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.
Everyone will be part of the resistance till April 15th., then they will whip out the check book and pay homage to the overlords. --
Thank you for posting the excellent article. Who is John Galt? TEXIT!
THIS. This is the answer to all of the people, like me, who have wondered, and waited, for the great leader, or organizational structure, to emerge. Not only is he not going to burst onto the scene and energize the resistance, but if he did, it would only allow the state to paint a bullseye on the resistance. And if he did and survived for any period of time, we all know we should be entirely suspicious of him.
So for those of us who “only have a handful of people we can trust entirely to have our back,” congratulations! You’re a cell!
This essay could have been written yesterday, and not be more relevant. Fascinating.
This will be a strange war (speaking of the coming civil conflict on American soil); many of the self professed patriots have ensured that they and primarily only they will be fighting for past glory. It’s an odd situation, likely not to be physically fought by the much of the lower-middle and upper-middle classes, and the financially wealthy will determine how they want to distribute their support, on a case-by-case basis. It’s not that it’s not admirable that people would fight for restoration, because it is, but even if the battle is won, it seems that this is only in a war for survival, without the desire of taking back the former form of government on behalf of many Americans. There would be a lack of confidence and belief in those precepts. Basically, the warfare will highlight one of the big problems of today; hyperindividualism. Ask a person what their definition of a patriot is, and you’ll get a different answer almost consistently, some being related to intellectual ideas, some as to material pursuits, others are abstract and personalized. Perhaps that’s how it should be, but will likely point out that there’s no alignment, being such vast differences that have exponentially grown.
You’re correct in that the fight will be about survival. There is no way to restore anything. Your children’s future will hinge solely on how long you can keep them alive. In some cases, they will be too scattered for you to be of any help. Many of us are so old and debilitated that all we can do is resist in the face of force wherever that may be while surviving until dead. Assuming the republic were to be restored, what does one do about all the worthless breathers hell bent on destroying everything in their path. I can tell you with certainty no matter what we do we will not achieve anything positive. That doesn’t negate a call to arms for that is inevitable. On that note I am in agreement.
Eddy, we are in the same boat! Good luck to you!
I believe this is what Chris Kyle was trying to teach before he was murdered by a govt. op. Jan 6 a good example of top-down consequences.