In my post immediately below this one I made a case for Liberty being the common goal for which we all strive, knowing that if Patriots in Cape Cod, Washington State, McAllen, et cetera all move toward the goal of Liberty at the same time, we will be an irresistable force. I made the statement ":That's the only Leader we need".
I need to clarify that statement.
In every single AO there will be a need for a Patriot who takes point and leads others to take and hold objectives, to close with, engage and take Enemies of Liberty out of the fight.
You will need local level combat leaders. And as I have said for more than 2 years now, if you are reading this blog, you'll probably be that local Leader by default. You are ahead of the curve when compared to others in your AO. Someone in your AO will need to be the first one into Harm's Way, and because you are who you are, you'll probably be "The One".
You may not need to stay in that position. There are probably combat vets in your AO who are behind the curve right now who will square their sh*t away and get up to speed quickly, and may be better tactical Leaders. If you trust them let them take point. If you are an Awakened lawyer with no small unit skills or experience, be smart enough to yield tasks to the right people as circumstances evolve.
So, for clarification: If we are all headed toward the North Star of Liberty, there is no need for a national top-down C&C. But when things get sporty, someone in your AO will have to take point. You should count on that person being you, at least in the beginning. Someone needs to be the first one to take what the enemy most wants. Someone will have to be the first to defend what the enemy most wants to take and hold. Someone will have to stand tall and throw the monkey wrench into OpFor's protocol.
Congratulations. You're it.
Kerodin
III
Thanks. And as Leader, my first act will be establish a Dog Appreciation Day. My next act will be feeding politicians to my dog.
ReplyDeleteYou wouldn't do that to CGD - it'd be indogmane.
DeleteK
Do my best.
ReplyDeletePickdog
III
Great !
ReplyDeleteThat's gonna be one fat dog.
ReplyDeleteMiss V
My first executive order will be that lawyers go first followed closely by career politicians (here in New Meixco about as corrupt as any place else [maybe more so]) and then by anyone else who does not subscribe to both the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Just saying .....someone needs to set the standard.
ReplyDeleteWorker,
DeleteWhat part of NM are you located in?
I'm in central NM.
You have no idea of how much it pains me to write the following:
ReplyDelete"Leaderless Resistance" is the absolutely wrong paradigm on which to build any organized opposition to a tyrannical government. Without any legitimizing and controlling authority, "Leaderless Resistance" degenerates into pointless murder and banditry, as the history of "The Order" illustrates. Furthermore, it invites defeat in detail by the security forces, which most assuredly would have the benefits of centralized command and intelligence.
If we look back to the history of the Revolution, we will see a nationwide chain of command from the Continental Congress on down.
If the Patriot movement were really serious, such a chain of command would be in place now.
"Leaderless Resistance" was discussed to death a decade and a half ago, and justly relegated to the dustbin.
The fact that we have made essentially no progress since then is extremely distressing.
As much as folks may want to disagree with the comment above, the writer is factually and historically correct.
DeleteThe issues being faced in this medium come from primarily a natural distrust of anyone (after all, the internet is basically anonymous), Ego, and the operational folly of announcing plans and organizational structure to OPFOR on an open channel.
I submit that those who are out in the AO's know how to network and contact each other and are doing so outside the parameters of the 'liberty movement blogosphere', and from that initiative, a nucleous of command may grow, first, within the several States, then regions, and then nationally.
That's how I see it.
I'll agree that Fabius is historically correct regarding the Continental Congress.
DeleteI disagree with: If the Patriot movement were really serious, such a chain of command would be in place now.
Leaders are currently taking point locally and building the machinery of wide-scale resistance, and these Leaders are either self-selecting because they realize that no one else will do the job, or they are being drafted by a few of their buddies or voted into command in more advanced units such as militias.
This is a natural evolution, and it will repeat at a National level in the same manner. One of the local groups will take an action that puts them on the front page of MSM, and by default the Leader of that group will evolve as a natural Leader on the national stage. Then others will follow.
That is how we will get a noble Leader who deserves the position, rather than an opportunist seeking to satisfy his inner cravings.
Someone like Dick Heller or Alan Gura could, by circumstance, find themselves drafted. James Okeefe. Someone like an Andrew Breitbart. Each of those folks, and many, many like them, are in the same trenches as are we, and it must be circumstances and natural selection that fills the first national "Leader" role, not a vote.
Kerodin
III
A consideration: Take Acton's famous quote, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men...There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it."
DeleteIf we apply this to the current discussions on the "who" and "how" of leadership, we might consider ensuring that a set of governances, ie, "law", ie, constitutional limitations (strictly interpreted by participants) becomes the framework of any infrastructure. Doing so will help allay the very, very valid concern regarding human nature; that is, that man can and will become corrupt if left unchecked.
