Military Review

Lone Wolves, Teamless Resistance and Rebel Anarchism

Lone Wolves, Teamless Resistance and Rebel AnarchismThe concept of "command-free resistance" was developed by US intelligence officer Julius Louis Amoss in the 60s

Calculating the American communists, he determined that they had formed their network of small cells that were not connected with each other. In the existence of such a network, Louis Amoss saw a real threat to state security. The effectiveness of the communist activities was achieved through good conspiracy — if one cell could be found, the rest remained safe and connected their lobbies, both to help their colleagues who were in danger and to achieve their goals. The Communists of the United States were at that time representatives of all classes of society - from shopkeepers to senators, so the effect of their activities was very noticeable. So the impetus for the development of the theory and methods of waging network wars by the US military (Louis Amoss was followed by Arthur Sibrovski) was received from the US Communists, who were supported by the USSR special services.

In 1983, a member of the American Ku Klux Klan, Louis Bim, published an essay "Commandless Resistance," proposing to abandon any hierarchy, since the conventional pyramidal model of organization poses a serious threat to its members. Louis Bim was on the other side of the American system, but used its fruits to promote his ideas. As a more stable form, he proposed to create small groups that would not be connected with each other, and a propaganda body would perform the function of a mediator. Bim suggested introducing a two-tiered approach to the revolutionary struggle. One part would represent the ground "information agencies", which "distributed information using newspapers, leaflets, computers, etc.". Information authorities should not carry out any illegal actions, but rather provide guidance as propaganda is used for the purposes of recruitment. The second row would be composed of individual operators and small “phantom” cells that would conduct attacks. These people must be very careful, restrained, anonymous and not maintain any links with "ground" activists.

Network terrorism

After the attacks of 11 in New York in September, analysts began to more seriously consider network structures as a tool for the struggle of various terrorist groups. Also for the reconstruction of social networks began to use network analysis, aimed at identifying previously unknown sites. A similar analysis was used in armed conflicts - in the French army (under the leadership of Yves Godard, the Algerian underground was thus destroyed in 1955-57), as well as in the British special service MI6 against the Irish Republican Army (in exactly the same way and with success the Irish separatists fought against the UK).

At the present stage, hundreds of different organizations use the methodology of command-free resistance — US neo-Nazis, Islamic fundamentalists, radical ecologists, whom the US government also identifies as a terrorist organization (for example, Animal Liberation Front). Usually, all such organizations have a pronounced ideology and use their own media as a propaganda mouthpiece (previously - samizdat, now - Internet sites). Also, through their propaganda agencies, the cell informs their supporters about the goals and methods of the boycott campaign (this may be a list of objects for which the participants in autonomous cells themselves choose attacks or recommendations on organizing telephone calls to any campaign or public service). Often the organization lacks resources (money, technical equipment, weapons), brings it closer to another category of persons - the so-called lone wolves.

Loner wolves

According to the American experts on terrorism from the Stratfor geopolitical research center Fred Barton and Scott Stewart, because of their uniqueness, "lone wolves" present very serious challenges for law enforcement and state security professionals (see “The“ Lone Wolf ” Disconnect ”by Fred Burton and Scott Stuart,

A lone wolf is a person who acts on his own discretion, without orders or even communication with the organization. Theoretically, such a distance would prevent premature disclosure of attack plans through whistleblowers or technical means and therefore provide superior operational security.

A lone wolf is different from a “sleeping operative” because A sleeper is one who penetrates a target group or organization and does not take any action (sometimes for a long enough time) until a certain signal arrives or a number of events occur. The lone wolf is an autonomous activist who by his nature is already in the target group and is capable of self-activation at any time. In addition, we must remember that the "sleeping" or other hidden operative, trained and sent by the organization. The existence of this connection with the organization means that by definition the operative cannot be a lone wolf.

According to American analysts, the main problem of lone wolves may be the acquisition of skills for the successful conduct of terrorist activities. Although, on the other hand, combat training is not 100% necessary. For example, Joseph Paul Franklin committed a series of murders (perhaps about twenty in several states) and robberies, chose high-profile targets such as Vernon Jordan and Larry Flynt, although he only seriously injured both of them. Lack of proper experience can also be an obstacle for single wolves. The famous Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski managed to kill only three during his summer campaign 18. Part of the explosive devices that he created did not work. On the other hand, attempts to acquire weapons and ammunition on the side can be taken out by law enforcement agents.

