This is the problem with the thought process of urban survivalists.
So, you’ve stockpiled your food, and you of course also have enough weapons to protect yourself. Heck, you might have enough that when what is essentially an ARMY of people who don’t have food have assembled to come take you out, you can defend your “country”. Which means you are pretty powerful army.
Now, however, you are running out of food. And you have the power to take out an army against you. Will your family starve, now that you have run out of food?
Or, will you use all the force you have, force strong enough to repel an ARMY of invaders, to take the food of the guy next door? Yes, unless he is even more powerful. You won’t let your family die out of altruism.
But if he can fend you off, then HE was the more powerful, and if he runs out he’ll take you out.
Someone is going to have more weapons and power than you, unless you are the top dog. If you are the top dog, you will rule the world taking out those below you. If not, you will be taken out.
The only way this doesn’t come to a tragic end is if, at some point, you form a treaty with others, a kind of “nation”, where you all mutually defend yourselves. And then you need to mutually ensure your survival, meaning you need some way for people who run out of food to get from those who still have it, to keep factions from defecting and attacking.
Essentially, long-term survival will require the reconstruction of society. You need a government, you need people who are living well enough they aren’t motivated to lash out, and you need power distributed enough that no one person or a small group can take out the group.
Of course, you better pray that the military has prepared successfully, because you have NO CHANCE if the army is starving. It’s going to take you out, and you don’t have tanks, artillary, or close air support.
Wilderness survival is the only way individuals can make it. You find an out-of-the-way place, secure the perimeter, but mostly just STAY HIDDEN. Nobody knows where you are, or what goodies await them, and they can’t waste their time searching for you, not knowing there’s a reason to do so. They will go to where the groups of people are.
So, while I could build up my house to be energy independent, and put a stockpile in my basement, if I was serious about this stuff, my real survival gear would be in a nondescript cabin in the woods out in the middle of nowhere. My plan would be to have enough food and water to make it a month while I assessed whether things were collapsing, and then have gas to drive to my final destination.
the most basic what we need and those mostly in the urban areas have no clue where to get it.
Water.
Ask those in the urban areas where their fresh water supply is for them to live on and where could they go to get water and food if need be and they are clueless.
Here we have animals, hunters, fish, lots of fish, know where various water supplies are and those not so close if something went bad here.
“Urban Survivalists” may be an oxymoron.
You are not calculating in the value of defensive positions and pre planned engagement zones. Once you leave your bunker area and move into someone else’s back yard, you are automaticly less powerful. The defensive structures are in their favor. Eventually there is a point of equilibrium where neither side has the force necessary to overcome the defensive posture of the other.
This is very important. I preach this every time conversation turns to "when TSHTF". There are so many skills necessary to maintain even an 1800's life style that people need to channel their energies into presevation of neighbors sooner than later. "Later" means plunging back into some really dark times.