Joel Skousen Advice: Your thoughts please : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Just when I thought our plans were well under way, we purchased the Joel Skousen book on "Strategic Relocation" and now I seem to be back to the confused stage. I thought a location we need to look for would need to be the kind that would lend itself to self-sufficency (in the context, hopefully, of like minded people). Now, however, according to Skousen, I need to take into consideration a lot of other potential problems too! Like war, extreme government interference in private life, earth changes, etc.

Any thoughts, opinions and general advice regarding Skousen and his "Strategic Relocation" book?

BTW I first looked through old threads. Couldn't find what I was looking for, so I wrote this question. Did I miss a Skousen review somewhere?

-- Joe (, December 07, 1998


TOTAL SCHIZOPHRENIA is what Joe/Runway/William/Thomas is looking for.

-- Dunno (, December 07, 1998.

Anything that we have no control over, we will be vulnerable to no matter where you live. Utopia would be nice but it just isn't going to be found on mother earth.

-- bardou (, December 07, 1998.

Utopia does exist trouble is other people mess it up, the flora and fauna are not really a problem (NB we've wiped out the bears and wolves).

-- Richard Dale (, December 07, 1998.

Joe, each of us must decide what is "good enough" preparations for ourselves. Some want to be prepared for nuclear war or fallout as part of y2k preparations because no one really knows what's going to happen with nukes.

Some, like me, decided not to worry about that because to me, if it comes to that point, I don't want to live. My genes just aren't that special or important to the human race for me to want to survive the worse calamity of all, nuclear obliteration of mother earth. It's something I can't and won't contemplate, so I don't dwell on it (here's an example of self-protecting denial.)

I prepare according to my own research and optimism. In my view, there is no preparation that is too much or too paranoid, it's really a matter of how much money, energy, optimism/pessimism, and willingness on the part of individual. Who's to say who's right or wrong on y2k prediction? Only one thing is certain; if it's more than a bump in the road and you're not prepared at all, you're going to look and feel like an idiot while struggling for your life. If it is only a bump in the road, you won't feel nowhere near as idiot or hurt even though you were prepared to the teeth. You can even make yourself feel better by giving away surplus to needy people.

So keep reading and doing your research, you'll eventually settle on your limit of how far you're willing to go.

-- Chris (, December 07, 1998.

Joe - anyone - go to the Art Bell site and check out the Joel Skousen interview on real audio - absolutely fascinating.

Well worth the effort - "we're doomed, doomed I tell ye!" (Pvt. Frazer, Dad's Army, Walmington-On-Sea, 1939).

-- Andy (, December 07, 1998.

Andy, I did, and that's part why I am asking the question! I heard Skousen AND read his book.

I can and am in the process of preparing for a possible 6-8 Y2K event, but to have this other stuff thrown at me now is the reason for the confusion.

I'm just looking at the thoughts and opinions of others.

Chris- I really appreciate your comments. Sort of the path I am presently on, but I just feel the confusion setting in after having looked at Skousen's material. Trying to get my bearings again.


-- Joe (, December 07, 1998.


Do your very best to get centered, then follow your own guidance, intution or "gut" feeling. Get really good at learning how to trust that internal guidance system. It takes practice. Then trust it for Y2K.


-- Diane J. Squire (, December 07, 1998.

I agree - your gut feelings come from what the evolutionists claim are 500,000 years of survival in times of crisis. Your ancestors survived Ice Ages, cave bears, dire wolves, lions, and saber-toothed tigers. They've survived drought, floods, famines, and cyclones and pestilence time and time again.

And, I've noticed more 2 month-old babies running around lately than woolly mamoth yearlings and saber-tooth tiger cubs.

You'll manage. Trust your instincts, and double-check all your sources before committing your resources to just one theory. you can't prevent a meteor from hitting your house tommorrow night. The likelihood of systems failure in our current man-made support infrastructure is so likely (in my opinion, in my judgement, based on my experience) that other highly unlikely events are not worth worrying about.

Prepare first against the most threatening failures (power, water, sewage, telephone.) Then worry about secondary effects of those.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (, December 07, 1998.

For more info on the Soviet/Russian threat, visit:

Jeff Nyquist was on Art Bell this past year as was Joel Skousen. I have Nyquist's book. It is scarier than anything y2k has to offer.

-- Joe O (, December 09, 1998.

Here's Joel Skousen capulized view of y2k severity, cast in the context of a defense of Gary North, from GN 'relocation' forum: --------------------------------------------------------------------- I happen to be good friends with Gary, and also happen to disagree with his worst case scenario, for many of the reasons stated on the internet2000 site. Clearly, because so many computers are not going to be compliant does NOT necessarily mean that civilization is going to collapse. I have done a lot of research on the possible work- arounds at the technician level in railroads, utilities and the government sectors. There are ways to get things operating again, without total reliance on computers. It won't be easy, and there will be at least a few weeks of serious breakdowns of essential services-- so everybody does need to prepare for alternate electricity, food, water, and security (especially in the big cities). As I have said before, all of your preparations will be useful for other larger crises that are looming further down the time line--so don't get too enthusiastic about not having to prepare as much for Y2k. Better to do things now than when it becomes apparent the Russians really were cheating all along about disarmament.

But one thing I strongly disagree with is the attack on Gary's character and motives. Gary may be overestimating the danger, but he is not unprincipled or dishonest. He doesn't invent crises just to sell newsletters. He doesn't have huge stockpiles of Gold that he intends to make a killing off of. He isn't on drugs, and never has been. The author's use of extremely perjorative language in his criticism of Gary is unbecoming of any thinking person, let alone someone who claims to be on the "religious right."

Here's the bottom line: When this thing is over, even though it WON'T be the end of Western Civilization, we are all going to owe Gary North a big vote of thanks. In my opinion, Gary North's worst case scenarios have been the big motivations for the establishment to come out of their doldrums and do something about Y2K--even if only to prove Gary North wrong! Gary may well be responsible for Y2K NOT being the great disaster he is predicting. Because his warning got everyone's attention, things are now getting done--despite all the false starts and even cover-ups on the part of corporations and government agencies. Anyway, that's how I feel about this.

Joel Skousen, Moderator Author of Strategic Relocation

-- runway cat (, December 09, 1998.

Joe, If possible try not to relocate downwind of any nuclear power plants. :o)

-- Mickey (Mickey, December 10, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