There is also such a term as “radicalization of a loner”. A person is either already a loner and then radicalized, or he is motivated by external factors. As a rule, mentally unstable people are less worried about their security and are more prone to self-radicalization in the information vacuum than politically motivated people. Attempts to get feedback and support from one’s own kind lead to the creation of dynamic ideological intersections. Similar phenomena were seen among the teams of skinheads racists, radical Jews and Islamic fundamentalists.

Rebel Anarchism

Rebel anarchism is very close to these concepts of network wars. It is a revolutionary theory and practice within the anarchist movement itself. Historically, rebel anarchism may be adjacent to anarchosyndicalism, that is, formal anarchism, but within the framework of warfare. Insurgent anarchism can be called the fighting of Makhno on the territory of Ukraine. Nestor Makhno even before Mao understood the banal truth - "a rifle gives rise to power." Although Batko was partially engaged in workers and village committees, developing self-government, he then concentrated exclusively on armed struggle, denying any cooperation with both the Red Army and the puppet national-bourgeois Ukrainian regimes, be it the UPR (“UPR is our class enemy ", - said Makhno) or Directory.

In the modern world, insurrectionary anarchism rejects political programs and holding congresses, concentrating on actions of direct action, either peaceful or violent. Attack instead of pacifism, compromise, refusal, mediation, or compromise is the essence of insurgent anarchism. The work of the Italians, Luigi Galleani (organized a series of explosions in the United States, from where he was deported to 1919), and Alfredo Bonanno influenced the development of modern ideas of insurgent anarchism. The main theses of ideology are: 1) The state just will not disappear. Attack; 2) Self-organization, not a controlled rebellion, from rebellion to revolution; 3) Uncontrollability. The system fears not so much the acts of sabotage as their social distribution; 4) Permanent conflict instead of mediation with institutional forces; 5) Illegality, although rebellion does not mean bank robbery; 5) Informal organization; 6) Take the best from the teachings of individualism and communism.

From street network wars to coups d'état

In an era of asymmetric responses, when non-governmental actors influence the economy, politics, and sometimes change of state regimes, the questions of transforming urban groups into network clans and organizations remain topical.

John Sullivan, Los Angeles County Police Analyst, notes (for details, see his article "Urban Gangs Evoling as Criminal Netwar Actors", Small Wars and Insurgencies, Vol 11, No.1, Spring 2000; "Gangs, hooligans, and anarchists - the vanguard of netwar in the streets ") that small criminal groups could potentially turn into highly networked cartels, triads and terrorist groups. And given the rapid development of information technology, the very nature of the conflict and crimes is changing. Military historian Martin van Creveld exacerbates this prediction: "Future wars will be fought not by armies, but by small groups, which we call terrorists, gangsters and gangsters, and who will undoubtedly choose a more appropriate official name." Considering the evolutionary stages, the apogee of which is a network war, Sullivan identifies three generations of urban gangsters. In the past, criminal and armed groups could not claim the status of terrorists and did not fall under the classical definition of terrorism. The lowest level was typically a small group operating in the vicinity of one quarter. Further groupings start their criminal business. And then “mercenary intentions” are mixed with politics. At first, politicization takes place (for example, as in the case of the Sicilian Mafia). It can take place from the establishment of control over a quarter or district to co-opting into the ranks of the police structure and representatives of the authorities. Ultimately, a group with an active political agenda can destabilize the government. The second level is internationalization. By nature, most gangs remain at the local level, despite the large number (for example, the number of members of the Los Angeles multi-ethnic group "18 Street" reaches twenty thousand people). Others create clicks and confederations. Some spread their activities throughout the country. And others are becoming transnational and even international, with their branches in foreign countries. The third level is the experience and sophistication that determine the tactics and strategy of the organization, the use of technical means and weapons, the very structure of the organization.

According to American analyst Robert Bander, network informal organizations struggle much harder than conventional terrorists, and the development of such structures will lead to the emergence of so-called non-state "soldiers", and terrorism will have not political, as it was before, but system (For details, see C Robert J. Bunker, "The Terrorist: soldier of the future?" Special Warfare, vol. 10, No 1, Winter 1998).

