Problems with Using a Retreat--Social Issues (Updated)

I think its important to understand the original impetus for relocating to a retreat, or simply moving to a rural area in the first place--nuclear war. Then, after the riots of the 1960's and 70's, there arose the idea that due to social or economic upheaval, cities and suburbs would collapse into bitter war zones dominated by gangs and mobs, a la, Mad Max. While there are a few instances where rural peoples have prospered over those in cities in time of social upheaval or war, it is foolishness to believe that the gangs, looters, mobs, armies, etc., will simply walk around the small burghs and farmstead to attack the cities. To the contrary, there is a reason why people have historically fled to cities for protection.

However, my point today is not to rehash the physical or financial problems with bugging out. I've previously stated that, unless forced by flood, fire, etc., to leave, you should plan on bugging in. Numerous posts and articles discuss how, in disasters, roads will be clogged. Attempting to bug out on foot is more likely than not going to end in disaster--if you can't already live off the land like that, a disaster is not suddenly going to teach you the skills, and magically improve your conditioning and constitution to the necessary level.

My point is the social issues. Let's assume, for sake of argument, you actually make it to your retreat in or near some tiny town in the hills/forests/mountains of where-ever, and no one has appropriated your retreat and supplies. (When I was younger, there popped up on the national news for a time stories of people in L.A. who had weekend homes in the Mojave who would go out and find mobs of people having broken into their houses, just partying it up and eating their food, and stealing anything of value). Anyway, unless you are very isolated, and very self-sufficient, you will still have to deal with the locals.

I could tell you about how closed small towns are to outsiders, but I will let James Wesley Rawles explain it himself. This is from a recent posting on Survival Blog, and Rawles was responding to someone complaining about all the Mormons in Utah, and perceived favoritism. Rawles responded:

As for Mormon politics and clannishness in Utah, I don't consider that a major issue or impediment for anyone who is considering relocation to Utah or to southern Idaho. I've observed that there are are lots of non-Mormon small towns throughout the United States where newcomers get the cold shoulder socially, and where there is a de facto hiring preference for locals. That is just basic social dynamics and the We/They Paradigm in action. To illustrate: I've been a landowner living year-round in The Unnamed Western State for eight years, and faithfully attending the same local church for all of that time. But I'm still considered a relative newcomer. Many of my neighbors have lived here for three or four generations. So I can't expect to be "instantly integrated." That is just the way it is.

James Dakin gives somewhat of the opposite perspective--the oldtimer looking at the prepper coming from somewhere else:

Preppers are, obviously, preparing. Survivalists do the same. The main difference is that Preppers are preparing for the end of the Oil Age whereas Survivalists are preparing for the end of western civilization. Preppers are preparing for their luxuries to be disrupted and stockpile to make that happen as late as possible. ...  Survivalists are Mad Max. Preppers are middle class concrete fallout shelter dwellers. Survivalists are Rednecks whereas Preppers are Yuppies. ...

*

...  Meanwhile, Pete Prepper is tearing out the last three hairs he has trying to juggle a mortgage and a retreat land payment while still paying the minimum on the trophy wives credit card bills and liposuction surgeries. ...

 I'm not interested in delving into the semantics of "survivalist" versus "prepper." What I'm more interested in Dakin's general attitude toward the outsider setting up his retreat in Dakin's small northern Nevada town. The fact is, it is a somewhat typical resentment or dislike of the "outsider." I'm not putting Dakin down because, as Rawles acknowledges, it is part of human nature.

The point is that even with the money he has spent in the local economy and the attempt to put down roots, Rawles acknowledges that he is still somewhat of an outsider after living in the area for years. So, how much better can another prepper (or survivalist) do, especially if he only occasionally visits or uses his retreat property.

Update (11/21/2013): As noted in the comments below, Matthew Bracken has discussed this issue, and observes:

To begin: you do not want to live as a trapped and cut-off minority in what might become “enemy territory.” If you live amidst your civil war enemies, as defined and located within the CW2 Cube, you will be in mortal danger even if your immediate neighbors know, love and respect you. Those persons who have a stake in fanning the flames of CW2 (and their number shall be legion), will intentionally target those remaining “holdouts” who may be respected minority neighbors. (In this essay, minority means “the minority within a given group or area.” Blacks are the majority in some areas, and whites are the minorities in others, and so on.)