This was the whole intent behind the unanimous Declaration, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution as ratified: Place checks and balances against the men placed in power, as well as the system adopted to govern (lead) the several States.
Any such move will require 'off-line' deliberations, else OPFOR will have their cake...and eat us, too.
We must move beyond the stumbling points brought out by many commenters and begin to solidify.
What happens if we don't?
Simply, nothing.
Trainer: How would you suggest the Liberty Movement proceed to the point of putting a "Leader" in place? Or if you are advocating simply solidification in the public sphere, what would you suggest?
DeleteUniting behind a Leader from the choices available in our public sphere would seem to be a non-starter to me. The people involved will fight the concept, before we ever get to topics of platform, short & long term goals, politics versus direct action, financing, et cetera.
On a semi-related note, despite the public brawls, I genuinely believe that "Our Community" has improved morale and focus over the last 2 years. Cohesion is strong within the various factions, if not between the factions. And our numbers have grown modestly, I get 2-3 folks each week who have just found our online sphere as a result of our combined efforts to grow. On top of that, from David's BofA action, to III to Liberty Platform, to PatComs, to the place Bill Nye & others are evolving the PatComs (quietly), and other examples, as a community we are "doing" and growing far more these days than we were even 2 years ago.
My point: My faith and confidence that the Liberty Movement is heading in the proper direction grows steadily.
K
Are you referring to a political or operational leader? One will not be the other, nor should be.
DeletePolitical leaders can be elected; operational leaders, if elected, will soon find themselves overwhelmed if they were chosen due to popularity versus demonstrated leadership traits and capabilities.
Politically, discussions such as these lay the foundation. Sooner or later, real political organization will come from private conversations and networking across the several States.
Operationally, as I've said on other blogs, the local AO's in each State should network with each other forming mutual defense/support alliances, eventually stretching across the State, and then forming a State alliance. Once (if ever) acheived, the State command element should make contact with like-minded groups in every State that borders their own.
All without the benefit of the open blogosphere. In other words, those of us reading the blogs should never, ever hear of it in this medium.
Once that's done...then a national network of operational groups can form to follow "the Commander's intent."
And that's it. Pure and simple.
Being somewhere different than the place one was a couple years ago (while that's nice) is really not the measure we're looking for...really. Not out in the AO's....at least the way I see it.
Q.Fabius
ReplyDeleteLet me preface my comment, I was not involved in the movement 15 years ago so I have no point of reference, however I have trained recently (2008-09) with some (2) of the "major" players of the militia movement circa 1995ish +/-.
The one thing I and others I trained with took away from the various training routines was an absolute, no doubt, bull-in-the- china shop mentality. There was no room for input, dissent if living in Nazi Germany 1942 would have lead to certain death.Unless somewhere between the time frame you are talking about and my experience (2008-09) these leaderless leaders had a come to Jesus moment, I have no idea who or what you are talking about.
I'm not ready to make a judgement call one way or the other, however my recent history with the leaderless leaders you are referring to is simply inaccurate.
Mozart
Thanks, Sam. You did a better job saying what I was trying to say in my comment on your earlier "leaderless resistance" post. Wish I had been clearer.
ReplyDeleteI have to say that, being disabled and untrained I doubt that I will be leading anyone, other than maybe by taking out a bit of the trash, when the time comes, but I know a few folks who have been in combat who I would gladly follow as far as I can. Or provide support and supply for, when I cannot.
Mozart,
ReplyDeletePlease let me re-phrase my comments. Perhaps I will be able to address what I think you were getting at in your second paragraph.
I'm not talking about leadership within local units. Most of these would be squad or at most platoon sized. What I say is missing is a command structure above these local units. There must be some central authority to conceive strategy and plan operations. I see no evidence that such an authority exists or is in the process of being put together.
The recent flap over CPX Foxtrot gave me brief hope that some sort of Patriot command had evolved while I had not been paying attention. When the so-called op order came out I was extremely disappointed. It certainly wasn't like any command post exercise that I had ever been involved with.
After all these decades, the Patriot movement should be able to conduct the following operation:
1. Pick a date in the near future. Keep the Enemy from finding out about it.
2. On that date at a certain Zulu time, have two men in business suits drive up to the county court house in every county in every state.
3. These two men will set up a card table and four folding chairs in a convenient spot near the court house. The men will place pocket copies of the Constitution and other patriotic and political literature on the table and give it out to passers-by. They will discuss the same with any of the public that wish to sit and talk.
4. Exactly three hours later, the two men will pack up their gear and drive away.
We would have demonstrated the capability for disciplined, simultaneous, and widespread action. The Enemy's security goons would have a stroke.
You young guys, go make it happen!