← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · travis

Leaderless Resistance

Thread ID: 10127 | Posts: 52 | Started: 2003-09-29

travis [OP]

2003-09-29 20:51 | User Profile

Although I don't mean to belittle any White Nationalist organizations, given the problematic nature of organizations and leaders dedicated to our cause in the current environment, I think there is a need to focus on decentralized activism.

The concept of leaderless resistance has been around awhile but I've seen little effort to promote, perfect and implement it to advance our cause. Col. Amoss wrote about it 40 years ago and Louis beam wrote the following more recent article about it:

[url]http://www.crusader.net/texts/bt/bt04.html[/url]

Leaderless resistance has a broad meaning, most readers of this forum are probably active in it to some degree. Many of us, including myself, don't want to be a member of an organization because of the baggage that goes along with it.

Since the main reason to apply this form of resistance is not to circumvent leaders but to circumvent guilt by association, there is no reason not to have some organisations or websites to assist or facilitate this kind of activism without the participants having to become members. Since nothing illegal would be advocated, this information could be made available to the general public.

Some of the kinds of information and services provided could be: Warnings of laws and policies and changes in them to prevent legal altercations, as well as loopholes around them. Tips on the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of certain strategies of debate. Networking assistance to help us get in touch with others in our area. Leadership tips on operating "cells". Success stories showing tactics and actual results in recruiting.

The main objectives would be to enlighten, convert and recruit.

I think the ADL is far more concerned about this kind of activity than resistance contained in organisations they have the ability to monitor and harass. When I googled "leaderless resistance" I got a couple dozen Jew sites showing their paranoia about this by trying to obscure the distinction between legal and violent resistance and putting words in Louis Beam's mouth.

Remember Protocol 5: "...to dislocate all collective forces which are still unwilling to submit to us....There is nothing more dangerous than personal initiative if it has genius behind it, such initiative can do more than can be done by millions of people among whom we've sown discord"

Any federal attempts to harass individuals who are not afilliated with organisations and to suppress their first ammendmant rights will be met with more resistance from the general public than harassment of organisations.

Any ideas? Suggestions?

FadeTheButcher

2003-09-30 03:16 | User Profile

Me and a friend recently had an argument about this. Eventually we came to the conclusion that a two-pronged strategy is necessary. First, there is a definite need for organization at some level. There must be some organized countermovement, if not racially nationalist at first, at least something like a white version of the ADL or NAACP, something to at least strike back at Jewish and nonwhite pressure groups. It is also reasonable to expect that members of such organizations, people who come out in the open as activists would be subjected to all sorts of pressure and attacks, principally intimidation of their employers. This is why it also must be recognized that not everyone can be a member of such organizations, why everyone cannot be a full-time activist. We also need people who are not out in the open, who can infiltrate the mainstream and distort the mainstream to our purposes. I speak of university professors, editors of small newspapers, government bureaucrats, military personel and so on. These are also the people we must count on to finance the activist organizations.

travis

2003-10-01 01:18 | User Profile

If, as you suggest, we could get some small newpapers on our side, we would have something worth financing. I think there is only one paper of that kind, somewhere in Northern Idaho. It's a regular local paper.

Activism, in my opinion, all boils down to influence. No matter how activism is structured, the principle objective is to counter the negative influence of the Jewish media.

I'm all for the N.A. and the NAAWP and support the formation of many more such organizations. I'll never join one because organizations are not for me. I'm an extreme individualist and not a leader or follower and I've always been more effective at doing anything I did by doing it without supervision or assistance. I realize people like me aren't the norm, and many need some leadership and camaraderie to make them more effective, also many have leadership skills which should not go to waste.

Since leaderless resistance and personal initiative is far more difficult for the Jews to hinder than organizations, I think that all of us that are inlined to this kind of activism should not join organizations at all. Since my principal modus operandi is using internet forums as a means of getting the word out, which I spend at least 20 hours a week doing, joining an org wouldn't make me much more influential.

By starting this thread, I hope to foster an exchange of ideas and strategies between independents to help us maximize our influence and thus the quantity of converts to our cause.

WhiteUtopian

2003-10-05 22:48 | User Profile

Some of you might know me from StormFront, if so, you have probably seen my struggle to get a collective of activists and operatives organized there. The idea is sound, leave information about what the collective's monthly activities(all legal)are on a thread like this and the lonewolves can see it and act alone knowing they aren't alone. Why isn't it happening?, Initiative, WNs can't seem to get it together and use the numbers we have now. They just want to raise kids, type on the computer send money to good orgs. I am amazed at how we squander our numbers, WNs complain about how we need to get more people in the movement, we do need that, but we need to use what we have for now. Massive effective operations can be lauched off this thread, you just need action minded WNs to view the thread. Which is the first problem, these sites are broke up all nice and neat, but that makes it so that plans and ideas get missed, because some people hang out in other areas of the board. What I like about mobilizing off of SF or here is that these are open forums, these aren't NS forums or Creator forums, they are open to all, it is neutral ground. These sites are unity, we have chosen to congregate here, despite our affiliations or lack there of. I hope this board is different than SF, I have little patience for the shiftless.

WhiteUtopian

Uncle John

2003-10-07 01:42 | User Profile

For an outstanding example of the leaderless resistance concept in action, see the Earth Liberation Front website ([url]www.earthliberationfront.com[/url]).

WhiteUtopian

2003-10-07 22:01 | User Profile

I really wish there was site dedicated to having just action minded people on it. Alot of sites are for education and recruitment, I want a activist website. Where I can talk people who are actually going to do something.

travis

2003-10-07 23:42 | User Profile

[QUOTE=WhiteUtopian]I really wish there was site dedicated to having just action minded people on it. Alot of sites are for education and recruitment, I want a activist website. Where I can talk people who are actually going to do something.[/QUOTE]Much of what goes on at White Nationalist websites consists of "preachin at the choir" and arguing about the details, hopefully this forum will fill that void. What is the main objective of activism? Isn't recruiting and educating the masses the primary objective?

Frederick William I

2003-10-08 04:32 | User Profile

[QUOTE=WhiteUtopian]Some of you might know me from StormFront, if so, you have probably seen my struggle to get a collective of activists and operatives organized there. The idea is sound, leave information about what the collective's monthly activities(all legal)are on a thread like this and the lonewolves can see it and act alone knowing they aren't alone. Why isn't it happening?, Initiative, WNs can't seem to get it together and use the numbers we have now. They just want to raise kids, type on the computer send money to good orgs. I am amazed at how we squander our numbers, WNs complain about how we need to get more people in the movement, we do need that, but we need to use what we have for now.... I hope this board is different than SF, I have little patience for the shiftless.

