The goal of this exercise is to determine who, in a crisis (disaster, war, domestic conflict), in your neighborhood could be a potential threat or ally. The methods used will be ordinary observation, communication, and public-domain resources. While not foolproof, at least you will have basic friend/foe identification predictors, as well as a profile, of those who live around you.
 
Sources 
You don’t have to use expensive people search subscription services. A lot is available online for free if you know how to use your Google-fu. You can use open-source (or subscription-free) services. Services are myriad; but at the cheap end just search names and addresses. Cross-reference them with popular social media like Facebook. Much more information can be had easily for low fees, depending on the service.
 
Recording 
Create a map of your neighborhood. You can use pins on Google Earth, draw a complex map, or a simple map with a legend. A simple map, with street names, house/parcel numbers, and names with perhaps a few extra quick-reference symbols would probably be most helpful. Detailed information is then cross-referenced off a spreadsheet listed by street and then address. A digital map might have just a pop-up with the relevant file (though you should have paper files in case of EMP or something).
 
Obtain the name of the property owner. Generally this will be the homeowner, but you will need to conduct additional research if the property is in a trust or some sort of company. This step will not only tell you who probably lives there, but if the home is a rental or not. For instance, the GPS/mapping software I use for off-roading also has property registration details for nearly all parcels, which tells me who owns a given house.
 
Once you have a name of the owner/resident, search the Internet for them starting with the name + the town/city. You might use more specific tools like Facebook or “people search” sites to dig up more info. Do they have a criminal record or are they litigious? Most county courts have a website where you can search cases for past criminal charges or civil cases. Note their job as well, paying attention to those with critical skills.
 
Note details such as who lives in the home. Are they a family with young kids? Elderly people? List the number of residents, ages, and names if possible. Attempt to determine their job, if any, the politics, and any religious affiliation (if any).
 
If the home is a rental, see if it is titled to an individual, a small landlord’s LLC, or a large corporate property ownership group. Individual and small landlord companies are slightly more likely to have better tenants than large, faceless companies. Someone who lived in that house or might live there again, or has to manage the tenants themselves are more likely to choose better tenants. Better tenants mean better people and less potential problems.
 
Visual indicators like lot of cars parked outside a home may indicate many residents in a multi-family residence or a lower-income household. You can generally judge by the car; cheap car not in great condition (unwashed, unrepaired damage) probably indicates a poorer person. On the other hand, some cultures will have nice or expensive looking cars but live in a run-down home.
 
Is the house an Airbnb? If it is, you probably already know the potential downsides. Long term, an Airbnb may play host to squatters, either the traditional type or refugees who maybe stayed there at one time. Prepare for a LOT of people who are interested in that house, especially if it’s in a desirable bug-out location like the woods. Bad actors may be aware that the place isn’t habituated. Conflicts may erupt between renters/squatters and the owner who might be bugging out there.

• Is the property listed on a short-term rental site?
• Is the property owned by an LLC?
• Is the owner from out-of-state?

 
Incidents 
How your neighbors live and what goes on at their home is probably one of the largest behavioral cues on how they will react in extremis. What houses have the police over a lot? Do they have loud parties or fights? These are indicators of people who are disrespectful of others and potentially combative.
 
Homes with frequent EMS calls are a potential weak-link; the people there may have medical issues that could result in an empty house. This means one less defender, the loss of a special skill, or simply an undefended home that is a vector for intrusion or squatters.
 
Which homes frequently get deliveries? It is just packages (UPS/FedEx) and Amazon, or do they regularly order grocery deliveries or DoorDash? Food deliveries could indicate someone has a scant pantry. People who don’t stock up on food or cook for themselves will rapidly be in a bad situation of grocery stores and restaurants go down.
 
Affiliation 
Who are the cops who live in your neighborhood? Look for take-home cars or police cars parked in the driveway or out front at lunchtime.
 
Military affiliation: with the demise of DOD window stickers, it’s a bit harder to tell who’s “in” and who isn’t, but there are signs. Look for people coming and going in uniform. Though it’s more likely to identify veterans, look for military-themed license plates, disabled veteran plates, and branch motivational (“moto”) stickers like the USMC eagle, globe, and anchor. One guy I saw has a license plate frame that basically says “active duty Coast Guard.” Since I did my area study, I know he’s not just a fan of the HH-65 helicopter but most likely a crew member of the Los Angeles area helicopter squadron.
 
Active-duty servicemembers may be absent in a time of crisis, or they may be assets at home. Potentially, they could be targets for violence in a low-intensity conflict. Can you determine if this person is in a sensitive position, such as a drone pilot or a special forces officer?
 
Note homes with American flags flying; they’re probably at least ideologically similar to you, if not potential allies. On the other side, look for foreign flags (i.e. Mexican flags), pride flags, or those dumb “In this house…” signs; these are likely risks if not enemies. Political yard signs should be tracked as an indicator of the residents’ politics; research candidates you aren’t familiar with as someone may be more comfortable putting out a sign for a lesser political office than easily advertise with Trump/Harris.
 
Ethnicity 
Why is race/ethnicity important—after all, aren’t we all equal? In virtually every civil or domestic conflict across history, racial, ethnic, and cultural distinctions have formed the basis for violence. In fact, some of the most basic divisions of humans are along racial, then ethnic (nationality), and finally religious/cultural lines. Different groups are preyed upon primarily because they are different.
 
The general ethnic makeup of an area can only be done at the larger-scale using things like the racial dot map, which will tell you if you live in a predominately single-ethnicity, or multi-ethnic, area. It will show you enclaves of relatively homogenous single ethnicities, but this gets us into more of an area study.
  
Why is race important? Racial heterogeneity has always been a recipe for a disaster in a crisis. Irish Catholics vs. Protestants, Serbs vs. Croats, black residents vs. white police. In a serious enough emergency, everything goes racial. People separated into different nations, ethnic groups, and self-segregated long ago for a reason. It is only prosperity and law and order that prevents (mostly) racial conflicts from cropping up.
 
Even if you have prosperous, respectful black neighbors, this is no guarantee that they do not have lower-class relatives that might come to stay with them and create problems.
 
Illegal aliens may cause problems like violence or revolt during immigration crackdowns. They may also have brought attachments to foreign organized crime like drug cartels or Tren de Aragua. 
 
Immigrants may not share your culture. A relative complained about a group of recent Hispanic immigrants having loud parties in her neighborhood. Her boyfriend, who grew up in the third world, said “No one back home would ever think to complain or call the police. Huge, loud parties until dawn are so commonplace over there.” Of course, being upper class himself he understands the complaint but was pointing out that third worlders are accustomed to a certain degree of bad behavior and squalor. They do not place the same emphasis on property value, orderliness, or the boring quietude of the suburbs.
 
Third worlders of any stripe are a risk precisely because they do not appreciate to the same degree of what makes western life so enjoyable. Coming from abysmal standards, literally anything is better.
 
Note religious affiliation or suspected religious affiliation if you can, although this is not a big indicator outside of certain areas. Utahns might want to note their non-LDS neighbors or anyone might be interested in knowing that Muslims live next door. Do they celebrate Christmas, for instance?

Age
What are the ages of your neighbors? Older people have probably been in the are for a while, are relatively financially stable, but may die soon or in a crisis, leading to turnover of the home. Younger people may be outsiders, but probably longer-term residents. Do adult kids live at home? Do middle-aged parents have children that might return home and change the dynamic or bring problems with them?
 
Special risks
Certain places will be high-risk, like the residence of motorcycle gang members, drug houses (either “trap” or flop houses), and overcrowded, illegal alien rental “clown houses.” Section 8 has seen low-income individuals with violent tendencies and disrespect for suburban norms moved into middle-class communities. These Section 8 tenants often bring with them crime and other problems to areas that didn’t see them before.
 
How about apartment or condo complexes that get taken over by a certain ethnicity and then devolve into a gang-infested hellhole? Sure, we’ve heard of bad neighborhoods but we forget about high rise housing projects like Cabrini Green that were utterly dysfunctional and gang-controlled. Maybe you’ve seen the images of an apartment complex taken over by an armed Central American gang. This will only get worse as immigration increases and law enforcement pulls back.
 
Poverty and crime go hand in hand. There are many “low income” projects going in that cater to or attract illegal aliens or immigrants. With them, they bring gangs and violence. While these communities may seem self-contained like the walled city of Kowloon, they often spill over into neighboring areas. A complex of 250 units may house 1,000 people—more if third-world living situations take hold despite zoning. In desperate times, these places will spill over into surrounding neighborhoods.
 