Under the black flag of "direct democracy"

The revolutionary avant-garde of anarchists, nicknamed by journalists as the "Black Bloc", successfully use online tactics to stimulate political action. In a study conducted by the American Rand Corporation, among the network of potentially dangerous communities, where football hooligans, gangs and radical organizations fell, the anarchists took the highest rating in all indicators. High levels of politicization and internationalization, plus considerable experience at the level of evaluation between medium and high. Concern over the actions of anarchists is primarily sacred with a good lesson that social activists and anarchists presented to the US government in November-December 1999 during the WTO summit in Seattle. The losses incurred as a result of the unrest amounted to $ 3 million and were, together with the arrests of more than six hundred people, the results of the mistakes of the special services and the police. Street actions were held in parallel with international and virtual - the WTO website was attacked, spam was sent by e-mail, and the WTO headquarters in Geneva was rendered electricity-free as a result of the operational and defiant Green Renet Brigade campaign (Battle in Seattle: Strategy and Tactics Behind the WTO Protests, Washington, DC: The Maldon Institute, Dec. 16, 1999).

Where does power go?

“Power is shifting to small non-governmental actors who can organize themselves into recognizable networks more quickly than traditional government structures,” write John Arquila and David Ronfeldt in their book Preparing for Conflicts in the Information Age (In Athena’s Camp: Preparing for Conflict in the Information Age), published by Rand. Is this what Foucault wrote about, characterizing the finding of power as “everywhere and nowhere”, or is it transformed into something new?

Despite the fact that the network theory of the year has been developed for a relatively long time, the model of managing the world without a specific center of power is quite suitable for the mondialist club. President of the Council on Foreign Relations (СFR) Richard Haas in his programmatic article on the Future of the World titled “The Age of Nonpolarity: What Will Happen After the US Dominance”, published in the June issue of the Journal of International Relations ( 2008 / 3.html) writes that the main feature of international relations in the 21st century will be a world dominated not by one, two or several states, but rather by a multitude of actors who will represent different types of power. “At first glance,” writes the apologist of modern mondialism, “the modern world looks multipolar. The main forces - China, the EU, India, Japan, Russia and the United States are countries where more than half of the world's population lives, produces 75% of world GDP and spends 80% of world weapons costs ... However, the fundamental difference from the classical scheme of a multipolar world is nation states lose their monopoly on power. It moves to regional and global organizations, including non-governmental and corporations. ” Further, the author lists new regional players, which include not only countries, such as Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Nigeria, Egypt, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, Australia, etc., and not only global organizations like the IMF, UN, World Bank, but also a number of regional from the Arab League to the SCO. Separately allocated states and cities, for example. Uttar Pradesh in India and California in the United States, as well as cities such as New York or San Paolo. The list of candidates for power includes energy companies and media giants (al Jazeera, BBC, CNN), militia groups (Hamas, Hezbollah, Mahdi Army, Taliban), political parties, religious organizations and terrorist groups, as well as drug cartels and non-governmental organizations, the number of which includes specific funds such as "Doctors Without Borders" and "Greenpeace".

The author predicts the appearance of not a unipolar or bipolar world, but a multipolar system, where several leading authorities will determine the rules of the game and punish those who violate them. “The absence of poles complicates diplomacy,” Haas writes. The classic state associations and unions that exist at the moment are accustomed to certain threats and are preparing for them in advance. Therefore, in the near future they will face an inevitable crisis, and the building of relations between political actors will be more situationalist. Since the absence of poles will cause difficulties and dangers, Richard Haas, expressing concern about the deterioration of the system of international relations, proposes to exacerbate global integration, which will help establish stability. In fact, the president of CFR voiced the thoughts of his predecessors, who proposed the theory of convergence during the collapse of the USSR. Definitely, mondialists fear loosening of their power, therefore they are interested in integration as one of the key players in future world politics. On the other hand, the US actions on the world stage (military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, recognition of Kosovo’s independence, diplomatic intrigues with unrecognized republics and puppet states) show that they are not going to lose power from their hands and a soft transformation in favor of the interests of Washington.

Therefore, whatever the actors of network wars, whether a small radical group or a large concern, should be aware of global interests and the eternal geopolitical rules of struggle. We have to win this war.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. AVV
    AVV 30 January 2014 13: 15
    But our interests with the Shtatov’s do not fit in any way, so we need to bend our policies and push the West wherever possible !!!
  2. Same lech
    Same lech 30 January 2014 16: 10
    Yanukovych has already caved in under United States interests and is behaving in accordance with the above article.