WhiteUtopian[/QUOTE]The whole idea of "leaderless resistance" IMO is one of the things that has kept the WN movement locked in a closet. Its assumptions are contrary to all known sound psychological principles, which is that group solidarity is essential for the motivation of any group activity, but especially those involving high risks or danger.

Ofcourse those SF people aren't going to do much. Why would anyone undetake to risk his life for people that don't even know him, and would probably do little concretely to help?

Any Army leader knows this basic fact. Feelings of group identification and group solidarity, and teamwork are essential
to any activity. And you aren't going to create these feelings among anonymous people sitting at their modems.

That is why some organization structure is essential for any activity's success - even though, like any such WN activity, it will if successful in any degree be heavily infiltrated by gov't and or ADL/SPLC agents - the main argument for Leadership Resistance in the first place. Throwing out all hope of organization though is like throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

The key is WN's and their allies who wish to succeed just have to learn and operate with a flexibility which is sometimes difficult for them.

Hope the Western Heritage League develops into an organization with this kind of flexibility. Although if it does, I'll expect it to be attacked to some degree for its "compromises", and I expect that as in the case of the German NDP, some of the most hardline opponents of its compromises will eventually turn out to be provocateurs.

WhiteUtopian

2003-10-08 06:13 | User Profile

Travis, the main idea is to educate our people recruit more, but I'm talking about organizing activities that increase the flow of new people to the education sites. You are missing my plan, I want to increase activity in simple propaganda plans. This brings more people our message, you can only do this with a clever collection of people that ACT and not talk.

Frederick, I think your assessment of what I'm saying is flawed. IMO I think that using a reputable thread to coordinate simple massive efforts is a reality. It won't work if you don't do it for sure, let it fail if it is going to, but don't shoot it down. Everything on the thread is legal, who cares if feds inflitrate?. I am mostly talking about flyers. I have already got many from SF to drop flyers in unison on the 14th. I am trying to get people nationwide to take part every 14th of every month, it is "Flyer Day". This is a simple plan that will work for a bit as long as the word gets out. I am expecting successes to bring more interested parties to act in unison on November 14th and then more on December 14th. Join the team, all the flyers are non-offensive that we are using, they are good. 1-4 AM on the 14th of October lend us your strength, thanks.

WhiteUtopian

travis

2003-10-08 11:52 | User Profile

Frederick William I, I agree that a large segment of the population, perhaps even the majority, does not posess the independence, self-determination and initiative needed for leaderless resistance.

But from a psychological perspective, Isn't it the individualistic types that are least likely to go along with the mass consciousness of a multicultural wonderland? I would imagine many of our current WN's posess individualistic traits in extreme disproportion to the general population.

WhiteUtopian, I have designed and printed my own flyers. Passing out flyers is illegal in some areas and comparing notes about laws at a local level is something that organisations as well as lone wolves on a forum could do. Stormfront had a good, though rather unsophisticated thread on this topic and I hope someone knowledgeable will start a thread on that topic here.

Oklahomaman

2003-10-08 14:24 | User Profile

For an outstanding example of the leaderless resistance concept in action, see the Earth Liberation Front website ([url]www.earthliberationfront.com[/url]).

Three problems with the ELF as a model.

1) The ELF hasn't been remotely successful at achieving its goal of a state entirely guided by ecological idealism by any objective standard.

2) The ELF isn't befret of leadership. Its leadership and political will are derived entirely from complex organizations like "respected" ecological schools and organizations that provide cues and a context for the ELF to act upon. There is an enormous amount of membership overlap between the organizations and the ELF.

3) The ELF is primarily organized to facilitate criminal activities. Promoting a political message to the public-at-large is clearly only a peripherial objective to the ELF. The nature of their work is several orders of magnitude different than what is proposed here.

From an analytic point of view, it's important to note the environmental movement is quintesentially leftist and thus operates on Marxist presumptions about human nature and political change. Their strategies and tactics serve a fundementally different purpose than any system proposed by rightists.

Frederick William I

2003-10-08 15:26 | User Profile

[QUOTE=WhiteUtopian]Travis, the main idea is to educate our people recruit more, but I'm talking about organizing activities that increase the flow of new people to the education sites. You are missing my plan, I want to increase activity in simple propaganda plans. This brings more people our message, you can only do this with a clever collection of people that ACT and not talk.

Actually I was tending to see things you're way, and trying to place it into the perspective of my overall criticism of "leaderless resistance" (LR) as put forth by Travis. You're experience at SF - its difficult to get someone to do anything - seems to be a common fristration felt by operators of WN websites. It seems to me it reflects a general defect in the LR theory.

Regarding your passing out flyers, it is one of the general political activities that seems tedious and hard but that sometimes can bear some fruit. Firstly though I'd just note is somewhat of a departure from LR. as it is more coordinated and organized than most LR are and the model suggests.

Also, I'd like to ask what is on the flyers, and what your purpose is. If it is just abstract, as in "oppose the zionist dominated gov't etc." even if a person is sympathetic, I doubt it will have much long term effect. You need a way to tie someone in to something, and the more he's tied in, the better it will be (also a deviation from the concept of LR).

The real point of any organization, as Alex Linder pointed out in his NA criticism, should be the founding of local chapters (cells for the conspiratorial minded). Again a big dviation from LR.

Frederick William I

2003-10-08 16:19 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Oklahomaman]Three problems with the ELF as a model.

1) The ELF hasn't been remotely successful at achieving its goal of a state entirely guided by ecological idealism by any objective standard.

Something IMO that the WN movement sorely lacks.

3) The ELF is primarily organized to facilitate criminal activities. Promoting a political message to the public-at-large is clearly only a peripherial objective to the ELF.

The same could similarly be said about the founders of WN leaderless resistance.

The epitimy of the type of person it holds up as a hero would be Tim McVeigh. Who's work, incidentally, actually was a terrible blow to at least certain parts of the patriotic movement (i.e. the militia's) as will most of the successes achieved when LR realy accomplished its objectives and gets the type of people most prone to its message to "act".

Frederick William I

2003-10-08 16:25 | User Profile

[QUOTE=travis]Frederick William I, I agree that a large segment of the population, perhaps even the majority, does not posess the independence, self-determination and initiative needed for leaderless resistance.

There is also a segment of individualistic people like me who react with contempt towards egotistical, self-serving "leaders" and perform just as well with or without encouragement and have no time for the sqabbling over details and internal power struggles inherent in all organizations. I know it can be frustrating. I sympathize. But we do need good leaders, and if one has the patience to particpate in organizations and work to improve them IMO its more effective than just going out on your own

But from a psychological perspective, Isn't it the individualistic types that are least likely to go along with the mass consciousness of a multicultural wonderland? I would imagine many of our current WN's posess individualistic traits in extreme disproportion to the general population.