Here is an example I posted on Twitter: this is an "affordable community" specifically for farmworkers, which means simply by demographic realities it discriminates in favor of Hispanic. This complex is a 19 acre, 360 apartment ghetto with a population of probably 1,000 people right in the heart of a middle-class bedroom community of mainly mid/upper-middle class income white people.
 
The residents must be farmworkers (basically 100% Hispanic in California) who make near-poverty wages. The majority of these people are extremely poor, often recent immigrants from Latin America, and likely not citizens or even legal. They do not reflect the economic or cultural background of the community at large and this is essentially a colony of “others” who will not easily homogenize with the rest of the city.
 
Personal factors
Financially imprudent: if they’re broke and hungry, they’re more likely to be desperate and take chances that someone who isn’t destitute won’t take. Undisciplined people who live carelessly are more probably the kind who will blame others for their problems, engage in risky behavior to survive, or make poor choices for both themselves and the neighborhood. These types may be a higher risk for engaging in theft, robbery, prostitution, or other illicit activities to survive.
 
Addiction: Alcoholics, drug addicts, and those dependent on prescription medication (especially psych meds) may do dangerous things to feed their addition or because of their condition. They should be regarded as unreliable and unpredictable.
 
Mental illness: Persons who are mentally ill should be regarded as potentially unstable and dangerous. A paranoid schizophrenic may be obvious, but persons with less disabling disorders could might not be an imminent danger, but they could degenerate without medication to a disagreeable or disruptive person. Imagine a bipolar neighbor who is ordinarily normal when medicated, but without their prescription they have dangerous mood swings. Example: when manic, it’s “Maple Street stole our water, let’s burn them out!” and when depressive “This is miserable, I can’t take it anymore. I’m gonna kill myself, my family, and maybe the neighbors too.” This might even extend to a generally disagreeable “Karen type” who when off-meds engages in petty squabbles that destabilize neighborhood amity.
 
Homeless
Map homeless people in your area. They are of course transient so this is not a permanent map, although some areas are conducive to homeless encampments like open spaces. You might wish to create maps that you can track over time to analyze for patterns of homeless camp sightings. Be sure to track RVs and people living in cars; the latter may be harder to spot. For car campers, track them by vehicle description and license plate.
 
A car that although it moves around, but is seen occupied by a person all hours of the day, likely indicates a homeless person. Additional indicators include a car filled with personal items, windows that are often completely blacked out (for sleeping), cooking in or near the vehicle, and often signs of someone relieving themselves near the vehicle. Tracking by specific vehicle/plate allows you to monitor movement of individual homeless persons, not just generally.
 
Making a list
Make note of individuals who post on local social media, such as Facebook and NextDoor. You are looking for inflammatory political rhetoric that implies that they would engage in, sanction, or condone political, ethnic, or religious violence. Not a mere difference in political opinion, but the kind who viciously gloat over the death or harm to those on the opposite side of them. For example, someone who posts with glee that X person or politician was or nearly was assassinated or celebrates or calls for harm.

• Cross reference their posts by searching by date, such as to see what they said at the Butler shooting of President Trump or Charlie Kirk’s assassination.
• Search names in combination with commentary on other hot social issues to see if they are making inflammatory remarks.

Persons who openly gloat in political or like violence are likely to support it, even indirectly. In a civil conflict, actions alone cannot be used as predictors of risk. Statements made in this regard may imply an attitude and system of beliefs that are sympathetic to social terror and tyranny. As for the Left/Right divide, the Left tends to see extrajudicial/extralegal harm as an appropriate tool, whereas the Right sees it as a last resort. The Left is more likely to openly relish in their opponents coming to harm while the Right tends not to, or tempers the normal human adversarial reaction in ways leftists do not.

St. George-ism is a new brotherhood concept for men who draw strength from the hard examples of saints, warriors, exemplary men, and martyrs who stood their ground; not from soft, sentimental feminized religion, but from the kind of faith that fights proverbial dragons and refuses to make peace with evil.

St. George-ism is a banner for men, uncompromising, militant in spirit but not in cruelty, who refuse to make peace with evil. It is the call to be warriors in spirit, defenders of the faith, destroyers of dragons, and men who stand for truth and justice when others bow.

St. George-ism is a men’s religious movement and philosophy rooted in the Christian tradition. It celebrates courage, sacrifice, loyalty, and the refusal to make peace with evil. Our exemplars are men like St. George, St. Paul, St. Maurice, St. Crispin, and others. Men remembered not as supernatural patrons, but as real men who stood firm in faith and character. We honor their feast days, fly the Cross of St. George, and gather in brotherhood to tell their stories and live their maxims.

Our movement does not require church membership or perfect piety; it asks only that men respect the inheritance of Christian morality, strive toward virtue, and fight against personal vice and evil. Imperfection is expected, but struggle is demanded. At its heart, St. George-ism is a banner of unity and inspiration, a fraternity of men who choose service over self-indulgence, conviction over compromise, and the courage to stand even when it costs everything.

It is a brotherhood of principle, not denomination; a way to carry the Cross of St. George as a living symbol of resistance to evil and inspiration to men. Think of it as a lodge or fraternity, but rooted in Christian tradition: a fellowship where holidays and feast days are not empty dates on a calendar, but occasions to remember what it means to be a man of faith and conviction. Rough or polished, soldier or civilian, believer or seeker; if you honor these principles, you are welcome under the Cross.

We welcome all men who respect the Christian legacy of moral order and courage. Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox brothers, and even men of no church who recognize the worth of Christian morality are invited. What unites us is not dogma but the refusal to bow to vice, cowardice, and nihilism. Our bond is the sword and the cross: the conviction that manhood requires sacrifice, loyalty, and the will to confront evil.

This movement is rooted in the Christian tradition, but it is not closed to those outside the faith. We believe that the ideals of courage, sacrifice, loyalty, and the refusal to make peace with evil speak to all men, regardless of creed. You may not kneel at the altar, but if you respect the inheritance of Christian morality and the strength it has given our culture, there is a place for you here. Our examples are men who stood firm in the face of vice and tyranny; their spirit can inspire anyone who believes that manhood is service, not self-indulgence, and that truth is worth fighting for.

Yet we do not hide our conviction: the fullest strength comes in Christ. If you are not a Christian, we welcome you, but we also encourage you to become one.

We require no oaths, no new creed, and no departure from your church or tradition. It asks only that you look to the examples of the saints and Christian men of history as models of courage, sacrifice, and fidelity; men worth imitating, even in their flaws.

This movement is not a monastery. It is a brotherhood for men who live in the world. We may be rough, flawed men who wrestle with sin and vice every day. You may swear, drink, chase women, or fall short of being the “good Christian example” that some expect (though you shouldn’t be). What matters here is not a spotless image, but a true heart: the will to stand against evil, the courage to fight for what is right, and the humility to know that we are all sinners in need of grace. Those we honor were not plaster statues but living men, with tempers, scars, and sins of their own. If you fall, stand up again. If you fail, do not make peace with failure. The measure of a man is not perfection, but perseverance.

We adhere to traditional Christian morality, not as a straitjacket but as the highest path for mankind. We recognize it as the standard by which men flourish. Yet we also acknowledge that no man is perfect. Each of us falls short and each of us struggles with sin. Our aim is not to live as hypocrites pretending to be spotless, but as honest men fighting the battle within. A moral life is the ideal, and to put away vice is the goal, but we do not measure a man only by his failings. The true sacrifice is often found in the struggle itself: in resisting sin, in rising again after a fall, in refusing to make peace with weakness. It is better to be a man who struggles against evil within himself than one who embraces it with ease.

The pernicious ever-presence of sin and temptation will not leave us, and though men may try and fail, none will achieve sinless perfection. Yet this does not make sin acceptable, nor something to be cherished. Sin is to be cast off and left behind, even if imperfectly. What matters is the direction of the heart. The man who fights his impulses, even if he falls, is already engaged in repentance because he has turned toward God. The saint is not the man without sin, but the man who knows what sin is, refuses to make peace with it, and struggles against it until the end.

Better the man who fights his sin than the man who makes peace with it. A righteous man is not one without sin, but one who will not surrender to it. The true mark of a man is to rise again after he falls.