    The question is, what is the further development of events according to the Ukrainian scenario?
  3. svp67
    svp67 30 January 2014 16: 17
    All this is interesting, but now we see something different ... in particular in Ukraine, what is happening is the result of long and painstaking work, and there is no talk about any masses of "lone wolves" there, it is an ORGANIZED mass of active combat units - "combatants" who have undergone some training and are able to act both independently and act as organizers and leaders - "partisans" ... It is very similar to what happened in Petrograd in OCTOBER 1917 ...
    1. invisibility
      invisibility 30 January 2014 17: 01
      Very unlike! In October 1917, power simply fell into the hands of the Bolsheviks. Everyone else felt it was a happiness to get rid of her. Like, let them take power, and we will write everything to them. But the Bolsheviks had a program that they began to carry out from the first day. And what program do maidanutyh have? EU? It's ridiculous!

      Off topic. Otherwise, two comments pop up, who knows?
      1. svp67
        svp67 30 January 2014 17: 05
        Quote: invisible
        Very unlike! In October 1917, power simply fell into the hands of the Bolsheviks.
        With this course of Yanukovych, namely the phased surrender of everyone and everything, the power in Ukraine will also "simply fall into the hands of the" militants "
      2. Black
        Black 30 January 2014 17: 06
        Quote: invisible
        It's funny!

        It would be funny if it were not so sad ....
        1. invisibility
          invisibility 30 January 2014 17: 27
          Yes, you are right.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      3. CTEPX
        CTEPX 30 January 2014 17: 50
        Quote: invisible
        Otherwise, two comments pop up, who knows?

        Explorer - he is such an explorer)).
    2. The comment was deleted.
  4. Stiletto
    Stiletto 30 January 2014 16: 29
    The article itself is very good in terms of disclosing the mechanism of the threat. However, localizing the consequences does not mean removing the roots of the problem itself. And for this just a universal "antidote" has not yet been invented.
  5. Black
    Black 30 January 2014 17: 02
    Big politics, geopolitics - did not become hands washed in spring water. A vile, ruthless, immoral world, no matter what guise it is dressed up, no matter what philanthropic slogans it strides.
    Whether they are network terrorists or lonely anarchists, they are all the product of an immensely "grabbing" civilization, a society subordinate to a handful of nonhumans eager to jump above God or become equal to him on Earth.
  6. mad
    mad 30 January 2014 18: 41
    Why aren't we adopting these technologies? Support the "Occupy Wall Street" in the United States, blacks rioting in London! Basques, Indians, Scots and Irish - these nations should have the right to self-determination ?! Europe-America will drown in its own shit and will be distracted from its supplies in our direction. And then you can conclude a non-aggression pact, how long can you play with one goal?
    1. officer29
      officer29 31 January 2014 00: 39
      About 30 years ago, we supported all sorts of organizations, movements and movements, which, as it seemed to us then, were being integrated into the socialist future of our planet. What came out of this disentangle today! request
  7. Vitaly Anisimov
    Vitaly Anisimov 30 January 2014 18: 52
    Quote: mad
    Why aren't we adopting these technologies? Support the "Occupy Wall Street" in the United States, blacks rioting in London! Basques, Indians, Scots and Irish - these nations should have the right to self-determination ?! Europe-America will drown in its own shit and will be distracted from its supplies in our direction. And then you can conclude a non-aggression pact, how long can you play with one goal?

