>LEADERLESS RESISTANCE
>by Louis Beam
>
>The concept of Leaderless Resistance was proposed
>by Col. Julius Louis Amoss, who was the founder
>of International Service of Information Incorporated,
>located in Baltimore, Maryland. Col. Amoss died more
>than fifteen years ago, but during his life 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 take‑over
>in the United States. The present writer, with the benefit
>of having lived many years beyond Col. Amoss, has taken his
>theories and expounded upon 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 grasps 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.
>I have relished their friendship, endured their pain,
>and they mine.
>
>When we 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 vision for
>the masses that America is a "free democratic country"
>where dissent is allowed.
>
>[I THINK WE KNOW TO WHOM COMRADE BEAM REFERS. ‑ HC]
>
>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
>feeble minded 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 restive 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 nonexistent. 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
>of pyramidal organization by dividing authority into
>three: executive, legislative and judicial. But the
>pyramid remains essentially untouched.
>
>This scheme of organization, the pyramid,
>is however, 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 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 type 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 type of
>organization is the cell system. In
>the past, many political groups (both right
>and left) 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 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 these bygone days of poor
>communication, of weeks to months for a letter to
>be delivered, the committees without any central
>direction whatsoever, were remarkable similar in
>tactics employed to resist government tyranny. It
>was, as the first American patriots knew, totally
>unble 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 Communist, 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 World War II, 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 are active in another
>cell. The value of this is that while any one cell
>can be infiltrated, exposed or destroyed, such
>action will have no effect on the
>other cells; in fact, the members of the other
>cells will be supporting that cell which is
>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 efficient and effective 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 type of organization can be
>penetrated quite easily and it thus is not a sound
>method of organization in situations where the government
>as 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 headquarters or single leader
>for direction or instruction, as would those
>who belong to a typical pyramid organization.
>
>At first glance, such a type 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
>ndividuals to cooperate with each other when
>there is no intercommunication 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 show this to be true.
>
>Since the entire purpose of Leaderless Resistance
>is to defeat state tyranny (at least insofar 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 idealist 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 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 show to be unworkable or impractical.
>Leaderless Resistance has worked before in the American
>Revolution, and if the truly committed put it to use
>for 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 type group. Such groups and organizations
>are an easy kill. Especially in light of the fact
>that the Justice (sic) Department promised in 1987
>that there would never be another
>group that opposed them that they did not have
>at least one informer in. These federal "friends
>of government" are 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 enemie's job more
>difficult by implementing effective countermeasures.
>
>Now there will, no doubt, be mentally
>handicapped people out there who, while
>standing at a podium with an American
>flag draped in the background, and a lone
>eagle soaring in the sky above,
>will state emphatically in their best
>sounding red, white, and blue voice, "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
>any thing more than a dog sleigh in the
>Alaskan wilderness. The old "Born
>on the fourth of July" mentality that
>has influenced so much of the
>American patriot's thinking in the
>past will not save him from the government
>in the future. "Reeducation" for
>non‑thinkers of this type will take
>place in the federal prison system
>where there are no flags or eagles,
>but abundance of men who were "not
>violating any law."
>
>Most groups who "unify" their disparate
>associates into a single structurehave
>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 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
>would have, 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 nightmarefor a
>government intent upon knowing verything
>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. A single penetration of
>a pyramid type of 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 by the Department of
>Justice (sic) that 300 FBI agents formerly
>assigned to watching Soviet spies in the US
>(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
>the brunt 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 a modern police state. America
>is quickly moving into a long dark night of police
>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.
>