This is a men’s philosophy rooted in Christian virtue and warrior discipline, with saints (and other men) as exemplars rather than intercessors. In other words, Saint George isn’t your patron in heaven, he’s your model on earth. We do not believe in the veneration of saints as supernatural, but respect their sacrifices and achievements as men, taking them as examples of manhood, service and faith.

This order holds to the power of legend. We do not venerate saints as supernatural beings, but we honor their stories as banners to rally under. A legend is not about whether a knight killed a dragon once, rather, it is about the truth that a man must stand against evil, even when the world calls it hopeless. Legends distill courage, loyalty, sacrifice, and perseverance into images that move the heart. They give men role models larger than life yet rooted in reality: George with his lance, Maurice with his legion, Paul on the road to Damascus, Crispin at Agincourt. Even the lighter tales such as Swithun’s rain and Arnold’s beer, remind us that joy and humor belong beside valor. Legend makes virtue memorable. It turns duty into story, story into inspiration, and inspiration into action. This is why we keep them, tell them, and pass them on.

St. George was a Roman cavalry officer who chose loyalty to Christ over loyalty to Caesar and was martyred in the persecutions of Diocletian, circa 303. His legend as the dragon-slayer endures as a symbol of Christian courage: the man who does not bargain with evil but destroys it. For our movement, he is our patron and archetype: the warrior saint whose lance becomes the standard of faith, manhood, and resistance to vice, faithful even unto death.

His legend as the dragon-slayer (a much later creation, not fact) is the heart of our banner: the dragon is the world’s sin, vice, and corruption that men face in their own time and place. Where the Archangel Michael casts Satan down in heaven and wrestles with demonic principalities, George shows that a man of flesh and blood can face evil on earth and overcome it. He is the model of courage without compromise, the proof that holiness is not only angelic but human, and the reminder that the fight belongs to us as men.

When the emperor demanded universal sacrifice to the pagan gods, George openly confessed Christ, gave away his wealth to the poor, and refused to renounce his faith. For this, he was imprisoned and finally beheaded at Nicomedia around 303; in many hagiographies after being brutally tortured for days. His martyrdom is among the best-attested of the early soldier-saints, remembered across East and West. George is the patron saint of England, soldiers and warriors, and of farmers and shepherds.

Michael the Archangel is honored in our order as the symbol of the heavenly warrior, the captain of God’s hosts, the one who cast down the dragon Satan in heaven. He is the pattern, but not the exemplar. Unlike the human saints, Michael is not a man who knew temptation, weakness, or death. He cannot serve as a model of human manhood, only as a banner of divine victory. For that reason, we respect him as the heavenly archetype of Christian militancy, but our focus remains on men of flesh and blood who lived, fought, and died in faith. Those who wish may keep his feast on September 29 (Michaelmas), but his veneration is not required. Michael is the symbol above us; St. George and the other saints are the examples beside us.

St. Maurice (3rd century). Commander of the Theban Legion, who was martyred with his men for refusing to worship Roman gods. He is a patron saint of soldiers. He is symbolic of discipline and loyalty to God over empire.
 
St. Swithun, the Rain-Bringer. Patron of the dry season, he is the man who reminds us that God provides refreshment to the faithful who endure. To us, he stands for perseverance, patience, and the certainty that no drought lasts forever. But he also is the saint who shows up in The Simpsons. His mention in popular culture is a reminder not to take ourselves too seriously. Even as we fight figurative dragons and endure dry seasons, a Christian man can laugh, smile, and stay lighthearted. That way Swithun stands for both perseverance and humor. He’s the man who says, “Yes, life is hard, but rain will come,” and in the meantime, don’t forget to laugh.
 
St. Paul, the Converted Zealot. Once a bloodthirsty accuser against Christ’s followers, he later was a tireless evangelist for them. His letters and missions to the Roman (gentile) world brought salvation vicariously to probably more men than any other. He is proof that a man’s fiercest passions, once turned, can save the world and that God can redeem the heart of any man.
 
St. Arnold of Soissons. Sometimes called St. Arnold of Oudenaarde, he was a former soldier turned abbot and bishop. He famously told people to “drink beer, not water” during a plague, since boiled, fermented beer was safer. For us, he is the saint of fellowship and temperance: proof that God blesses simple joys, and that men need not renounce all pleasure to live faithfully. Beer can be a symbol of camaraderie, gratitude, and moderation through a shared drink that can strengthen bonds without enslaving the soul.
 
St. Joseph, Father of Jesus. Not a soldier, but the archetype of fatherhood. Chosen as the earthly father of Jesus, he accepted his duty faithfully without grumbling. He obeyed the angel’s command to take Mary as his wife, to flee into Egypt, and to return when it was safe. He worked with his hands, provided for his family, and lived in humility, without seeking recognition.
Joseph is the model of quiet authority and steadfast manhood. He reminds us that not every battle is fought with a sword; some are fought by standing guard over one’s household, by remaining faithful when unseen, by sacrificing comfort for the sake of others. If George is the warrior and Maurice the commander, Joseph is the father: the man whose strength lies in protection, endurance, and faithfulness in the ordinary.

We hold that poetry, like legend, is a vessel for truth. A sermon may teach, but a poem or song can be carried in the heart. Kipling’s lines like those in “Recessional”, Shakespeare’s Henry V St. Crispin’s Day Speech, or the old ballads of saints and kings; these endure because they distill what prose cannot. Poetry is not decoration; it is memory made sharp. It gives us words that march, words that can be spoken aloud at a feast or remembered in solitude.

Men may struggle under stress, but they can remember a line, and that line will remind them who they are. Verse, song, and legend are not empty tradition but sparks that kindle conviction. They turn ideals into banners and banners into brotherhood.

Scripture is revelation, God’s word and commands. Legend and poetry are memory, man’s stories and verses that carry truths and inspiration into men’s hearts. We do not seek to replace scripture with legend, but celebrate both as appropriate to their own purposes. God speaks in scripture and men remember their deeds, hopes, and fears through story, song, and verse.

 
As a member of this order, you aren’t bound by oaths or rituals. You’re invited into a tradition. Here’s what that looks like in practice:

• Keep the Feasts. Mark the days of St. George and the others. Fly the Cross, gather with brothers, raise a glass, tell their stories. No one dictates how you celebrate, only that you don’t let the day pass unnoticed.
• Bear the Symbols. The St. George’s Cross is our banner. Some wear it on a pin, others hang it at home, others paint it on a shield for fun. However you display it, you carry it as a sign of belonging.
• Meet in brotherhood. Get together with other men, whether it’s three guys in a garage or a hall full of comrades. Eat, drink, argue, laugh, sharpen each other. Fellowship itself is the practice.
• Remember the examples. Read or retell the lives of the saints and heroes. They weren’t plaster saints, they were men, flawed but faithful. Their examples give us something to measure ourselves against.
• Live the Maxims. Stand for what you believe, even at cost. Refuse peace with evil. Know that perfection isn’t required, but perseverance is.

That’s it. No dues, no mandatory prayers, no secret handshakes. The point is to give men a sense of belonging, a banner to rally around, and a rhythm of days and symbols that remind them who they are.
 
Brotherhood. Men are encouraged to meet regularly, whether weekly, monthly, on holidays, or as life allows. This could be over beer, at a lodge hall, or in someone’s backyard. The point is fellowship, not formality. We are primarily a men’s fraternal order, so while families and women are encouraged to share our beliefs, gatherings should be limited to men, in order that we may open ourselves more freely to each other without fear of judgment or imputation of weakness.
 
Remembrance of Saints and Men as Models. Members reflect on what each exemplar represents, i.e. George’s courage, Maurice’s loyalty, and Paul’s conversion. Reflection can be quiet, personal, or shared in conversation. This is a time for scripture, poetry, songs, and stories.
 
Deeds, Not Perfection. Men strive to live out the maxims: standing firm, refusing peace with evil, persevering through failure. Crudeness, rough edges, and imperfection are not disqualifiers. The heart and will matter more than polish. Men should encourage each other to be better men, better fathers, and to share burdens in hard times.
 
Optional Devotion. Christians may add prayer, scripture, or worship as their own tradition dictates, but none is required for participation. For others, the moral and cultural inheritance of Christendom is the common ground.

We hold that poetry, like legend, is a vessel for truth. A sermon may teach, but a poem or song can be carried in the heart. Kipling’s lines like those in “Recessional”, Shakespeare’s Henry V St. Crispin’s Day Speech, or the old ballads of saints and kings; these endure because they distill what prose cannot. Poetry is not decoration; it is memory made sharp. It gives us words that march, words that can be spoken aloud at a feast or remembered in solitude.