See my commentary to Oklahomaman on Tim McVeigh. Yes they do possess these traits, but I think they and these traits are one of the most problematic aspects for WN.

travis

2003-10-08 18:13 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Frederick William I]I know it can be frustrating. I sympathize. But we do need good leaders, and if one has the patience to particpate in organizations and work to improve them IMO its more effective than just going out on your own

See my commentary to Oklahomaman on Tim McVeigh. Yes they do possess these traits, but I think they and these traits are one of the most problematic aspects for WN.[/QUOTE]

The problem with leadership skills is that they don't occur in individuals in equal proportion to their intellect. If someone intelligent also has leadership skills it's matter of coincidence, not the rule. I worked in the corporate world long enough to realize that leaders are people with charisma and gift-of-gab and I prefer not to take orders from someone with an IQ ten points below mine. I also realize my leadership skills are insufficient to run a ditch-digging crew and would not waste my time and others trying to start an organization.

There is no doubt that we need some good leaders, but if we did have any I would be more inclined to support them than to follow them.

Since infiltration is a foregone conclusion, the primary benifits of organizations is to offer leadership to it's followers and to have a mechanism to keep it's followers from engaging in counterproductive actions. I think you made a good point that McVeigh might not have done what he did under the supervision of good leadership, and I don't advocate violent illegal activism.

Unfortunately, the infiltration factor prevents our organizations from effectively using any ADL-like secretive intelligence maneouvers so we must work twice as hard to enlighten the masses. But fortunately for us, the truth is on our side, all we have to do is communicate effectively to our own (and all gentiles, for that matter).

My purpose in starting this thread was not to discourage organizations. We can't afford to put all our eggs in one basket and like our enemies, we need to pursue our objectives thru as many vehicles as we can, and leaderless resistance is the one that I intend to focus on.

WhiteUtopian

2003-10-08 22:45 | User Profile

The LR I was thinking of over the internet was lead by directives set down by the thread coordinators. The lone wolves are lead in legal activism, by seeing if any new directives have been given and continuing apon the same activity schedule if not. You must advertise this thread, it must be a well visited thread that is always growing because the participants always talk of there recent successes.

I am not opposed to violence, but it wouldn't be organized on the thread I speak of. Militant action should be reserved, it hurts our propaganda efforts. We want a good image. It would behoove many to prepare for conflict in case we fail though.

WhiteUtopian

travis

2003-10-08 22:54 | User Profile

[QUOTE=fucla]why not?

i am new to this board, but is this a generally held opinion around here or do most of the members view violence as a legitimate means to an end?[/QUOTE] I can only speak for myself. I do think violence is a legitimate means to an end in some cases. I don't denounce violence on moral grounds, I denounce it on strategic grounds.

The objective is to be successful in our endeavors, not to be morally right. Working within the system is strategically more benificial to us than getting us all labeled as terrorists.

We have to ask ourselves what is the best way to advance our cause, not whether we would be "right" in our minds for commiting violence and thus subjecting ourselves to intense negative scrutiny.

Currently our best bet is to recruit and educate intelligently and aggressively. If we can increase our numbers while we have the internet as a weapon, we won't have to use violence. Our numbers are too few to be successful in a violent approach.

Times are changing fast. We need to get smart and serious about the future of our people and be careful not to act counterproductively in venting our anger.

WhiteUtopian

2003-10-08 22:55 | User Profile

The flyers were more along the lines of, Facts on aids and blacks, non-white crime rates, white's being the world minority. No swastikas or offensive terms full of facts and their sources.

WhiteUtopian

2003-10-08 23:14 | User Profile

You got it Fucla.

travis

2003-10-08 23:22 | User Profile

[QUOTE=fucla]you dont view the use of violence as a possible method of galvanizing support or serving as a catalyst to motivate like minded individuals to action?

i understand that there will be the smearing of such actions by the media and so forth. perhaps, you are of the opinion that such actions may forever minimalize/marginalize such a movement.[/QUOTE] Do not underestimate the power of media. If an act of violence galvanizes support at this stage it will galvanize many times that amount in opposition.

The Jewish power of INFLUENCE is what got us in the fix we're in. Now that we have the internet to help us we have the opportunity to reverse it if we're smart and dilligent enough. Don't waste this opportunity, it wont be around long. We have to focus on increasing our numbers in the immediate future, if we don't no amount of violence on our part will save us.

Increase your influence. Use your influence. It's your most powerful weapon.

We are involved in a war of ideas.

travis

2003-10-09 10:51 | User Profile

Fucla,

It seems that some particants on this forum believe your contributions are less than sincere.

[url]http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=10344[/url]

I think this should be addressed before we continue this discussion.

Maximillian

2003-10-09 17:11 | User Profile

I'm going to assume for the moment that fucla isn't a troll.

The only people that would be attracted to our so-called "movement" through the use of violence would be criminals and undercover federal agents. No violence, no criminality.

This "final epic battle" stuff is more in line with fringe religious movements seeking an end-time apocalypse, not people interested in building a stable Western civilization. See Professor Kaplan's triumphalist evaluation of the rightwing's self-defeating apocalypse wish:

[url]http://www.wpunj.edu/cohss/old_cohss/sociology/sociology/kaplan1.htm[/url]

As Travis said, our battle is a battle of ideas. We have facts on our side, so that aspect is easy.

Maximillian

2003-10-09 17:32 | User Profile

Another thought on violence. Gov't aggression at Waco and Ruby Ridge created a great deal of anti-government resentment, and perhaps some sympathy in the public mind for the victims of that aggression, even though they were members of fringe movements. What happened?

Timothy McVeigh blowing up a day-care center full of babies is what happened. Media influence made sure we saw the babies he killed, as surely as it hid the babies we burned alive in Dresden. Not to mention that killing babies is, uh, wrong?

Maximillian

2003-10-09 18:04 | User Profile

fucla, it appears you are attempting to be an agent provacateur. Either that, or you are mistaking us for Basque separatists or something.

travis

2003-10-09 18:21 | User Profile

fucla, Goodbye, troll.

Uncle John

2003-10-09 21:56 | User Profile

The concepts of leaderless resistance and organized resistance are complementary. It seems to me that leaderless resistance activities will evolve into organized resistance as the Establishment fails.

I agree that the ELF has failed to meet its objectives. No revolutionary movement, organized or unorganized, can create a revolution out of thin air. One also must have the right issue at the right time.

