I think it was interesting that the brochure is apparently available in English, Swedish and something called "Easy Swedish". I'm not sure exactly what this is and a brief Googling didn't help, but I'm imagining something like "Basic English", that is a simplified version of the language designed to be easy to read for people learning the language.
Full list of languages (names are in Swedish) reads:
Arabiska
Engelska
Farsi
Finska
Meänkieli
Nordsamiska
Polska
Romani Chib
Somaliska
Svenska
Sydsamiska
Ukrainska
so quite a few more varaiants than what you would expect from knowing Sweden has five official minority languages.
Compare to Finland - which has universal male conscription (Sweden does not), and allows women to serve in all combat arms.
(Per Wikipedia, Sweden's military has Reserves of 34,000. Vs. Finland's has Reserves of 870,000. Even though Finland's total population is a bit over 1/2 of Sweden's.)
I like how the section on finding shelter tells you things you can do rather than things you shouldn’t do.
Instead of “take shelter indoors” they say “if you’re outside, hide in a ditch” and then further down talk about progressively better options for taking shelter should any of the above not apply. It feels positive, practical, and deliberate.
Also, ahem, the use of a sans-serif face for sidebars mixed with serif body text really heightens the sense of imminent global catastrophe!
I wonder if there is one single book/pdf that has consolidated all vital information needed in such scenarios. i.e. if you were to be stranded on a deserted island and could have one book, which book would that be?
If you were going to be stranded in Northern Australia you'd likely prefer the Australian Army Bush Tucker Guide maps - topo maps with routes, springs, etc. marked and a food guide on the back showing edible resources by map grid.
If you're making a brochure to go out to the whole population of a country, keep it simple and straightforward even if that means oversimplifying the advice a bit.
I've wondered about that. Any major crisis is going to last much longer than a week. Will having a week's supplies really make a difference? Maybe it will lead to a slight staggering of refugee movement. I can't help thinking it's nearly in the same category of advice as "duck and cover".
1 week of supplies is more about flexibility. In survival situations once things get bad they snowball. People aren’t going do drop dead on day 8, but think of it as having a week to prepare for a known disaster before you need to worry about the basic necessities. 6 months is hypothetically better but far more expensive and it would only make an actual difference in a tiny number of situations.
Further it’s fairly trivial to cycle through a week of supplies and keep it fresh. Looking at the shelf life of what you regularly consume, find stuff that lasts a while, get a little extra, and then keep restocking as you normally would after that point. Just remember first in first out.
PS: It’s honestly surprising how long some stuff lasts, honey in an unopened glass container is going to be good long after you’ve died of old age.
The executive government decides and make an announcement like most other places?
A crisis is more complicated because that power is derogated to very local levels: for example each individual school has a crisis plan they can activate when they think it's necessary.
In practice the brochure is mostly about big crises you can sort of see coming, so it'll either be obvious because you house is on fire/under water, or it'll be on the news. In either case "a crisis" is not really a legal concept but rather an organisational one, more precisely it means "you did make a plan for this like you are required to, right?"
> The executive government decides and make an announcement like most other places?
I don't know where you live, but this is a terrible metric in america. We shredded libya without most people even realizing anything was going on. Libya never recovered. Similar story with syria. Similar story with iraq.
I suppose the media actually covered aspects of our most recent invasion of iraq.
If you fail to notice it through the news, and other official channels, then there's usually a very loud siren that's hard to ignore telling you there's a major danger near you in most countries.
If I had to guess in a case of an official declaration of war those would be activated all over the country for at least a day (probably more)
I suppose it is an updated pamphlet, but this call for preparedness is not new in Sweden: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17121110
Thanks for sharing. Kind of interesting to look at the comments in retrospect, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17121862
I think it was interesting that the brochure is apparently available in English, Swedish and something called "Easy Swedish". I'm not sure exactly what this is and a brief Googling didn't help, but I'm imagining something like "Basic English", that is a simplified version of the language designed to be easy to read for people learning the language.
Use Google translate on this page https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A4ttl%C3%A4st
Full list of languages (names are in Swedish) reads: Arabiska Engelska Farsi Finska Meänkieli Nordsamiska Polska Romani Chib Somaliska Svenska Sydsamiska Ukrainska
so quite a few more varaiants than what you would expect from knowing Sweden has five official minority languages.
Total defense duty is pretty hard core. 16-70 obligatory service in time of war.
Applies to citizens abroad too.
I wonder what the requirements are on nonresidents who just happen to be temporarily in the country?
>Applies to citizens abroad too.
Same goes for Switzerland. My understanding is that Swiss citizens working abroad use vacation days to fulfill their yearly drills.