Men may struggle under stress, but they can remember a line, and that line will remind them who they are. Verse, song, and legend are not empty tradition but sparks that kindle conviction. They turn ideals into banners and banners into brotherhood.

Scripture is revelation, God’s word and commands. Legend and poetry are memory, man’s stories and verses that carry truths and inspiration into men’s hearts. We do not seek to replace scripture with legend, but celebrate both as appropriate to their own purposes. God speaks in scripture and men remember their deeds, hopes, and fears through story, song, and verse.

Article I, Purpose
St. George-ism is a religious and fraternal movement dedicated to promoting manhood, moral integrity, and spiritual resilience through the examples of historic Christian saints and martyrs. We affirm that these saints—like St. George, St. Paul, St. Maurice, St. Crispin and other men—lived with courage, sacrifice, and fidelity, and serve as enduring models for men in every age.
Article II, Principles

1. We believe that courage in the face of evil, fidelity to principle, and perseverance through trial are virtues for all men.
2. We do not require doctrinal conformity. Members may be Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, or of no denomination. Any man who honors the Christian tradition of morality and spirituality is welcome.
3. We affirm that perfection is not required. Men are flawed, but the heart matters more than polish. The measure of a man is perseverance, not appearance.

Article III, Symbols and Observances

1. The Cross of St. George is our banner, carried as a symbol of resistance to evil and unity in principle.
2. Members are encouraged to mark the feast days of our exemplars (April 23, June 29, July 15, September 22, October 25, and others), through fellowship, remembrance, and the telling of their stories. Prayer, devotion, or other religious acts are welcomed but never required.
3. Gatherings may take any form: meals, toasts, reflections, or simple acts of fellowship.

Article IV, Organization

1. St. George-ism is a voluntary fellowship. No man is compelled to join, and no man is bound to oaths.
2. Local groups may form freely, establishing their own customs, meetings, and fellowship, provided they uphold the principles and symbols described above.
3. A central body may be established to protect the name, symbols, and charitable mission of St. George-ism, incorporated as a nonprofit religious and educational organization.

Article V, Rights and Protections
As a religious fellowship, St. George-ism claims the right to gather, to display the Cross of St. George as a religious symbol, to mark feast days, and to order its life according to the principles of faith and conscience.

Though it may come as a surprise, Rhodesia did not have a militia in the traditional sense. A militia is typically a body of non-professional soldiers who mobilize in times of need, often composed of veterans or trained civilians. In the American context, people tend to think of either the unorganized militia—male citizens of military age—or irregular, private groups engaged in guerrilla-style warfare. Organized militias, by contrast, are sanctioned by the government to varying degrees and may function as de facto military forces, such as state militias or the National Guard.
 
In the Anglo-Saxon tradition, the militia was a legal and civic obligation: all able-bodied men were required to defend the realm. One of the main purposes of a militia is to train the citizenry in warfare and keep them ready for action when the time came. These men were mustered periodically for training and inspection (hence “a well-regulated militia”) and could be integrated into a national army during wartime. Englishmen were expected to understand basic tactics, maintain discipline, and be proficient with arms. Various laws compelled militiamen to own weapons and train with them, particularly during the age of the legendary English longbowmen.
 
While Rhodesia didn’t have a militia in name, it certainly upheld a militia-like tradition of arms. The country was settled in the 1890s by pioneers moving north from South Africa, including Boers who brought with them the commando system, a true militia in form and function, forged during the Anglo-Boer Wars. This system of armed, locally organized citizen-soldiers remained a well-known and influential model throughout the 20th century. At the same time, imperial settlers fought native African resistance using colonial volunteer forces and defensive units, reinforcing the idea that every man might be called upon to bear arms. The concept of the citizen-soldier was as ingrained in the Rhodesian mindset as it was in the American one.
 
By the 1960s, the original pioneers were mostly gone, but their martial legacy remained. Many white Rhodesians were veterans of World War II, and following the war, a wave of British servicemen, encouraged by the UK government to emigrate due to a postwar job shortage, settled in Rhodesia. National Service was also in place, meaning that most able-bodied white men had undergone conscription and received at least basic military training and experience.
 
It’s also important to remember that Rhodesia, for much of its history, was a frontier society. Even into the Bush War era, large parts of the country remained wild and unsettled. Like the American West, it was a land marked by occasional clashes with native populations, dangerous wildlife, and abundant hunting opportunities. A strong firearms culture, remarkably similar to that of the United States, has long existed in Southern Africa and persists to this day. By the time the Bush War broke out, Rhodesians were, by necessity and tradition, a martial people.
 
In short, while Rhodesia lacked a formal militia, its people were steeped in a tradition of armed self-reliance and citizen-soldiering. They were culturally and practically prepared for military service. So when the Bush War erupted, the country didn’t need to build a militia from scratch. The people were already primed for duty, and many transitioned seamlessly into the army, police, and various reserve and auxiliary forces that would become the backbone of Rhodesia’s war effort.

Rhodesia’s militia-like units were all government sanctioned and fully incorporated into the Security Forces system. That did not mean that neighbors couldn’t run to the sound of the guns from a nearby farm, as they quite frequently did; rather, the civilians were not organized into private defense groups as the government saw to that. Even guards for camps, farms, and potential sabotage targets were organized under the Security Forces’ aegis.
 
Most Rhodesian men who could fight were seeing service in some capacity or another. If one wasn’t an active-duty servicemember, they were quite probably a reservist with either the police or the army. If one wasn’t serving, you were probably too old, too unhealthy, or found a way to weasel out of one’s obligation.
 
Rhodesia’s army was structured in a tiered system that balanced a small core of professional soldiers with a much larger body of reservists. At the top were the regular units—full-time, professional troops such as the Rhodesian Light Infantry (RLI). Supporting them were the reservists, made up of conscripted white men who had completed national service and were required to serve in periodic call-ups. They formed the bulk of the infantry within battalions like the Rhodesia Regiment, often rotating through six-week deployments in the field. Below them were older or less fit men assigned to support roles such as local defense units or static security posts.
 
After completing 18 months to two years of compulsory national service (depending on the era) white men were placed into the reserve system and remained there for many years. They were expected to report for training and active duty in regular intervals, often serving six-week stints multiple times per year. This rotational system allowed Rhodesia to keep its farms, businesses, and industries running while still fighting a counter-insurgency across a vast and difficult landscape (although businesses still struggled).

Being in Africa, the Rhodesian government understood colonial realities. In the early 1960s, when Rhodesian authorities began to recognize the growing threat posed by African nationalist movements and guerrilla infiltration, particularly after events like the Mau Mau Uprising in Kenya and early incursions from Zambia and Mozambique. Police reservists were seen in this light not just as a way to supplement normal police duties, but to respond to a potential insurgency. In fact, in the early stages of guerilla warfare, the police insisted responding to terrorist attacks was their job, not that of the Army, as it was seen as a criminal matter.
 
It became clear that traditional policing methods were inadequate for tracking and engaging armed insurgents in difficult terrain. The idea emerged to create small, highly mobile units that could operate in the bush, fast, light, and intimately familiar with rural conditions. These were essentially a rapid-reaction force (RRF) that could operate in paramilitary fashion against the terrorists. What eventually emerged was PATU: the Police Anti-Terrorist Unit of the British South Africa Police (BSAP).
 
PATU was composed largely of white reservists and regular police officers, many of whom had bushcraft experience as farmers or hunters. Training emphasized fieldcraft, small-unit tactics, and cooperation with other forces like the army and Special Branch. They were designed for quick reaction, ambushes, and follow-up operations in response to terrorist activity. In the same way an ad hoc group of neighbors might form their own semi-organized militia to respond to rural attacks, this group did so as part of the official police organization.
 
At first, PATU’s responsibilities focused on manning police stations, running roadblocks, motorized patrols, and radio watch, but as the war intensified, the unit took on a more infantry-like role: laying ambushes, responding to attacks, and conducting combat reconnaissance. Light, fast-moving, and reliant on individual initiative, PATU could operate on its own or alongside military formations such as the RLI and Selous Scouts.
 
Each district had its own PATU team, divided into small sticks that reported to the nearest police station. These sticks were drawn from the local community, ensuring that the men knew the terrain and the people they were tasked to protect. This service counted toward fulfilling their national service reserve requirement. The ranks were filled by reservists and men between 38 and 60 who were automatically conscripted into the unit. In addition, those who served included many younger men  exempted from army duty due to their civilian occupations, police regulars, former national servicemen, and a significant number of farmers.
 