[I]Oklahomaman wrote: The ELF isn't befret of leadership. Its leadership and political will are derived entirely from complex organizations like "respected" ecological schools and organizations that provide cues and a context for the ELF to act upon. There is an enormous amount of membership overlap between the organizations and the ELF.[/I]

This is exactly the way the concept is supposed to work. Transparent, above-ground political organizations offer cues, moral support, and publicize the 'propaganda of the deed' generated by the resistance units.

travis

2003-10-09 22:16 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Uncle John] Transparent, above-ground political organizations offer cues, moral support, and publicize the 'propaganda of the deed' generated by the resistance units.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure I understand you. Are you just observing ELF or suggesting we implement some of their tactics? What kinds of "deeds" would you advocate that the resistance units should undertake and that the organisation should publicize?

Uncle John

2003-10-09 22:40 | User Profile

[QUOTE=travis]I'm not sure I understand you. Are you just observing ELF or suggesting we implement some of their tactics? What kinds of "deeds" would you advocate that the resistance units should undertake and that the organisation should publicize?[/QUOTE]

I'm simply stating that the ELF provides the best current example of the leaderless resistance concept in action. Anyone who is interested in leaderless resistance as a strategy would do well to study closely the operations of the ELF.

Here is a quotation from Louis Beam's essay, "Leaderless Resistance": [QUOTE] Organs of information distribution such as newspapers, leaflets, computers, etc., which are widely available to all, keep each person informed of events, allowing for a planned response that will take many variations. No one need issue an order to anyone. Those idealists truly committed to the cause of freedom will act when they feel the time is ripe, or will take their cue from others who precede them. [B]While it is true that much could be said against this type of structure as a method of resistance, it must be kept in mind that Leaderless Resistance is a child of necessity. The alternatives to it have been shown to be unworkable or impractical.[/B] Leaderless Resistance has worked before in the American Revolution, and if the truly committed put it to use for themselves, it will work now. (emphasis added)[/QUOTE]

I take a slightly different view than Mr. Beam, because I believe Leaderless Resistance is an interim strategy, rather than an end in itself.

Here is another article on leaderless resistance: " 'Leaderless Resistance', Foundation Stone of the Dalit Sena" [url]http://www.dalitstan.org/sena/parivar/llessres.html[/url]

Okiereddust

2003-10-10 01:52 | User Profile

[QUOTE=fucla]what do you mean by 'agent provacateur?' seriously.

look, i am just posing some questions to the folks here. i tend to believe that violence does serve a purpose and does represent a legitimate means to an end. if you disagree, fine.[/QUOTE] FYI an "agent provoceteur" is someone, though appearing hardline, is in the service of the enemy, and who tries to entrap them into doing things that are counterproductively, crazy or illegal.

Definitions of an internet troll I'm sure are easily available through a search. See my sig for a definition of "traditional conservative".

Bardamu

2003-10-10 02:25 | User Profile

[QUOTE=fucla] i was invited here by someone who apparently thought I would fit in. [/QUOTE]

Yeah, and who might that be?

WhiteUtopian

2003-10-10 02:52 | User Profile

Fucla, I won't say that you can't use violence ever, I use the whole playbook. I use the playbook properly though, every plan has it's time when the circumstances are right and you would be wise to use the plan. Violence should be put off for sure, it is not it's time, one shouldn't put it too far in the future since the white race is shrinking. A troll, is a instigator of argument for the shear enjoyment of argument and messing with people.

WhiteUtopian

Maximillian

2003-10-10 04:13 | User Profile

My spelling of "provocateur" as "provacateur" was erroneous. I apologize if this caused any additional confusion. And also if you aren't one.

Walter Yannis

2003-10-10 15:41 | User Profile

[QUOTE=fucla]idistinctly tried to break the connection between violence and 'the movement' as you say. i am strictly seeking a discussion on the merits of violence as a legitimate means to an end.[/QUOTE]

There is no real question of whether violence can be morally justified, at least for us Americans.

We were born of violence, after all. The Declaration of Independence contains a succinct summation of the Natural Law arguments in favour of violent revolution when the "usurpations" are more than can be stood by self-respecting, free men. We've fought many wars - the biggest thus far with each other.

No, we Americans have a tradition of violence second to none. Clearly, violence is justifiable in some contexts.

We've always agreed on that. Lincoln specifically asserted the "right to revolution" in his arguments.

I point out that the circumstances of the American Revolution indicate that the moral threshhold for violence includes intereference with self rule of the people and unjust taxation. Given the judicial usurpation of politics, the refusal of the Feds to enforce our borders, and the absurdly complex Tax Code, I would say that many of our Founders would have found that threshhold long since reached.

Any absolute pacifism is an implicit rejection of our very founding.

Walter

Bardamu

2003-10-10 15:53 | User Profile

[QUOTE=fucla]i participate in another board that isnt focused on politics at all...but has a section where politics and other things can be discussed. i dont know the members name...just his handle and the handle at that site isnt listed in the member directory here.

i am using the same handle...so, if he sees this and wants to chime in..he can go right ahead.

[/QUOTE]

Okay, let me paraphrase what you have said and see if I have it right. You say that you were referred here by someone from another site whose handle is fucla. You are borrowing that name on OD. This same fucla, who now represents two people, is not listed in the membership directory of the other website. In other words, if I ask you the name of the website it will do no one any good to visit the website and look for fucla because fucla isn't listed there?

Hahaha. :thumbsup:

You are just a young woman honestly interested in our opinions on violence, i.e. terrorism. :whstl: :dung:

Bardamu

2003-10-10 19:05 | User Profile

The problem is quite simple. You arrive here on this website and immediately start provoking a conversation about violence. This leads people, rightfully, to suspect your intentions.

You are going to have a bad reaction anywhere from any political group where you go in and start trying to stir up discussions (also called conspiracies) of violence.

Don't blame us for your stupidity -- if that is what it is.

WhiteUtopian

2003-10-10 20:29 | User Profile

If you are going to organize violence fucla do it in secret chats and anonymous message boards and such, don't do it on a public forum. You could suggest how to train, or where to store weapons, but never suggest that people seriously consider killing somebody.

Uncle John

2003-10-13 00:21 | User Profile

This is the abstract of a paper from the [I]First Monday[/I] website.

[B]ABSTRACT

Leaderless resistance today by Simson L. Garfinkel[/B]

Leaderless Resistance is a strategy in which small groups (cells) and individuals fight an entrenched power through independent acts of violence and mayhem. The cells do not have any central coordination Ã¢â¬â they are leaderless Ã¢â¬â and they do not have explicit communications with one another. As a result, causes that employ Leaderless Resistance are themselves resistant to informers and traitors.

Leaderless Resistance was popularized by the anti-government activist Louis Beam as a technique for white nationalists to continue their struggle against the government of the United States in the face of overwhelming odds. Since then, Leaderless Resistance has become the de facto strategy of the violent fringe of the animal rights and environmental activist movements.