Compare to Finland - which has universal male conscription (Sweden does not), and allows women to serve in all combat arms.
(Per Wikipedia, Sweden's military has Reserves of 34,000. Vs. Finland's has Reserves of 870,000. Even though Finland's total population is a bit over 1/2 of Sweden's.)
Yeah thought same. I guess that’s one way to signal absolute commitment to Defense
Remarkably clear, straightforward, and useful material.
Discussed yesterday too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42173870
I like how the section on finding shelter tells you things you can do rather than things you shouldn’t do.
Instead of “take shelter indoors” they say “if you’re outside, hide in a ditch” and then further down talk about progressively better options for taking shelter should any of the above not apply. It feels positive, practical, and deliberate.
Also, ahem, the use of a sans-serif face for sidebars mixed with serif body text really heightens the sense of imminent global catastrophe!
I’m a bit miffed about the part about pets. It should mentioned that during prolonged crises, cats and dogs go from companions to workers.
Cats are really good at preventing vermin. Dogs have a million uses, including search and rescue.
Cats and dog literally evolved to serve us in these capacities.
At the same time, people to dumb things for their pets.
I wonder if there is one single book/pdf that has consolidated all vital information needed in such scenarios. i.e. if you were to be stranded on a deserted island and could have one book, which book would that be?
A book with a lot to say about the kinds of islands that are likely to be deserted.
Failing that, a good general book on survival in various scenarios is The SAS Survival Handbook by John Wiseman.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_SAS_Survival_Handbook
If you were going to be stranded in Northern Australia you'd likely prefer the Australian Army Bush Tucker Guide maps - topo maps with routes, springs, etc. marked and a food guide on the back showing edible resources by map grid.
Many of the comments mention supplies for 1 week.
I wonder how they got that number. Shouldn't preparedness depend on your location? city vs countryside? port city vs inland?
If you're making a brochure to go out to the whole population of a country, keep it simple and straightforward even if that means oversimplifying the advice a bit.
I've wondered about that. Any major crisis is going to last much longer than a week. Will having a week's supplies really make a difference? Maybe it will lead to a slight staggering of refugee movement. I can't help thinking it's nearly in the same category of advice as "duck and cover".
1 week of supplies is more about flexibility. In survival situations once things get bad they snowball. People aren’t going do drop dead on day 8, but think of it as having a week to prepare for a known disaster before you need to worry about the basic necessities. 6 months is hypothetically better but far more expensive and it would only make an actual difference in a tiny number of situations.
Further it’s fairly trivial to cycle through a week of supplies and keep it fresh. Looking at the shelf life of what you regularly consume, find stuff that lasts a while, get a little extra, and then keep restocking as you normally would after that point. Just remember first in first out.
PS: It’s honestly surprising how long some stuff lasts, honey in an unopened glass container is going to be good long after you’ve died of old age.
At scale, no response to a major emergency is ever fast. Everyone having 7 days would give the authorities at least some time.
Maybe it's intended to help with calculations. For comparison, the German BBK recommends a emergency stock to last ten days.
I guess they’re trying to strike a balance between what’s reasonable and not turning the entire nation into preppers
For context, the Netherlands recently increased their public preparedness recommendation from 3 days to 7.
How do you figure out whether the country is actually at crisis or at war?
The executive government decides and make an announcement like most other places?
A crisis is more complicated because that power is derogated to very local levels: for example each individual school has a crisis plan they can activate when they think it's necessary.
In practice the brochure is mostly about big crises you can sort of see coming, so it'll either be obvious because you house is on fire/under water, or it'll be on the news. In either case "a crisis" is not really a legal concept but rather an organisational one, more precisely it means "you did make a plan for this like you are required to, right?"
> The executive government decides and make an announcement like most other places?
I don't know where you live, but this is a terrible metric in america. We shredded libya without most people even realizing anything was going on. Libya never recovered. Similar story with syria. Similar story with iraq.
I suppose the media actually covered aspects of our most recent invasion of iraq.
God save palestine (he won't).
I'm gonna go drink myself to death.
Indeed it is, but that's quite a rare case globally so I didn't feel the need to make a special mention of it.
If you fail to notice it through the news, and other official channels, then there's usually a very loud siren that's hard to ignore telling you there's a major danger near you in most countries.
If I had to guess in a case of an official declaration of war those would be activated all over the country for at least a day (probably more)
War also typically involves a legislative declaration since it opens up various legislative pathways and policies for many things.
People getting blown to pieces == war.
Well shit, america has been at war for the last 80 year then. At least if this is a common viewpoint my worldview can finally align....
[flagged]