PATU operated as a rapid-reaction force (and better in this role than patrolling), with local “reaction sticks” ready to respond swiftly to farm attacks, ambushes, and similar incidents. Thanks to their organization at the community level, these men could often assemble and deploy within an hour of a call-out. When a farm was hit or terrorists were sighted, PATU would rally to pursue and engage the guerrillas, or to reinforce and counter-attack as needed. The problem, of course, was timing; by the time help arrived, the attackers who had “revved” a farm were usually long gone.
 
In addition to being called up as an RRF for farm attacks or terrorist sightings, the sticks would be posted on ambushes or patrols. These assignments did cause problems. Sometimes a PATU assignment would take a farmer away from his property, as he was being deployed to a more distant area or on a long patrol. This meant that another farmer on his call-up or a hired guard would have to look after the property.
 
For all of this, PATU had strength in its local roots. Because PATU sticks were heavily manned by local farmers, bushcraft and local knowledge were strong assets. The guerrillas referred to them as “the old men who can shoot straight,” a nod to both their accuracy and their determination. In combat, these men often proved highly effective. Local knowledge and the ability to respond on short notice was invaluable. A typical PATU call-up often began with a radio message or phone call to a rural police station reporting suspicious activity like a sighting of armed men, unexplained tracks, or shots heard near a homestead. Once the report came in, the men would grab their pre-packed kit bags, weapons (usually FN FALs or G3s), webbing, and radio equipment, then assemble at a designated point.
 
The mission would usually be to conduct a hasty follow-up on tracks, locate the enemy, or establish an ambush. It was fast, informal, and often dangerously underinformed, being more about rapid reaction than careful planning. The entire process from call-out to deployment could take as little as 30-60 minutes in the better-organized areas. Members often pursued the enemy aggressively and integrated effectively with police Support Units and army troops during combat operations. Many of the farmers who filled PATU’s ranks were eager to counterattack, driven by the knowledge that their own families were among the prime targets of terrorist violence.
 
Was PATU a militia? The unit blurred the lines between policing, military action, and civilian participation in the war. PATU allowed the state to mobilize armed rural manpower without the full cost or bureaucracy of standing army units. PATU represented a hybrid model: not quite police, not quite army, but a locally recruited force with official backing, tasked with fighting a war on their own turf.

Near the end of the war, the Security Forces Auxiliary (SFA), also known as Pfumo reVanhu for “spear of the people”, was raised. These were essentially formations of black Africans recruited at from the guerilla pool to keep them out of the insurgency and repurpose their numbers for counter-insurgency. Many early SFA recruits were former guerrillas who had defected from ZANLA or ZIPRA; the unemployed from cities and towns were incorporated as well.
 
By giving these individuals a legitimate, government-aligned alternative, the Rhodesian authorities hoped to deprive the insurgency of manpower while turning former insurgents and potential sympathizers into allies. Essentially, the SFAs were designed to absorb disaffected guerrillas into a controlled, government-friendly militia structure, preventing them from rejoining insurgent ranks or falling into lawlessness.
 
The SFAs’ primary function was territorial denial: preventing guerrilla re-infiltration, cutting insurgent supply routes, and denying insurgents easy access to villagers, food, and recruits. After conventional security forces cleared insurgent-held territory, these local militias were intended to hold the ground, thereby preventing guerrillas from controlling the area.
 
The SFAs failed because the program was initiated far too late in the war (1978) and the poorly disciplined troops acted little better than the terrorists. The idea to subvert the terrorists by moving those who might join them into a friendly militia was a good one, but like many of the Rhodesian COIN operations, it was executed badly. The various groups were tribal, clashed with one another, and often failed to engage with the terrorists out of solidarity with them.

So no, Rhodesia did not have a militia, but that wasn’t due to oversight or neglect, it was because the state deliberately and effectively preempted the need for one. By the time the war “hotted up,” the country already had a deep pool of armed, self-reliant farmers, hunters, outdoorsmen, and veterans, many of whom were experienced with firearms and bushcraft even if they hadn’t seen formal military service. Rather than allow this population to form informal or potentially undisciplined militias, the government created structured pathways for citizen involvement through formal institutions.
 
PATU in particular filled the exact niche that militias often occupy in asymmetric wars: small, locally recruited teams that could respond rapidly to insurgent threats in their own backyards. Unlike irregular militias, PATU operated with proper training, police authority, and close coordination with the military. It was fast, local, armed, and aggressive, everything a militia is meant to be, but legally sanctioned and professionally guided.
 
These formations allowed civilians to contribute directly to the war effort under proper command, discipline, and rules of engagement. The government didn’t merely tolerate armed civilians; it organized, trained, and deployed them with purpose. In doing so, Rhodesia avoided the chaos and potential abuse that can come with unofficial militias while still harnessing the full value of its armed citizenry. It was a state-backed militia system in all but name.

Rhodesia fought a brutal guerrilla war for over a decade—cut off from the world, outnumbered, and under siege.
It was a war of ambushes, farm attacks, propaganda, and betrayal. And while Rhodesia lost, the survival lessons it offers are more relevant than ever. What can prepared citizens learn from a war that was lost?

How did average Rhodesians survive the Bush War under constant threat of ambush, sabotage, and assassination? What can Americans take from it if they fear a civil conflict coming to their homes? American preppers should stop romanticizing survival and start understanding it.
 
Don’t Be Predictable
Rhodesians learned early on that routine was a death sentence. Farmers were ambushed at gates because they always parked in the same spot to open them. Others died because they always drove the same route at the same time. Break habits. Vary your routes, times, and behaviors. Be deliberately unpredictable. Rotate gate entries. Back into your driveway sometimes. Leave through the back gate now and then. If they know where you’ll be, they don’t need to be smart, they just need to be patient.
 
Perimeter Awareness Is Everything
Bush war farmers patrolled their fence lines. Not just for property upkeep, but to look for cut wires, buried mines, or signs of human passage. You must do the same. Walk your land. Check for disturbed earth, fresh footprints, broken branches, or tripwires.
 
Dogs Are Your First Alarm System
Nearly every Rhodesian farmer had dogs, and not yappy little ankle biters either. Big, alert, loyal dogs were often the difference between life and death. Dogs can sense human movement, detect strangers, and raise hell faster than you can fumble for a flashlight. Train them, keep them healthy, and alert. Dogs were often poisoned before attacks, so don’t leave their food unattended.
 
Night Security Is More Important Than Daytime
Attacks came mostly at night. The heat of the day gave way to the cold of fear after sundown. Farmers blacked out windows, turned off lights, and slept in shifts. If you’re rural, treat night as enemy time. Keep one person on watch. Don’t light up your house like a Christmas tree. Lights are beacons in the dark so keep it dark.
 
Gun Readiness Was Constant
Weapons were loaded and within reach at all times. If you had to run to your safe or grab a magazine, you were already behind. Rhodesians carried while on the tractor, around the house, and pointed them out the car window. You don’t need a fantasy arsenal, just make sure your tools are ready, reachable, and reliable. Train with them.
 
Vehicles Were Lifelines and Death Traps
Farmers knew vehicles could be ambushed or mined. So they drove fast through chokepoints, never stopped on the road, and checked underneath their vehicles before starting them. In some cases, they mounted rifle racks or installed makeshift armor. Don’t linger in your vehicle when parked. Don’t drive the same route twice.
 
Community Was Survival
Isolated farms didn’t make it. The ones who lasted were those who shared radio callsigns, formed quick-reaction teams, and checked in multiple times a day. Rhodesians used “Agric-Alert” radios to warn each other of attacks in progress. If your community can’t pull together in a crisis, you’ll be picked off one by one. Practice local drills and communications.
 
Have a Communication Plan
No one survived alone. Radios were lifelines. Codewords mattered. If your local group can’t talk when phones go down, you’ve already lost. Set up VHF or CB nets. Practice voice discipline. Keep it simple. The police and army didn’t roll without coordination, and neither should you.
 
Don’t Trust Every Smile
Some black farm workers were loyal and some were spies. That’s the hard truth. Some warned their bosses about attacks. Others handed over house keys to terrorists. Rhodesians didn’t talk freely around staff. They didn’t advertise security plans. They kept their guard up. You don’t need to be paranoid, just cautious. Assume everyone’s being pressured—because they probably are.
 