After introducing the concept and history of Leaderless Resistance, this paper explores the use of the technique by Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC), the Earth Liberation Front, and individual Islamic terrorists carrying out acts against U.S. interests. It argues that Leaderless Resistance is resistant to counterterrorism based on network analysis. Finally, this paper makes recommendations of ways that may be used to fight causes that employ Leaderless Resistance.

[url]http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue8_3/garfinkel/index.html[/url]

travis

2003-10-13 12:10 | User Profile

When I first googled "leaderless resistance" I found dozens of Jewish sites all trying to create the psychological link between violence and leaderless resistance, presumably to intimidate those who attempt to engage in it.

This tells me that if the Jews are so worried about it, it must be a good idea.

confederate_commando

2004-05-02 03:19 | User Profile

"Better grave than slave"

Leaderless Resistance An Essay by L. R. Beam

The concept of leaderless resistance was proposed by Col. Ulius Louis Amoss, who was the founder of International Service of Information Incorporated, located in Baltimore, Maryland. Col. Amoss died more than 15 years ago, but during his life he was a tireless opponent of Communism, as well as a skilled intelligence officer.

Col. Amoss first wrote of leaderless resistance on April 17, 1962. His theories of organization were primarily directed against the threat of eventual Communist takeover in the United States. The present writer, with the benefit of having lived many years beyond Col. Amoss, has taken his theories and expounded on them.

Col. Amoss feared the Communists. This author fears the federal government. Communism now represents a threat to no one in the United States, while federal tyranny represents a threat to EVERYONE. The writer has joyfully lived long enough to see the dying breaths of Communism, but may unhappily remain long enough to see the last dying gasps of freedom in America.

In the hope that, somehow, America can still produce the brave sons and daughters necessary to fight off ever-increasing persecution and oppression, this essay is offered. Frankly, it is too close to call at this point. Those who love liberty, and believe in freedom enough to fight for it, are rare today; but within the bosom of every once great nation, there remains secreted the pearls of former greatness.

They are there. I have looked into their sparkling eyes; sharing a brief moment in time with them as I passed through this life. Relished their friendship, endured their pain, and they mine. We are a band of brothers native to the soil, gaining strength one from another as we have rushed headlong into battle that all the weaker, timid men say we can not win. Perhaps not... but then again, perhaps we can. It's not over till the last freedom fighter is buried or imprisoned, or the same happens to those who would destroy their liberty.

Barring any cataclysmic events, the struggle will yet go on for years. The passage of time will make it clear to even the more slow among us that the government is the foremost threat to the life and liberty of the folk. The government will no doubt make today's oppressiveness look like grade school work compared to what they have planned in the future. Meanwhile, there are those of us who continue to hope that somehow the few can do what the many have not.

We are cognizant that before things get better they will certainly get worse as government shows a willingness to use ever more severe police state measures against dissidents. This changing situation makes it clear that those who oppose state repression must be prepared to alter, adapt, and modify their behavior, strategy, and tactics as circumstances warrant. Failure to consider new methods and implement them as necessary will make the government's efforts at suppression uncomplicated. It is the duty of every patriot to make the tyrant's life miserable. When one fails to do so he not only fails himself, but his people.

With this in mind, current methods of resistance to tyranny employed by those who love our race, culture, and heritage must pass a litmus test of soundness. Methods must be objectively measured as to their effectiveness, as well as to whether they make the government's intention of repression more possible or more difficult. Those not working to aid our objectives must be discarded, or the government benefits from our failure to do so.

As honest men who have banded together into groups or associations of a political or religious nature are falsely labeled "domestic terrorists" or "cultists" and suppressed, it will become necessary to consider other methods of organization, or as the case may very well call for: non- organization.

One should keep in mind that it is not in the government's interest to eliminate all groups. Some few must remain in order to perpetuate the smoke and mirrors for the masses that America is a "free democratic country" where dissent is allowed. Most organizations, however, that possess the potential for effective resistance will not be allowed to continue. Anyone who is so naive as to believe the most powerful government on earth will not crush any who pose a real threat to that power, should not be active, but rather at home studying political history.

The question as to who is to be left alone and who is not, will be answered by how groups and individuals deal with several factors such as: avoidance of conspiracy plots, rejection of feebleminded malcontents, insistence upon quality of the participants, avoidance of all contact with the front men for the federals - the news media - and, finally, camouflage (which can be defined as the ability to blend in the public's eye the more committed groups of resistance with mainstream "kosher" associations that are generally seen as harmless).

Primarily though, whether any organization is allowed to continue in the future will be a matter of how big a threat a group represents. Not a threat in terms of armed might or political ability, for there is none of either for the present, but rather, threat in terms of potentiality. It is potential the federals fear most. Whether that potential exists in an individual or group is incidental. The federals measure potential threat in terms of what might happen given a situation conducive to action on the part of a resistive organization or individual. Accurate intelligence gathering allows them to assess the potential. Showing one's hand before the bets are made is a sure way to lose.

The movement for freedom is rapidly approaching the point where, for many people, the option of belonging to a group will be non-existent. For others, group membership will be a viable option for only the immediate future. Eventually, and perhaps much sooner than most believe possible, the price paid for membership will exceed any perceived benefit. But for now, some of the groups that do exist often serve a useful purpose either for the newcomer who can be indoctrinated into the ideology of the struggle, or for generating positive propaganda to reach potential freedom fighters. It is sure that, for the most part, this struggle is rapidly becoming a matter of individual action, each of its participants making a private decision in the quietness of his heart to resist: to resist by any means necessary.

It is hard to know what others will do, for no man truly knows another man's heart. It is enough to know what one himself will do. A great teacher once said "know thyself." Few men really do, but let each of us promise ourselves not to go quietly to the fate our would-be masters have planned.

The concept of leaderless resistance is nothing less than a fundamental departure in theories of organization. The orthodox scheme of organization is diagrammatically represented by the pyramid, with the mass at the bottom and the leader at the top. This fundamental of organization is to be seen not only in armies, which are, of course, the best illustration of the pyramid structure, with the mass of soldiery (the privates) at the bottom responsible to corporals; who are in turn responsible to sergeants, and so on up the entire chain of command to the generals at the top. But the same structure is seen in corporations, ladies' garden clubs, and in our political system itself. This orthodox "pyramid" scheme of organization is to be seen basically in all existing political, social, and religious structures in the world today, from the Federal government to the Roman Catholic Church.

The Constitution of the United States, in the wisdom of the Founders, tried to sublimate the essential dictatorial nature pyramidal organization by dividing authority into three: executive, legislative, and judicial. But the pyramid remains essentially untouched.

This scheme of organization, the pyramid, is not only useless, but extremely dangerous for the participants when it is utilized in a resistance movement against state tyranny. Especially is this so in technologically advanced societies where electronic surveillance can often penetrate the structure, thus revealing its chain of command. Experience has revealed over and over again that anti-state political organizations utilizing this method of command and control are easy prey for government infiltration, entrapment, and destruction of the personnel involved. This has been seen repeatedly in the United States where pro-government infiltrators or agent provocateurs weasel their way into patriotic groups and destroy them from within.

