.  It might be accurate so you save ammo, but the round is such a poor transfer of energy that you must hit your target two or three times.  Where is the ammo savings?  If you are sniping, so as to reduce fouling, why do you need a semi-auto anyway?  If the gun was more robust, would spare parts be a factor?  A weapons choice can be supported or refuted.  NONE, not one firearm ever in the history of always has ever been perfect.  You are just trying to pick a less imperfect one.  Perhaps if you are choosing a more imperfect one you are guilty of being unduly influenced.  You are associating a totem with a tool, confusing performance with implied abilities.  Nothing wrong with that.  They call it brainwashing for a reason.  The trick is to realize the influence.  You are not silly for falling for the trick, just refusing to see the trick after it has been suggested. 

END ( end 'o the article Amazon link http://amzn.to/2ttzqFi )

Please support Bison by buying through the Amazon ad graphics at the top of the page. ***You can support me through Patreon ( go to www.patreon.com/bison )***You can make donations or book purchases through PayPal ( www.paypal.me/jimd303 )

*** Unless you are in extreme poverty, spend a buck a month here, by the above donation methods or buy a book. If you don't do Kindle, send me a buck and I'll e-mail it to you.  Or, send an extra buck and I'll send you a CD ( the file is in PDF.  I’ll waive this fee if you order three or more books at one time ).  My e-mail is: jimd303@reagan.com  My address is: James M Dakin, 181 W Bullion Rd #12, Elko NV 89801-4184

*** Pay your author-no one works for free.  I’m nice enough to publish for barely above Mere Book Money, so do your part.***   Land In Elko*  Lord Bison* my bio & biblio*   my web site is www.bisonprepper.com *** Wal-Mart wheat***Amazon Author Page
* By the by, all my writing is copyrighted. For the obtuse out there

 

18 comments:

  1. White separatist will always fail. Every time I see a sexy Latino, asian, or mulato girl I think screw that separations crap! I'm for some good multiculturalism today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "It's a trick, they want to intermix!" And, your point is? White gals could be sexier, but their crap attitude usually spoils it. Sexiest gal I ever bedded was not too pretty-but she was sultry. Attitude matters, bitches.

      Delete
    2. Only natural. The gene pool wants to widen. The exotic is found sexy. Africans in Norway would get all the booty they wanted, and Norwegians in Japan likewise, prior to the era of expansion when those extremely distant tribes suddenly got far too close for comfort thanks to high speed (even before fossil fuels) transportation and importation. NOW peoples tribal instincts realize that it isn't just the cut and pattern of the tartan that can mark a tribal enemy it is physical features as well - that is the real birth of modern racism.
      Foolish though - the heart (and loins) wants what it wants, and for good evolutionary (or even divine plan) reason too.

      Delete
    3. Just don't forget xenophobia is usually what they label racism.

      Delete
  2. Yes, as with a lot of survivalist "common knowledge" (= lore) it has everything to do with what is inside your brain. You choose what you can figure out. Most of our epxerience of the extra-ordinary comes from Hollywood, and these Hollywood guys are a bunch of lazy guys who know their audiences well : it's like porn, it has to be the same yet different every time.

    As for the survivalist "arsenal", perhaps another way to look at it is the intended use :
    1- people
    2- animals
    3- clay pigeons ???

    I'd say survivalism is not really about foraging, so aspect 2 is minimal. Perhaps a .410 would do.

    The whole issue is revolving about the best gun to kill somebody. This is actually warfare.

    And thus it becomes very complicated quickly, but fortunately our choices are few. It's not like in real urban warfare where they have mortars and a hundred trucks to lug the ammo around, we're in "misc small arms" territory.

    The issues would be essentially
    1- semi-auto or not ?
    2- close range, long range, a bit of both ?

    Both the BIC Approach and the Zero-Skill Approach exclude the semi-auto.

    Regarding the range, we could over simplify it into :
    2a - I let some people get close to me
    2b - I don't

    And this depends on what you think the scenario will be. A gradual collapse has a lot of 2a, a waterfall collapse has more of 2b (but still some 2a in the first days/weeks).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've been reading up on military history. Might do an article on the uncharging fundamentals of combat. J.F.C. Fuller seems to have his act together on this.

      Delete
  3. It looks like you can get the .223 in up to 80gr bullet weights. I saw a break action .223 at Walmart a while back. Don’t recall the price, but it wasn’t too steep. You can reach out up to 400 yards, perhaps a little more on a windless day with that caliber. As you say, it’s a small bullet, and maybe not a one shot kill in some cases. But I think that anything beyond a flesh wound will incapacitate someone, and post collapse, will be certain death once sepsis sets in. The .243 is actually a better round, allowing up to a 100gr bullet, but it’s not as common as the .223.

    I sure wish that I still had my Ruger Redhawk .44 magnum, as well as my Ruger Service Six .357 magnum. Both guns that I regret selling to this day.Do you remember years ago when Ruger sold the .44 mag semi-auto rifle? It was a spitting image of the 10/22 but in .44. I think it had a 5 round capacity, so you couldn’t waste too much ammo at once. I mention all this as nostalgia only.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Five round mags won't stop the semi semians! I saw a video of Kanukians modifying SKS five round strippers so they could pour on the lead.

      Delete
    2. My memory fails me, and I can’t recall if it had the same exact mag system as the 10/22, but it would make sense that it did. If I recall correctly, it was actually only a little heavier than the .22 version. This was years ago, probably in the 1970’s and before when they offered this gun. They offered some cool guns over the years.

      According to my father, that pistol that The Great Humongous had in The Road Warrior, was a Ruger .256 Hawkeye. This was a necked down .357 to .25 caliber. The Great Humongous also had this to say:

      “I am gravely disappointed in semi-auto’s for post collapse use.”

      Nah, he didn’t really say most of that, but I thought that you might like it :D

      http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/10294/11015414_1.jpg?v=8CE316522894CE0

      Delete
    3. Actually, Lord H COULD have said that:)

      Delete
    4. I saw a picture comparing two people shot in the buttox (say it like forest gump). One by a 223 the other by an Ak round. The guy shot by the ak round was back at work a couple of days later. The 223 guy was a freakin mess.


      But seeing as we're talking survivalist - pretty much any centre fire rounds going to suck to be hit by.

      Then to be absolutely fair I read poor sanitation killed / laid plenty of people low. More than actual violence. Maybe it was ave who wrote that

      Delete
    5. Was the wound per change during Vietnam? I thought that was when all the good yawing wounds happened. Could be wrong on that one, just thinking they stabilized the round for range.

      Delete
  4. AR fanboys are like Trump fanboys, in that they are loyal even though the product doesn't work well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was going to say, even if they look good, but the Donald's hair, yo...

      Delete
    2. Ah , but the Donald's hair is not always in perfect place as is the Lord Bisons.

      Delete
    3. Someone once wrote something about his hair looking like an alien landed on his head. Can't disagree.

      Delete
  5. I've got a cheap 80% lower almost strictly for totemic purposes because my state dislikes the AR so much. No real interest in the gun itself. TBH I don't see being a fightin' man as my role, nor my best method for survival as such.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eventually we all are only fighters, but as paranoid as I am I still think most of us will be dead before that.

      Delete

I must moderate-trust me. You don't want to see what happens otherwise. Sometimes it takes awhile to respond as I only check two or three times a day. No N-Bombs, nothing to get me libeled. Otherwise, have at it. If you criticize me, make sure to praise my hair first.