Use Terrain to Your Advantage
Farms with clear fields of fire fared better than those nestled in thick bush. Rhodesians cut back vegetation, built berms, cleared dead ground near the house, and created hardened zones. Even modest earthworks or fencing can shape the fight. Don’t let them get close without exposing themselves. Build your house like you might have to fight from it.
 
A Safe Room Isn't Paranoia
Many homes had reinforced bathrooms or root cellars where the family could retreat. Some doubled as comms centers or panic rooms. You don’t need a vault door. Just a space with a hard barrier between you and gunfire, with a radio, first-aid kit, flashlight, and rifle. Practice getting to it fast.
 
Signs of Trouble Were Easy to Miss Until They Weren’t
A dog going quiet. A worker acting nervous. A snapped twig where no one should be. Farmers who paid attention to these subtle lived longer. Train your family to pick up on odd behavior as this was often the only warning signs. The faster you react, the more control you retain. Stay ready even when things feel normal.
 
Work Out a Reaction Plan
When the alarm went up, whether from a dog bark, a gunshot, or a radio call, Rhodesians didn’t fumble. They got their asses into gear. You need SOPs. Who grabs what? Who checks on the kids? Where do you rally? When do you call for help? Write it down. Drill it. Sleep with your boots near the bed.
 
Understand That War Comes to the Innocent
Many Rhodesians couldn’t believe they’d be targeted. Some didn’t believe it after they were. Civilians were murdered, not because they fought, but because they might. Don’t assume being neutral, kind, or harmless will save you. In civil war, neutrality is a myth. You’re either a target, or you’re a problem to be eliminated.
 
These lessons weren’t drawn from a theory but rather they were bought in blood. When the rule of law collapses, there are no more “good neighborhoods.”

Lessons From the Rhodesian Bush War is not a conventional history—it’s a focused, hard-edged study of what happens when a nation is cut off, surrounded, and forced to fight a war with limited men, limited resources, and no margin for error. Rhodesia’s bitter bush war offers more than military lessons; it’s a case study in rural defense, community survival, and the slow-motion unraveling of a society under siege.
 
Written with the clarity and grit demanded by today’s preparedness-minded readers, this book explores the tactics, gear, and lived experiences of Rhodesian security forces and civilians alike. It examines how farmers defended themselves, how the military adapted to asymmetric counterinsurgency warfare, and how a small country held out for over a decade against overwhelming political and numerical odds before being undone not by defeat in the field, but by international betrayal and internal exhaustion.
 
Whether you’re a survivalist looking for lessons in real-world collapse to prepare for SHTF, a student of irregular/guerilla warfare, or simply curious about one of the most misunderstood conflicts of the 20th century, this book will challenge your assumptions and deepen your understanding. The fight may have been lost, but the lessons remain. Rhodesians never die.

These defensive sprays have applications in riot control as well as personal defense. OC can be sprayed on individual aggressors within a crowd, applied to violent clusters of individuals, or sprayed broadly into a crowd to disperse it. It serves as a vital less-lethal weapon to potentially de-escalate situations before lethal force is required, giving defenders another option to defuse hostile encounters. Compared to traditional tear gas devices, OC is legal nearly everywhere and widely commercially available in a dazzling variety of forms.

There are two main methods of OC dispersal: liquid aerosol and blast expulsion.

• Aerosol canisters use compressed air or the pressurized solution itself to expel a fine spray of liquid agent. This is the type most commonly used by law enforcement and for self-defense. It is the same mechanism as many aerosol products around the home.
• Blast expulsion covers using an explosive or other force, including inertia, to eject a powdery, micro-pulverized chemical agent. Compressed air is found in the commercial Kimber Pepper Blaster product. Explosive, or often just inertial dispersion from when the container ruptures on impact, is most often found in riot control munition 12 gauge shells or 37/40mm grenades.

Fogging refers to using a heat source to vaporize a liquid to release it as a cloud of "fog" vapor. These devices are commonly referred to as “pepper foggers” which are distinct from the "fog" spray patterns of aerosol canisters. Foggers are typically used to disperse large quantities of CS gas and not OC.

The effective range of OC canisters can vary depending on the specific formulation, propellant, and design. The MK3, MK4 and MK9 designations refer to different sizes of pepper spray canisters, with MK3 being smaller and MK9 being the largest. Some generic examples of different capacity canisters are listed below, but actual specs may vary by brand.

In discussing various OC spray dispensers, considerations revolve around the type of spray, including stream, cone, foam, gel, vapor patterns and the “360” degree claim. Pattern is an important consideration in selecting a device as it will affect the coverage, range, and accuracy of delivery. Some patterns are unsuitable for crowd control or use in high wind, while others are best when discriminate delivery is necessary. It would be worth the money to buy a few inert canisters to practice with and to visualize the spray pattern.

Streams are likened to laser precision, minimizing blowback, while cone (some times “fog”) sprays create an OC cloud, increasing the chance of hitting the target but posing a higher risk of self-contamination. Cone-shaped mist sprays offer a shotgun-like pattern for efficient face hits and coverage, yet they are most susceptible to wind and cross-contamination.

Streamers, with a longer range and lower cross-contamination risk, demand more accurate placement for effective use. The accuracy allows the stream to be “steered” and, for example, can be fired directly into the center of the face or aimed at openings in masks. Most law enforcement agencies use stream patterns to strictly control where the OC goes. The advantages of stream-type dispensers include their usability in windy conditions, outperforming certain spray-style units. Careful aiming is necessary to deliver an effective eye hit, though streams do provide some “splashing” effect to carryover the solution to other parts of the face.

Gel sprays, resembling streamers but thicker, exhibit minimal aerosolization, resulting in zero respiratory effects. Caution is advised with "gel" versions due to reported issues, including longer onset times. Gels’ narrow streams and low aerosolization are preferred in sensitive environments like courts, hospitals, and correctional facilities due to their reduced cross-contamination potential. However, direct eye hits are essential.

When selecting OC (pepper spray), it is recommended to aim for a Major Capsaicinoid Content (MCC) between approximately 0.7% and 2%. The MCC is a crucial measurement as it accurately represents the strength of the entire formulation. Do not to solely rely on SHU or the percentage of OC listed, as these numbers can be deceptive. MCC is a more consistent and reliable indicator of strength. For instance, “10% OC” would indicate that a tenth of the solution in the container is the active ingredient and the remaining 90% would be the alcohol or water based solution. MCC, with 1.3% being an ideal percentage for anti-personnel use. However, anything over 0.7% MCC is considered acceptable for effective defensive use.

You can get aerosol pepper spray or tear gas grenades. These work just like bugbombs. You can toss an aerosol tear gas (CS) or pepper spray (OC) grenade along with a smoke grenade to create a sort-of combined effect and fake people out into thinking it's a true tear gas grenade.

OC grenades in this context are aerosol containers that either dispense from a top-mounted nozzle or through a tubular aperture. These are distinct items from pyrotechnic OC grenades, which are covered in the tear gas chapter. One example is a six-ounce can that will cover up to 10,000ft3 in 60 seconds (total diffusion time) with a device discharge time of approximately six seconds.
A valve continuously sprays until the pressure supply is exhausted. These are unidirectional cone sprays. Once you press that button, it starts spraying until empty, usually for about 10-15 seconds. The range of their spray isn’t great. They obtain maximum coverage when placed vertically (like a bug bomb), but if thrown, will likely only spray in whatever direction they land. They also don’t spin around and project the spray in a radial pattern. What it does do outside is create a direct line of spray and can form an irritating aerosol cloud.
OC grenades are ideal for crowd management, area denial, and extracting persons from confined spaces (cells, rooms, attics, crawl spaces). Extraction grenades are intended for barricaded subjects such as a violent inmate in a cell. They often come with small, short vinyl tubing intended to deploy the substance into a confined area through a small opening.

Use of OC is legally restricted to situations where physical force is appropriate in self-defense. In other words, if you could hit the person, you can use OC. Though local laws may vary, a person must feel that they are imminent danger of physical harm. In the use of force continuum, OC usually falls into the same category as punches, but below firearms and impact weapons. While uncomfortable, neither blows nor OC should result in any serious or last injury. Note that inappropriate use of OC could constitute assault and/or battery in your jurisdiction.

