> http://www.louisbeam.com/leaderless.htm
>
> THE SEDITIONIST
>
> ISSUE 12, FEBRUARY 1992: FINAL EDITION
> LEADERLESS RESISTANCE
>
> 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 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 sparking 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 head long into a battle that all the weaker, timid men,
> say we can not win. Perhaps...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 freedom.
>
> 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 vision 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 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 loose.
>
> 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 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 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 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 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 individuals
> 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 pervious 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
> 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 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 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. 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.
>
> "If every person has the right to defend--even by force--his person,
> his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men
> have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these
> rights constantly." ---The Law. Frederick Bastiat Paris, 1850.
>
> Editors Note: This essay was written by Louis Beam in 1983 and
> published at that time. Republished above in 1992. I do not take
> credit for the theories expounded upon here, Col. Amoss deserves the
> credit for his brilliant analysis and insightful thinking.