In the pyramid form of organization, an infiltrator can destroy anything which is beneath his level of infiltration, and often those above him as well. If the traitor has infiltrated at the top, then the entire organization from the top down is compromised and may be traduced at will.

An alternative to the pyramid form of organization is the cell system. In the past, many political groups (both left and right) have used the cell system to further their objectives. Two examples will suffice. During the American Revolution, "committees of correspondence" were formed throughout the Thirteen Colonies. Their purpose was to subvert the government and thereby aid the cause of independence. The "Sons of Liberty," who made a name for themselves by dumping government taxed tea into the harbor at Boston, were the action arm of the committees of correspondence. Each committee was a secret cell that operated totally independently of the other cells. Information on the government was passed from committee to committee, from colony to colony, and then acted upon on a local basis. Yet even in those bygone days of poor communication, of weeks to months for a letter to be delivered, the committees, without any central direction whatsoever, were remarkably similar in tactics employed to resist government tyranny. It was, as the first American Patriots knew, totally unnecessary for anyone to give an order for anything. Information was made available to each committee, and each committee acted as it saw fit.

A recent example of the cell system taken from the left wing of politics are the Communists. The Communists, in order to get around the obvious problems involved in pyramidal organization, developed to an art the cell system. They had numerous independent cells which operated completely isolated from one another and particularly with no knowledge of each other, but were orchestrated together by a central headquarters. For instance, during WWII, in Washington, it is known that there were at least six secret Communist cells operating at high levels in the United States government (plus all the open Communists who were protected and promoted by President Roosevelt), however, only one of the cells was rooted out and destroyed. How many more actually were operating, no one can say for sure.

The Communist cells which operated in the U.S. until late 1991 under Soviet control could have at their command a leader who held a social position which appeared to be very lowly. He could be, for example, a busboy in a restaurant, but in reality a colonel or a general in the Soviet Secret Service, the KGB. Under him could be a number of cells, and a person active in one cell would almost never have knowledge of individuals who were active in other cells; in fact, the members of the other cells would be supporting that cell which was under attack and ordinarily would lend very strong support to it in many ways. This is at least part of the reason, no doubt, that whenever in the past Communists were attacked in this country, support for them sprang up in many unexpected places.

The effective and efficient operation of a cell system after the Communist model is, of course, dependent upon central direction, which means impressive organization, funding from the top, and outside support, all of which the Communists had. Obviously, American patriots have none of these things at the top or anywhere else, and so an effective cell organization based upon the Soviet system of operation is impossible.

Two things become clear from the above discussion. First, that the pyramid form of organization can be penetrated quite easily and it thus is not a sound method of organization in situations where the government has the resources and desire to penetrate the structure, which is the situation in this country. Secondly, that the normal qualifications for the cell structure based upon the Red model does not exist in the U.S. for patriots. This understood, the question arises "What method is left for those resisting state tyranny?"

The answer comes from Col. Amoss who proposed the "Phantom Cell" mode of organization which he described as Leaderless Resistance. A system of organization that is based upon the cell organization, but does not have any central control or direction, that is in fact almost identical to the methods used by the committees of correspondence during the American Revolution. Utilizing the Leaderless Resistance concept, all individuals and groups operate independently of each other, and never report to a central head- quarters or single leader for direction or instruction, as would those who belong to a typical pyramid organization.

At first glance, such a form of organization seems unrealistic, primarily because there appears to be no organization. The natural question thus arises as to how are the "Phantom Cells" and individuals to cooperate with each other when there is no inter-communication or central direction?

The answer to this question is that participants in a program of leaderless resistance through "Phantom Cell" or individual action must know exactly what they are doing and how to do it. It becomes the responsibility of the individual to acquire the necessary skills and information as to what is to be done. This is by no means as impractical as it appears, because it is certainly true that in any movement all persons involved have the same general outlook, are acquainted with the same philosophy, and generally react to given situations in similar ways. The previous history of the committees of correspondence during the American Revolution shows this to be true.

Since the entire purpose of leaderless resistance is to defeat state tyranny (at least in so far as this essay is concerned), all members of phantom cells or individuals will tend to react to objective events in the same way through usual tactics of resistance. Organs of information distribution such as newspapers, leaflets, computers, etc., which are widely available to all, keep each person informed of events, allowing for a planned response that will take many variations. No one need issue an order to anyone. Those idealists truly committed to the cause of freedom will act when they feel the time is ripe, or will take their cue from others who precede them. While it is true that much could be said against this kind of structure as a method of resistance, it must be kept in mind that leaderless resistance is a child of necessity. The alternatives to it have been shown to be unworkable or impractical. Leaderless resistance has worked before in the American Revolution, and if the truly committed put it to use themselves, it will work now.

It goes almost without saying that Leaderless Resistance leads to very small or even one-man cells of resistance. Those who join organizations to play "let's pretend" or who are "groupies" will quickly be weeded out. While for those who are serious about their opposition to federal despotism, this is exactly what is desired.

From the point of view of tyrants and would-be potentates in the federal bureaucracy and police agencies, nothing is more desirable than that those who oppose them be UNIFIED in their command structure, and that EVERY person who opposes them belong to a pyramid style group. Such groups and organizations are easy to kill. Especially in light of the fact that the Justice (sic) Department promised in 1987 that there would never be another group to oppose them that they did not have at least one informer in! These federal "friends of government" are ZOG or ADL intelligence agents. They gather information that can be used at the whim of a federal D.A. to prosecute. The line of battle has been drawn.

Patriots are REQUIRED, therefore, to make a conscious decision to either aid the government in its illegal spying (by continuing with old methods of organization and resistance), or to make the enemy's job more difficult by implementing effective countermeasures.

Now there will, no doubt, be mentally handicapped people out there who will state emphatically in their best red, white, and blue voice, while standing at a podium with an American flag draped in the background and a lone eagle soaring in the sky above, that, "So what if the government is spying? We are not violating any laws." Such crippled thinking by any serious person is the best example that there is a need for special education classes. The person making such a statement is totally out of contact with political reality in this country, and unfit for leadership of anything more than a dog sled in the Alaskan wilderness. The old "Born on the Fourth of July" mentality that has influenced so much of the Aryan-American Patriot's thinking in the past will not save him from the government in the future. "Reeducation" for non-thinkers of this kind will take place in the federal prison system where there are no flags or eagles, but an abundance of men who were "not violating any laws."