OC and other less-lethal weapons should only be used in necessary self-defense when lesser methods have failed. It should never be used as a punitive weapon simply to inflict suffering. Verbal direction, passive methods, and (where appropriate) physical redirection should be used first, though post-SHTF, especially in a WROL situation, these lesser means may not be practicable.
OC is not intended as a substitute or replacement for firearms when a lethal threat is being presented.

The intended effect of chemical agents including OC are, categorically:

• Distract
• Disorient
• Disrupt activities
• Disperse
• Disable

OC does all of that. With proper deployment, the subject is in too much blinding pain to do anything other than run away or beg for relief. Untreated, a seriously affected individual will be unable to see effectively to fight for at least ten minutes, probably greater if they are not decontaminated. Even small doses can get the uncommitted to leave. A protest crowd providing cover for violent actors within it might be convinced to go home if they suddenly are pepper sprayed.

On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a massive, coordinated assault on Israel, slaughtering civilians, overrunning military outposts, and taking hostages with ruthless efficiency. Entire communities were caught off guard, their defenses crumbling in minutes. People who assumed they were safe—who believed they would have warning, that help was on the way—were hunted down, executed, or dragged into captivity. The system failed them.

October 7 wasn’t a "terror attack" in the way most people think. It was a military-style raid designed to overwhelm defenses, kill as many as possible, and take hostages. And it worked.
If you think something like that could never happen where you live, you’re already behind.

Israelis near Gaza trusted their government, their military, and their security barriers.
They thought they were safe. On October 7, those illusions burned to the ground. What happens when the people meant to protect you aren’t there?

What do you do when your house is surrounded, your neighbors are dead, and there’s no help coming? On October 7, some survivors hid and prayed Hamas wouldn’t find them.
Others fought back—alone, under-armed, outnumbered. Which one are you?

Americans assume they’ll be fighting idiots when SHTF. The reality? Your enemy is smart, brutal, and doesn’t care if he dies. October 7 showed what happens when people underestimate raiders. Are you making the same mistake?

Firearms are essential, but firepower alone won’t save you.
•    No training? You’re a liability.
•    No teamwork? You’re outmaneuvered.
•    No perimeter security? You’re already dead.
•    Hamas didn’t attack individuals—they attacked communities.
What’s your plan?

Israel had walls, cameras, gates, and checkpoints. Hamas cut fences, used drones, paraglided over barriers, and walked right through. Security isn’t about infrastructure. It’s about men with guns ready to stop the threat. Who’s watching your perimeter?

Every civilian who survived October 7 did one of three things:
1.    Hid well enough to go unnoticed.
2.    Fought back hard enough to drive attackers off.
3.    Got incredibly lucky.
If you’re relying on #3, you’re doing it wrong.

You won’t have time to prepare when SHTF.
•    No time to unlock the armory.
•    No time to organize a defense.
•    No time to make a plan.
It’s either already in place, or you’re just another casualty.

Terrorists don’t care about “rules of war.” If you’re taken hostage, your best-case scenario is being used as a human shield. The worst-case? Well… you’ve seen the videos. Your best chance is fighting back at the moment of capture.

You don’t need a bunker. You need a plan.

•    A plan for first aid when EMS won’t come.
•    A plan for escape when roads are blocked.
•    A plan for when the power is out, the phones are down, and you’re on your own.
No plan? No chance.

Once upon a time, many of the rich and noble believed in noblesse oblige—the idea that they had a duty to care for society. They provided for the poor, treated employees decently (or pretended to), and avoided completely hollowing out the soul of the world for profit.

They were far from always noble or perfect. Manor lords gave jobs, if only to keep their estates running, but this kept their communities working. Aristocrats might toss a few coins to the poor to keep up appearances. Even today, the King hands out Maundy money. Social responsibility, however imperfect, was a value.

Even America’s robber barons practiced this (at least symbolically). Carnegie built libraries across the country. Vanderbilt founded a university. Say what you will about their motives, but they at least felt the need to give something back to the communities they profited from. Now today's billionaires run foundations that want to ban meat, give people weird vaccines, or turn your kids (and the frogs) gay.

Now, let's go to It’s a Wonderful Life. The movie gives us two archetypes: George Bailey and Mr. Potter. George is middle-class but raised with a sense of responsibility. Potter is rich and embodies the modern ethos of profit at all costs. Let’s break them down.

Potter is the prototype of today’s corporate overlord. He cares only about money. Venture capitalists would admire him. He’d strip-mine Bedford Falls, offshore jobs, and spike rents. He’d thrive in a world where drug addiction and despair follow economic collapse. Sound familiar, West Virginia? Who cares if you're so desperate you do meth if somebody gets a yacht.

In the "vision" portion of the film, Potter’s Bedford Falls is bleak—usury, seedy tenements, drunks, and exploitative slumlords. Immigrants? Serfs to exploit, not neighbors to uplift. He’d love illegal immigration and H1B visas as tools to boost profits, regardless of how they fracture communities.

George Bailey, in contrast, represents social responsibility. Raised by a father who saw his work as a calling, George’s family wasn’t wealthy, but they understood their role in helping others succeed. The Building & Loan made homeownership possible for the working class. He used his soft power for good while Potter used hard power to enrich himself, the consequences for everyone else be damned. He wanted to be loved (hence his willingness to destroy Uncle Billy, George, and the Building & Loan), but lacked the sense and humility to do it the real way.

George, like the best of his generation, sacrifices his dreams for his neighbors. This echoes the last real gasp of the British aristocracy. George's sense of duty echoes the British officers of WWI—men who gave everything for those they led, willingly joining the war as leaders, rather than shirking because they had the influence to avoid service. George’s father modeled this well: respected, comfortable, and committed to his community.

George learned well from his father and devoted himself to the community with admirable dedication. However, he lacked the resolve to make tough decisions. He could have appointed a more competent steward for the Building & Loan than his uncle and pursued his own dreams. With his many well-connected friends, George had opportunities to invest and build a better future for himself without abandoning Bedford Falls. While he was undoubtedly a good man, George's shortcomings lay in his limited imagination and reluctance to break free from the constraints he imposed on himself.

In reality, George often seems to embrace being beaten down and playing the role of everyone’s workhorse—a classic ISFJ trait. Uncle Billy, on the other hand, is an incompetent drunk who arguably deserves little sympathy for his repeated blunders. But giving the film the benefit of the doubt, let’s imagine George wises up. He makes smart investments with his well-connected friends, eventually takes over the bank when Potter dies in 1954, and becomes the town’s true benefactor. Following the trajectory of Jimmy Stewart’s other iconic roles, it’s easy to see George moving on to bigger things—perhaps even becoming a Senator.

What's the conclusion? We live in a global Pottersville today, where the callous rich only seem to care about getting richer. Those good, honest men who aren't bloodthirsty with ambition and greed don't rise to the top anymore. No, this isn't advocating for socialism or any of that crap, but a paen for a return to Christian charity and goodness. Men like George Bailey make the world a better place.

You may have heard the urban legend of early or experimental “red” night vision goggles used in Vietnam allowing users to see interdimensional beings like ghosts or demons. The following is one account of the urban legend given by the Coast to Coast AM radio show of July 8, 2023 with guest Mark Anthony:

While to anyone who understands any basic scientific information about how night vision works would immediately recognize this as implausible, it has not stopped retellings from going viral on TikTok.

Various spurious claims with just a little scientific truth mixed in to sound plausible to the ignorant have been made. One claim was that a chemical dye, Dicyanin, a toxic dye, was used in the early NVGs. It leaked out and caused hallucinations. However, dicyanin is not known to have psychoactive properties that would induce hallucinations even if they somehow were used in otherwise red goggles. Group hallucinations of the same phenomenon over a period of time are improbable because typically each persons’ hallucinatory experience is different. So what if it was the dicyanin that allowed people to see the spirit realm like a sort of visual filter?

Walter John Kilner, eccentric author of The Human Atmosphere, researched the idea of the human “aura,” or an electromagnetic field around the body. Kilner used dicyanin tined glasses believing that the resulting tint altered light to reveal the aura. The problem is that dicyanin is a blue tint, although he did use carmine red glass in his experiments. So assuming that the dye somehow allowed one to see the spirit world, this variation of the myth can’t even get the colors right!

Actual veterans have destroyed the rumor. Several pilots from that era have confirmed that there were no red NODs at that time, let alone goggles for flight crews. Extremely rare SU49 and SU50 goggles, which became the AN/PVS-5, date from the late 1960s and used green phosphor tubes. The near-prototype goggles were only used on an experimental basis and on the highest profile, top-secret operations like the Son Tay raid.

