“Our final century…”  That was a pretty riveting statement as was: “He reasoned that “by 2020 there will be thousands — even millions — of people with the capability to cause a catastrophic biological disaster. My concern is not only organized terrorist groups, but individual weirdos with the mindset of the people who now design computer viruses.”  

I know the avocation of local self-sufficiency has some economic penalties but if offset by some government contracts (who would benefit from the strategic dispersal of their industries from vulnerable industrial centers), I definitely think it would work.  Things like rapid prototyping, server computer systems, shop tools, robotics, and such all make such a dramatic shift possible.  Much like a NASCAR shop, individual regions should be able to build engines and other critical components from scrap metal.  Underground tunnels for our utilities might be something safer and even more maintainable but would need communities to have a very small footprint with limited infrastructure.  Water would be the most important thing to backup.  Rainwater holding tanks the size of living rooms, wells drilled even if public service exists, gray water recycling, and maybe things like fire trucks with the ability to filter contaminated water…  Smaller public utilities tend to be a bit more expensive that could also be offset by government funding.  Product standardization is also a key as it limits the ridiculous number of parts needed to maintain things.

Overall, a more robust, almost militaristic-type society where things are actually planned out and streamlined and built to the highest possible quality so that it lasts, would be the one most likely to endure.  It’s a difficult topic to convey but it’s probably more realistic and more affordable than Iraq right now.

Have you looked at the government lately?  Why thinkest thou an improvement is likely?  Get your head up and on a swivel, Chris!

Why do you expect planning, foresight, intelligence and imagination from a "almost militaristic" society.  Go read about Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia!

History, and current events, does not support your proposal and I wouldn't want to live in it, or have my grandkids stuck there, either.  Theorize all you want but leave us out, thank you so much!

A difficult topic and question to be sure Wade.  How does society prepare for thousands… hundreds of thousands…  perhaps millions of wackos just dying to put society’s haphazard, overly-confident, storybook way of life to the test?  Do we go about life as normal relying on far-off wars to end terrorism?  What about the bird flu, global warming, or nuclear warfare, which also lead the keeper of the doomsday clock to give us only a 50% chance of survival in THIS century?  Our government hasn’t exactly had the best track record when they not only allow but encourage people to build over fault lines, in flood planes, below sea level, or when they fail to call for proper storage of nuclear materials.  However, the government is all we have and I hope that by educating both public and government officials as to what is possible, that they will ultimately decide to be more careful.

I understand your discomfort with the term ‘militaristic’ and I did indeed hesitated to use it.  Militaristic thinking might as well have been replaced with what racing teams, mountain climbers, or long distance hikers must go through to prepare ‘specifically’ for their given task – as potentially matters of life and death.  Would a mountain climber choose shotty rope or poor equipment?  Does a backpacker not carefully consider each and every piece of equipment for its functionality, weight, performance, and quality?  I’m note sure how else to describe such careful and deliberate planning other than just to say militaristic, and I certain hope you don’t think I was suggesting the need for repression and outright brutality.  

To me, a call for local self-sufficiency is just such a careful plan that really doesn’t change the way we live or do business.  Designing our sewer system better, calling for more localized power generation and backup water systems, and trying to structure our homes and communities so that we can either work from home or right in our neighborhood just seems to be a more careful and effective way of doing things.  All such systems would benefit our lives by having to travel less and be less vulnerable to mass power outages and other potential disasters.  San Francisco, for example, has roughly 6,000 miles of underground utilities.  Planning a city to have a lower footprint and thus far less underground infrastructure is generally pretty smart (I’d think) and likely to lead to lower taxes and FAR less of a repair nightmare should a major earthquake actually strike.  

Even the idea of product standardization is something that can be totally voluntary (perhaps encouraged by tax breaks), unnoticed, and perhaps even something that can lead to higher quality of products overall.  To me, It’s almost like asking for better safety standards or cars with higher gas mileage.  With the way things are, I really have to wonder how society expects to maintain such an overwhelming/part-dependent infrastructure under pandemic conditions or economic collapse.  

Chris -- you write a good 'Doomsday'scenario, and extrapolate it nicely. Unfortunately, Wade is correct in believing that government would not participate. The people who are in are most interested in getting back in, and those who want in are concentrating in booting out the current 'ins' and taking their place. And those like Wade who wants no part of that future are really in the majority. Remember, the more comfortable we are, the less we are interested in maintaining that comfort if it means we have to do something.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):