Most groups who "unify" their disparate associates into a single structure have short political lives. Therefore, those movement leaders constantly calling for unity of organization, rather than the desirable Unity of Purpose, usually fall into one of three categories:

They may not be sound political tacticians, but rather, just committed men who feel unity would help their cause, while not realizing that the government would greatly benefit from such efforts. The Federal objective, to imprison or destroy all who oppose them, is made easier in pyramid organizations. Or, perhaps, they do not fully understand the struggle they are involved in, and that the government they oppose has declared a state of war against those fighting for faith, folk, freedom, property and constitutional liberty. Those in power will use any means to rid themselves of opposition. The third class calling for unity, and let us hope this is the minority of the three, are men more desirous of the supposed power that a large organization would bestow, than of actually achieving their stated purpose. Conversely, the LAST thing federal snoops want, if they had any choice in the matter, is a thousand different small phantom cells opposing them. It is easy to see why. Such a situation is an intelligence nightmare for a government intent upon knowing everything they possibly can about those who oppose them. The Federals, able to amass overwhelming strength of numbers, manpower, resources, intelligence gathering, and capability at any given time, need only a focal point to direct their anger [ie Waco]. A single penetration of a pyramid style organization can lead to the destruction of the whole. Whereas, leaderless resistance presents no single opportunity for the Federals to destroy a significant portion of the resistance.

With the announcement of the Department of Justice (sic) that 300 FBI agents formerly assigned to watching Soviet spies in the U.S. (domestic counter-intelligence) are now to be used to "combat crime," the federal government is preparing the way for a major assault upon those persons opposed to their policies. Many anti-government groups dedicated to the preservation of the America of our Forefathers can expect shortly to feel thebrunt of a new federal assault upon liberty.

It is clear, therefore, that it is time to rethink traditional strategy and tactics when it comes to opposing state tyranny, where the rights now accepted by most as being inalienable will disappear. Let the coming night be filled with a thousand points of resistance. Like the fog which forms when conditions are right, and disappears when they are not, so must the resistance to tyranny be.

by Louis R. Beam Jr.

Kevin_O'Keeffe

2004-05-02 06:59 | User Profile

"Leaderless Resistance" strikes me as a false flag notion intended to persuade some unstable types to do something that, quite frankly, ought to be done, but doing it at a time that is premature, so that the government can use the excuse of the perpetrator's irresponsibility as a pretext to murder and/or imprison the rest of us. At such a time as this concept has any relevance, it will emerge spontaneously and soon evolve into Led Resistance, if you will.

travis

2004-05-02 10:15 | User Profile

Having a leader gives TPTB a target. There are many effective and legal measures that can be taken by independents as long as they use good judgement. Face it. We really don't have anyone to rally behind. Leaderless resistance (the legal kind) is an option we must exercise.

All Old Right

2004-05-02 12:58 | User Profile

Travis is right. There are so many "out of the box" variations that are possible. I remember the disinformation spewed out buy ZOG agents about leaderless resistance not being effective, or being outdated...next thing we know, all the powers that be are talking about is about how effective it is.

But, there are so many possibilities other than outlawed acts. The basic line of thought is not to wait for the other guy to get off his butt and do something productive. The action can morph into guerilla action if needed, or just stay political.

Why wait until you have a sack over your head, and a neocon thug pissing on you or mashing you, naked, against the body of your buddy...do something useful, while you still can.

Frederick William I

2004-05-03 23:37 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]"Leaderless Resistance" strikes me as a false flag notion intended to persuade some unstable types to do something that, quite frankly, ought to be done, but doing it at a time that is premature, so that the government can use the excuse of the perpetrator's irresponsibility as a pretext to murder and/or imprison the rest of us. At such a time as this concept has any relevance, it will emerge spontaneously and soon evolve into Led Resistance, if you will.[/QUOTE] I don't really buy the pure "false flag" notion, but I agree the concept of leaderless resistance is based on an erroneous understanding of human nature. Any military commander will tell you, in times of great stress, group solidarity is important, people need to be able to see, interact, and feed upon ther comrades. And for that a large, public, above-ground organization is essential.

All Old Right

2004-05-04 00:49 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Frederick William I]I don't really buy the pure "false flag" notion, but I agree the concept of leaderless resistance is based on an erroneous understanding of human nature. Any military commander will tell you, in times of great stress, group solidarity is important, people need to be able to see, interact, and feed upon ther comrades. And for that a large, public, above-ground organization is essential.

"Leaderless resistance" just strikes me as self-deception by those who prefer to weave delusions as to why their own and their orginzations inadequacies in the leadership function do not doom their cause, and require remedy.[/QUOTE] To each cell, the action is above ground. Any concept can remain pure if the only change is a smaller package, but the same dynamics occurring within. Think the resistance in Iraq knows each other? Think the bombers in Thailand have tea with the fighters in Bahgdad? Yet, they still energize each other. You guys get so wrapped up in books, I sometimes wonder if you see real life at all.

Frederick William I

2004-05-04 05:28 | User Profile

[QUOTE=All Old Right]To each cell, the action is above ground.

Now you're talking about cells. This is not leaderless resistance. Leaderless resistance is sort of like a multiplicity of people acting as secret agents, only even requiring even more self-direction, implementing their own plan of action based on the broad concepts given.

So you're changing the definition slightly

Any concept can remain pure if the only change is a smaller package, but the same dynamics occurring within. Think the resistance in Iraq knows each other? Think the bombers in Thailand have tea with the fighters in Bahgdad? Yet, they still energize each other.

They darn well know each other. Listen, people in all middle eastern countries tend to hate the west. They hear anti-American and anti-western ravings all the time. Yet all the action comes from highly organized, highly trained groups like Al Queda.

You guys get so wrapped up in books, I sometimes wonder if you see real life at all.[/QUOTE] If anything is a crazy idea cooked up by someone out of contact with the world, it is leaderless resistance.

You're the ones that think people are bookworms motivated to act just by little pamphlets and manifesto's, based on pure ideology, and nothing else.

travis

2004-05-04 10:55 | User Profile

The bottom line is that we have no leader and if we did he would be behind bars unders phony charges in no time. In the event that we had a leader that was actually recognised and taken seriously by the media, he would later turn out to be shill. The Jews have gone to great pains to ensure that the goyim have nobody to rally behind. They know we are mostly a bunch of stupid followers with little resolve of our own.

One form of leaderless resistance that many here including myself engage in is joining many forums and engaging in discussions with the sheep about what's really going on.

Do you, Frederick William do this too or just criticize those who do while waiting to be led?

grep14w

2004-05-04 12:07 | User Profile

I think there are some problems with "leaderless resistance":

In order to work, each "lone wolf" needs to be highly motivated, secretive, disciplined, resourceful, and self-sufficient. How many people do you know who could measure up to such standards? Not many, I'll warrant. How many of such are political? Even fewer.