These early devices used low-sensitivity tubes, were heavy, and cumbersome and not adopted. Even the improved PVS-5 was hated for its bulk and incompatibility with cockpits.

There is no evidence or record of the US military ever having used red night vision. Nonetheless, this doesn’t mean that they secretly actually didn’t, nor that demons weren’t spotted. Being top secret, of course this kind of thing would be hushed up and all proof of red NVGs and their disturbing revelation covered up. For anyone who sincerely believes that, there is no convincing them otherwise.

For everyone else, the story has just enough truth to give someone with the vaguest understanding of night vision the impression that it’s true. A pseudo-intellectual explanation appealing to an uniformed audience might appear to make sense. It’s easy for someone with limited scientific knowledge to conflate the color red with the infrared spectrum. After all, red light helps preserve night vision, doesn’t it? If nighttime lighting is supposed to be red, isn’t that the best color for NVGs? But it also makes sense that people would see demons because red is an “angry” color.

While red does help preserve night vision by causing the slowest bleaching of the light-sensitive chemical rhodopsin in our eyes, it’s not a good choice for color displays. In 1995, Nintendo released the Virtual Boy, a virtual-reality headset that turned out to be a commercial failure. Perhaps one of the reasons it failed was its red-on-black monocolor screen.

Nintendo used only red LEDs due to cost, producing a monochromatic red image that resulted in players complaining of vertigo, nausea, and headaches. One reviewer said “the red was frankly kind of hard on the eyes.” Others were annoyed or disappointed with the screen. Whether it was the monocolor display, the color red, or other reasons, the Virtual Boy did not succeed.

Red as a color for augmented reality should have been seen as a poor choice simply from a psychological standpoint. Red is traditionally associated with strong emotions and is considered an attention-grabbing color. It can also stimulate physical responses, such as increased heart rate and blood pressure. Research in color psychology has indicated that red is associated with heightened arousal. It’s absent from most lighting, except in narrow military contexts. It’s often used in film to create tension or fear and to unsettle the audience. Red is an unnatural color, not often seen in nature, except usually as a warning.

Red phosphor tubes do exist. They are fairly recent developments and very rare. Most were developed for trials. As far as any published, unclassified source shows, red tubes were never used operationally by the US military. In fact, it doesn’t seem like they were ever really used in any serious research. Every commonly used phosphor screen has been a shade of green. Only the thermal imager, the AN/TAS-4A used with the TOW Missile launcher, used a red and black LED display.

Phosphors are used in screens, such as in early cathode ray tube (CRT) displays, because it has the ability to emit light when struck by electrons. In these screens, a beam of electrons is directed onto the phosphor coating inside the screen, and when the electrons hit the phosphor (luminescence), it glows, creating the visible image. Phosphors are ideal for night vision applications also because of their persistence; the light emitted from phosphors lasts just long enough to provide a clear, continuous image without overwhelming the viewer’s eyes or causing excessive afterglow.

While it’s true that any phosphor could generate the images, not all are suitable. Red phosphor tubes do exist and many different colors of phosphor were developed and tested during the early development of display screens, red was only adopted in certain niche applications. Red phosphors were more prone to burn-in and degradation over time compared to green phosphors. Green phosphor was also brighter and more efficient, while red had issues with persistence, meaning that the image quality was often poorer.

Green is simply a better color from a both spectral efficiency and human visual sensitivity perspectives. Yellow-orange-red light is not the optimal color for sensitivity in low-light conditions; green is. Red screens would produce a suboptimal image. Parts of the image that reflect red-orange light may appear less distinct or blended with adjacent colors, leading to a loss of contrast and detail. In a way, this would be like colorblindness.

Green phosphors often have better persistence characteristics, meaning the glow lasts just long enough to create a smooth image without excessive ghosting or flicker. Red phosphors, by comparison, may not offer the same level of smoothness in certain applications, especially early on in development.

The first documented US use of red phosphor in night vision dates from 1987 where a mix of red and green tubes was used in the Chromatic PVS-5 goggle. The goal was to create color night vision by using binocular fusion, except experiments were unable to produce true-color views. Later experimentation was tried in the 2010s and red phosphor tubes were briefly available in limited numbers around that timeframe by special order. It’s not so much that red phosphor tubes never existed, it’s that their documented development was later than the Vietnam war.         

Some of the collectors who obtained recently made red tubes posted images and they are certainly striking, perhaps even unpleasant to look at. While on objective terms they perform equally to P43 green tubes, perhaps subjectively they appear slightly darker and have less contrast. It probably wouldn’t be anything anyone would want to spent the night looking at. The color would likely exacerbate the psychological aspects of night combat. Whether red or green night vision, probably the mind that is most responsible for any perception of evil.

An article published in 2017[1] is often cited as “proof” of the stories, is anything but. Rather, the author clearly documents that the optical illusions variously described as “dragons,” “ghosts,” etc. were the product of unfamiliarity with night vision, fear, stress, and fatigue. None of the accounts seem to seriously suggest the user believed they were seeing the supernatural.

[1]

Soldiers and Marines, who grew up with black and white TVs, were unaccustomed to seeing the world through night vision and to them it may have seemed a little like magic. “Soldiers who spent ling nights peering into this strange electronic topographical arrangement began to see it not so much as an altered version of the landscape before them but another world…” The low resolution of early tubes didn’t help the otherworldly appearance. Some users reported being “bewildered” by jungle phosphorescence or shadows from flares and may have mistaken this as apparitions.

There was also the psychological burden of “seeing” the enemy who became less of a vague figure and as another human, not merely a target.

We’ve been conditioned by film to see red as a bad color, so would it be surprising if someone subject to the intense stress and fear of combat, coupled with anxiety, might be spooked by a red image? Even the few side-by-side comparisons of green and red phosphor tubes make the red ones look “bloody” and unpleasant. Red, therefore, is probably the worst color for night vision. Not that there actually were any red NVGs in Vietnam at the time, but if there were, it might be unsurprising to find that spending an entire mission looking at the world in red would produce anxiety.

This was an excerpt from The Night Vision Manual - Book 1 Image Intensification, a comprehensive guide to night vision.

[1] Richard A. Ruth, “The Secret of Seeing Charlie in the Dark,” Vulcan: The Journal of the History of Military Technology, 2017

Images taken through the tubes of red and green phosphor NVGs. Courtesy of J.W. Ramp.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jwhairybob/47493171282/in/photostream/
https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/Let-s-See-Some-Red-Phosphor-Christmas-Tree-Night-Vision/18-498793/

The problem with automated, algorithm driven moderation is that a simple batch of code that looks for prohibited words in the "wrong" order can't look for context. So for instance if you reply to something like say: "Canadian healthcare is so good you'll be seen in 2 years for that broke leg" with "Well, you could always commit suicide!", the code doesn't know it's a facetious reply.

In fact, the Indians who review this stuff (maybe, if you're lucky) probably don't even know what "facetious" means.

What happened here was the system saw "commit suicide" with a verb structured in such a way that in isolation it could be seen as an encouragement to self-redact. Obviously to a human it's not an encouragement do anything, but a smart-ass remark commenting on on how Canadian health care and assisted suicide is out of control. But does the code know that? Of course not.

So without warning you get a 7 day suspension for nothing more than putting words in an order that the code doesn't like. Nothing wrong was done, but computers are only as smart as they're programmed to be. For instance, I could (and many have) written: "You should go and Canadian healthcare yourself," meaning "kill yourself." But is the system smart enough to recognize that? No, of course not. It's like a blind traffic cop only pulling over speeders in Ferraris.

This could be resolved very quickly with a human to look at the code, but apparently the Twitter appeal process is nothing but automated denials. Maybe you get lucky and someone gets tired of seeing it pop up and a human looks at it at some point. Or maybe not.

It's a dumb system because 1. there's no warning that the speech is bad and what the rules are and 2. there effectively is no appeal if no human looks at it. So if you put words in the "wrong" order, you're automatically in the wrong. It's like being informed that something is illegal after you've done it. No, more correctly it's something being determined to be wrong after the fact because someone didn't like it.

In any event, I'm in time out for no more reason than computer code. Elon or not, Twitter isn't a free speech zone. It's better, but not without the follow through to make sure that speech is free and with poorly implemented policies and codes. But hey, moderators and programmers cost money! Of course, there doesn't seem to be any sort of algo that can detect the pedophiles or ban the bots.

Whatever. The enshitification of the Internet continues.