>>2150053Fascinating post, thanks. I think this is true for most men - without novelty and adventure, we get squeamish and dissatisfied. However, I can personally see it working in the following scenario, with one important limitation being that you would have to do it with a group of people like a large family or a tight-knit community:
>buy prime land with natural resources>set up farm, defense system, living quarters, etc>set up shit ton of solar panels, powerwalls, starlink and general torrenting/data hoarding setup>constantly make improvements to land and expandThis takes care of our need for novelty (having tons of digital media hoarded) and conquest (constantly expanding and always having projects to work on).
However the obvious tradeoff to being self-sustaining, whether you are an individual going offgrid or you are a country like North Korea, is you lose the luxury of trade and utilizing one another's comparative advantage, so there will be much more work to do yourself no matter how well you set everything up. Then the question is, does the leisure afforded to us by our modern lifestyles truly make us happier? Hard to say.
The reason I think someone shouldn't do it alone is because if shit actually does hit the fan, you will have to have people on watch to defend the homestead.
In this idealistic scenario the only disadvantage to being tied to one place is that the demographics of the surrounding area could shift wildly like in South Africa, and you will have your farmland seized. So a major factor in buying land would be avoiding somewhere that has the potential to be overrun by third worlders in the future.
Given that someone has the capital, motivation, and bearishness on civilization in the short term, it does seem feasible. But personally, I am not bearish on civilization and ultimately I think when hardship comes it is those who are highly adaptable that will triumph rather than those who autistically and rigidly plan everything in advance.