Now imagine millions and millions of people like that, all taking action independently of each other, towards the same overall purpose and goals, without any organization or contact with each other. Even moire unlikely.

I'm not aware of any successful resistance that remained leaderless and unorganized for long. At most there was an early chaotic period where the resistance was leaderless, but once critical mass was realized, leadership and organization always emerges.

Usually when I hear talk of "leaderless resistance" it is people talking about lone wolves engaged in illegal or violent acts - thousands of Timothy McVeighs or Eric Rudolphs out there, causing havoc. That seems rather pointless, in current conditions, since such activity is either counterproductive (McVeigh) or at best ineffective (Rudolph) and ends up with the lone wolf dead or in prison. What good is the "propaganda of the deed" when the target audience - whites - have their minds in thrall to the zionist controlled media?

"Leaderless resistance" does make sense as a strategy for legal propaganda and other non-violent activity, however, in an attempt to build a white base by doing an end run around the media. There is no need for any central organization or leader if all you are doing is providing information and advice. A Yggdrasil, for instance, has arguably done more good in the long run towards creating awareness in whites as to what is going on, than any violent "lone wolf" activity.

It's pretty useless to engage in violent acts of resistance for whites when most whites don't understand what it is you are doing. Violent resistance is the last step, not the first, in any kind of revolution. The problem is we have too many impatient would-be revolutionaries out there, who have no patience for the long slow work of preparation that is necessary before any successful revolution.

It's why most people don't get involved in the first place: they rightly realize that the "movement" such as it is, is chock full of losers, immature ranters, dangerous fanatics, government agents or ngo infiltrators, impatient, violent, and other unsavory types liable to drag you into the gutter if you chose to get involved. Who needs that?

At best "leaderless resistance" is an attempt to make the best of a bad situation. At worst it simply perpetuates our current disfunctional situation. There's no harm in considering some aspects of "leaderless resistance" as viable until a better situation emerges, but I think it is more likely to be useful for nonviolent, legal activity rather than violent or criminal activity.

All Old Right

2004-05-04 21:58 | User Profile

Cells aren't relevant to leaderless resistance? Huh?

Some defeatist attitudes around here!! Know why? Cause it's a hell of a lot easier than actually doing something about problems. Sometimes I think maybe America is just get what the modern generations ask for, the same negativity they contribute.

Davey Crockett

2004-05-13 20:16 | User Profile

"March seperately.....strike together" --Robert Miles

Leaderless resistance is very effective:

No organization where a FBI plant can infiltrate.

No one or two leaders to take down to break up the resistance.

Conter-propaganda will be no easy task for the antis.

Difficult to demonize any one or two individual leaders.

With no major organization, activities will remain unnoticed by the antis much longer.

One-to-one discussions is far more effective than a newsletter from headquarters.

An organization can be easily sued, whereas, an unknown group will be difficult to find or apprehend.

An unkown resistence is far more terrifying than a resistance by a known organization.

Howard Campbell, Jr.

2005-03-06 09:13 | User Profile

Classic essay. Worth a read...

"Leaderless Resistance" An Essay by L. R. Beam

"Leaderless Resistance" -- Part Two

The answer comes from Col. Amoss who proposed the "Phantom Cell" mode of organization which he described as Leaderless Resistance. A system of organization that is based upon the cell organization, but does not have any central control or direction, that is in fact almost identical to the methods used by the committees of correspondence during the American Revolution. Utilizing the Leaderless Resistance concept, all individuals and groups operate independently of each other, and never report to a central headquarters or single leader for direction or instruction, as would those who belong to a typical pyramid organization.

They may not be sound political tacticians, but rather, just committed men who feel unity would help their cause, while not realizing that the government would greatly benefit from such efforts. The Federal objective, to imprison or destroy all who oppose them, is made easier in pyramid organizations.
Or, perhaps, they do not fully understand the struggle they are involved in, and that the government they oppose has declared a state of war against those fighting for faith, folk, freedom, property and constitutional liberty. Those in power will use any means to rid themselves of opposition.
The third class calling for unity, and let us hope this is the minority of the three, are men more desirous of the supposed power that a large organization would bestow, than of actually achieving their stated purpose.

Conversely, the LAST thing federal snoops want, if they had any choice in the matter, is a thousand different small phantom cells opposing them. It is easy to see why. Such a situation is an intelligence nightmare for a government intent upon knowing everything they possibly can about those who oppose them. The Federals, able to amass overwhelming strength of numbers, manpower, resources, intelligence gathering, and capability at any given time, need only a focal point to direct their anger [ie Waco]. A single penetration of a pyramid style organization can lead to the destruction of the whole. Whereas, leaderless resistance presents no single opportunity for the Federals to destroy a significant portion of the resistance.

Distribute Freely.

Petrocco

2005-03-12 13:59 | User Profile

Leaderless resistance will tend to mean we don't have large gatherings of strangers drinking beer and shouting slogans.

Good. We don't need those.

What we need is this forum or something like it and I'm grateful this forum is here. We need the free exchange of ideas and information.

There's a new idea taking root in the mind of Caucasus. It's as revolutionary as those immortal words of the Declaration of Independence because contemporary society is utterly opposed to it.

I've verbalized this idea in my sig. Here it is in message text so people can dissect it at will:

"It's my inalienable right to discriminate against others. I will block or disadvantage anyone's participation in anything I'm doing on any basis whatsoever, and claim God's sanction. Whoever would deny me this would enslave me, as only slaves have no permission to say no but must always say yes. Whoever moans about fairness or weeps for equality is a tyrant in sackcloth. I have the right to say no or I have no rights at all."

Those words go against everything contemporary society wants us to believe.

Only on this forum or others like it will such an idea find purchase.

There is value in providing a medium for revolutionary ideas. Message boards can function as the soil in which seeds are planted. Some respondents fertilize the soil, some water it, and some plant the seeds. All pluck the fruit from the vine.

This fruit is food for the mind of Caucasus.

And that mind is hungry.

We have our leaderless resistance right here on this forum. The free exchange of ideas and information has always been the one thing that tyrants fear most. What is political correctness but an attempt at mind control? What is TV but a mechanism for mind control? The enemies of freedom understand the importance of stifling the mind. Here on this forum a mind can get unstifled. Nothing is more important.

Thank you for being here when I needed you. I hope to return the favor by joining the conversation and maybe steering it now and then into uncharted waters.

Howard Campbell, Jr.

2005-05-21 01:10 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Uncle John]For an outstanding example of the leaderless resistance concept in action, see the Earth Liberation Front website ([url]www.earthliberationfront.com[/url]).[/QUOTE]

Good link, UJ. Implementing One-Man-Cells is a wise strategy when all membership outfits are utterly infiltrated and rotten with provocateurs...