I dunno about that, although I think that it might be a how a liberal could see it.

I think both are ultimately concerned with the good of all, but differ on how best to approach it.

The early episodes with Morgan seemed to indicate bugging in would work; maybe board up a couple windows & generally stay quiet and out of sight. The Vatos also seemed to make it work, though in a much more challenging environment (dense urban vs. suburban). And of course Hershel's clan was doing okay staying put too.

Keeping moving not only means you are constantly foraging for the essentials, running the risk of dehydration and malnutrition / starvation, but you are constantly vulnerable to the zombies because you don't have a permanent location that can be secured and made defensible.

Even with Romero, the majority of the characters in Dawn of the Dead died because they got bored hanging out in the mall and hit the road instead. And Night of the Living Dead would've been an incredibly boring (but relatively body count free) movie if they'd simply turned out all the lights and hid in the basement .

I couldn't agree more; we'd have much more constructive discussions (as a society) if more people believed this.

Let me urge everyone to follow Chaos' admonition. I think there is some value in discussing the show even in terms of preparedness, though it's also fun, too. It would be a shame to get this thread shut down.

I also want to clarify that I did not intend to bring in politics. I was mainly interested in the cultural factors in a survival show like The Walking Dead. So, to me, Shane and Rick represent two sets of different psychological and cultural attitudes, and it's not clear to me which one would be best for survival. If we're in that situation, should we continue to uphold some sense of fairness and ethics, or should we embrace Shane's "new world" code of conduct?

In one of the last episodes, Dale said to Shane something to the effect of: "I'm contemptuous of you, and I can't be like you. My chance of survival probably is going to be worse because of it, but that's OK." This is self-knowledge and ethical decision. Dale knows who he is and where he sets limits for his conduct. I wonder where each one of us will stand when the storm hits. I don't think we'll know unless we've been tested. (I was almost mugged around Christmas. I had no idea I'd be able to react the way I did, and I certainly had no idea that I wouldn't be upset afterwards.) In the mean time, I have the book that Martin Focazio recommended about how communities actually come together in times of crisis. I hope things will be more like that.

To me Daryl is an interesting guy. Other than the fact that he seems to recover from wounds almost as quickly as Wolverine does from X-Men, he struggles against a different form of group thinking: standing by his brother (kin) vs. helping a group of strangers. In one of the last episodes, he had to climb his way back up a slippery slope after getting thrown off the horse and down the slope, getting impaled by arrow, and almost getting eaten by zombies. He hallucinated and saw his brother, who taunted him. At one point, Merle said, "Don't you know kin is the only thing you can count on?" This is probably the most traditional version of the spectrum between the good of the group vs. the good of all.

Yet he takes risks on behalf of the group precisely because he, as a denizen of the country with this sort of kinship value, doesn't fit in with the group. He has nothing to do in camp, and he's more comfortable searching for Sophia. So this is a bit ironic. Of course, he is also motivated by the new-found friendship with Sophia's mother. Wonder where that relationship is going.

So with your merry gang of a dozen or so trying to survive the zombie onslaught, what's your ideal convoy vehicles?

The Walking Dead is most identified with the 70s Winnebego Chieftain. The roof does make a great observation and sniper platform and zombie-free safe zone.

http://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_350764-Winnebago-Chieftain-1977.html

But Rick and fam seem to have taken to an old Jeep Cherokee. Shayne's by his lonesome in a Jeep Wrangler - top off. Daryl has been riding an old-style chopper and I recall that in route to the CDC he had it in the back of a pickup truck.

Is there merit in vehicles of the same brand and model year so parts could be swapped out? The Winnebego is afflicted with water hose travails - not a lot of spares laying around for that engine.

I'm inclined toward full-size pickup trucks that can haul motorcycles, fuel and camping gear. Oh, and multi-rifle racks.

And maybe trucks with campers (that can be jacked up and left behind - as I've seen in campgrounds).

Have to become adept at finding fuel - no matter what cars you have.

Brilliant - yes, gotta keep those zombie teeth away.

I do think a boat is the way to go. A boat on a very big lake with enough homes and support facilities around to raid food for awhile.

I'm assuming zombies can't swim.

Most of the stories I've seen have them walking around on the bottom, but not swimming. So stay in deep water.

While Shane would likely come out on top if it was just him & Rick up against a group of zombies (Otis redux), I'm not convinced he can make the decisions needed for long-term survival in that world.

I mean, they are at a safe, secure location that is also self sufficient with abundant water, food, electricity & even medical care and yet Shane is jumping at the bit to leave and head out into the unknown, zombie infested world to an Army base which, given what we've seen of the Army's effectiveness against the initial zombie uprising, may not even be there anymore. It's basically a repeat of the CDC plan and Shane doesn't appear to have any information to suggest this new "plan" would be any more successful.

He may have lost his moral objection to sacrificing the lives of others for his own comfort & survival, but I don't think he's displayed the capability to choose the environment that is most conducive for survival.

Just because you have the ability to fight doesn't mean you should seek out environments that require you to.

Certainly the show is making it look that way. Another point of significant difference: while Shane instigated killing all the zombies trapped in the barn, violating their host's personal feelings and request, when it turned out one of their own, Sophia, was amongst the zombies, Rick was the one who manned up to put her out of her misery. Just a moment ago Rick was obeying the host's request to attempt to capture and imprison the zombie neighbors, in case one day a cure is found.

I think the difference here is moral courage. Shane has the courage to survive, sure, and the willingness to do whatever it takes. But Rick has the will to survive with moral courage. The show seems to suggest you have to have some of that to be a good leader for a group of people. Shane and Rick are very much alike, and they even share a family in a way (would be interesting to see what happens with Lori's baby). But Shane always seems to be in Rick's shadow, partly because he lacks the personal qualities to lead.

Perhaps this goes back to something I've harped on in this forum: community in the time of disaster. It's probably easier to survive with people than by yourself. If you want to be a part of a community, you can't be shooting your partner so the zombies will feast on him while you can make your get away. Group ethics has an importance. (I admit on this forum I see a lot less of this "me and my 9 against the world" mentality, but on some other forums, man, is it Mad Max over there.)

By the way, re: Sophia in the barn: I totally didn't see it coming. I liked that moment of drama, which totally flipped the switch on the executioners.