Asklemmy

50304 readers

425 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

Would you be friendly or hostile in a zombie apocalypse (lemmy.world)

submitted 2 weeks ago by Cattail@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

57 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Guess this is an ad hoc poll for where on the spectrum would you be on the zombie apocalypse, but I do expect halo effect to alter the results.

The question is would you be hostile or friendly to other survivors you come across if they had no recourse for their actions

The main assumption is that You have the inherent resistance to the plague so that way you can you can start in a heavily populated area and make your way out or live in there.

I would be curious if people would hide away for the rest of their lives in a cabin in the woods.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I'll probably just kill myself. It's either get killed by a zombie and become a zombie or die on my own terms and spare the world from my undead corpse.

Also, a zombie apocalypse isn't going to "end" when the majority of the population are already zombies (which are functionally immortal given that they're already dead) so there's nothing to look forward to afterward. Like exactly zero zombie apocalypse stories have any sort of end game where the minority human survivors win or even how they could conceivably win. What am I living for then? To spend a decade or two starving, afraid, paranoid of everyone living and dead, and surviving just for the sake of surviving? Fuck that, I choose death. Survivors of even the nuclear apocalypse have something to live for because it can still get better with time and humanity might still have a chance to rebuild, but not a supernatural apocalypse orchestrated by forces literally beyond our rational and scientific comprehension.

[–] Cattail@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I don't think starving would be a big issue because everyone would have food in their house and we have plenty of domesticated plants and animals that can produce way more food per plant that was possible 20,000 years ago. Fear would be a constant since theirs zombies and the lack of humans would mean nature takes over and scary animal make a rebound.

To put an optimist spin on zombie apocalypse, if you struggle paying off a car then we'll it stops and you'd have hundreds of cars at your disposal just to test, you'd have all the buildings materials your ever need, you could Milky way at night, pick up any hobby and get good at it. Personally I like to see that I could rebuild society get electricity back up again.