    The spiritual core is not the same .. (we are like out of this world for them ..) The mysterious Russian soul is like a bone in their throat We "play" not by their rules, just! The whole world was practically subjugated .. The USSR was ruined ... AND THE RUSSIANS GO AGAIN ..))) An ineradicable nation ... fellow These are the "beasts" we are ... laughing
  8. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 30 January 2014 19: 06
    Hollywood, I love you! Unable to generate forecasts, experts began the commercial operation of cinema. What do we see in the film from which these amazing ideas are taken? Here is the miserable room in which the sewer man lives. He wasn’t washed for three days, he hadn’t cut for a hundred years, he gathered his clothes from the garbage can, on which he emerges from work. And suddenly!
    He opens the door in his dirty lair ... There is a hall of squares on 600, lined with stands with equipment and equipment for two or three million. A beard shaves off and clothes are removed - in front of us is a man of about forty, strong as steel and smart as a god. He shows the ability to wield all equipment and weapons, is free to navigate the world of computers and has comprehensive information about everything he needs. It’s familiar, right?
    Well, think about it. How much does it all cost? Weapons and equipment are expensive. But preparation is much more expensive! And it costs not only, and not even so much money. Its value cannot be measured in paper, it is thousands of hours of skilled labor! We also take into account the fact that out of a hundred pros, only one can be an effective pro instructor. Etc. etc....
    So, for real revolutions, maydauns are not suitable. Why do they still exist at all? Because Berkut did not receive the order. How long does it take for Berkut to stop grimacing and jumping? Hardly more than an hour. Well, it takes a week for the terribly out-of-date law enforcement agencies, drenched in contempt by the "networkers", to reliably cork into bunks all, absolutely all "actors" who did not have enough thought to escape the country. It's bullshit, not a revolution. In a country that can be brought down by maydauns, there is nothing that is truly valuable, and it is not an enemy.
    For a real attack, you need real people. And there are a lot of problems ... Okay. You pumped in billions, distracted instructors of all branches of the military for decades, trained many people, equipped them. Doesn't roll, they are not loners! What is rightly indicated in the article. What then? They must develop independently, without supervision. Oppa ... How's that? How to induce the crystallization process of well-rounded people who are ready to carry out the orders of the "actors"? After all, there is another small difficulty in this matter.
    A comprehensively developed person has a property that simply drives all these actors crazy, from here to both poles. It is incredibly hard to fool. An attempt to use such a person for his own shaggy purposes usually ends with the actor's intestines wound on a ladle. Very uncomfortable. You can sing this maydaun - go ruin your country, you will feel good, very good! Even if some miracle happens, and the 200 man will be able to charm real people (you don’t need the right to grind Yanukovych on asphalt anymore, even redundantly) then what? Realizing that they were weaned, these people are really angry, and then ...
    A person does not become real (and therefore truly dangerous, fit for a big deal) without the comprehensive development of the mind. And this leads to the impossibility of its use. A person needs to be developed in every way. And in order to insure yourself forever from revolutions inspired from without, you do not need to betray and deceive him. No need to snuggle in front of him like a pancake in a pan, boasting a tricked-out position and thieves' appropriated values. One must be honest with the person, and one must give him the freedom to decide. Then, with all these revolutions, Maidan, provocations and direct military aggression, a person will fully understand. With revolutions - himself, without attracting power. No problem.
    1. Grbear
      Grbear 31 January 2014 07: 19
      Michael3 +
      And in order to insure yourself forever from revolutions inspired from without, you do not need to betray and deceive him. No need to snuggle up to him like a pancake in a frying pan, boasting a tricked-out position and thieves' appropriated values

      Our oligarchs with the government, if they do not understand, will not only get "loners" and "actors". angry
  9. Black
    Black 30 January 2014 19: 09
    Quote: mad
    And why do not we adopt these technologies?

    Quote: MIKHAN
    The spiritual core is not that ..

    Oh, yes, I beg you !!!!! Nothing "human" is alien to us when "the trees were big". The USSR could afford different things.
    If you are about -NAS-present, then we would have enough strength to fight back. Let's stand on our feet, strengthen our "spiritual core" and pay off our debts a hundredfold!
    1. officer29
      officer29 31 January 2014 00: 45
      and repay the debts a hundredfold! [/ quote]
      First we need to collect the old ones, and not write them off billions!
  10. Vitaly Anisimov
    Vitaly Anisimov 30 January 2014 19: 45
    Quote: Chen
    Quote: mad
    And why do not we adopt these technologies?

    Quote: MIKHAN
    The spiritual core is not that ..

    Oh, yes, I beg you !!!!! Nothing "human" is alien to us when "the trees were big". The USSR could afford different things.
    If you are about -NAS-present, then we would have enough strength to fight back. Let's stand on our feet, strengthen our "spiritual core" and pay off our debts a hundredfold!

    And I'm talking about it .. (well, a little with pathos ..) And yet the underlying value system is different (with them ..) They could never understand us And we understood them (there were such comrades.) ..! Argue I don’t want this, my opinion is simple.
  11. starhina01
    starhina01 30 January 2014 20: 00
    In Europe America, lone wolves (for example, Breivik) have recently begun to appear; their whole point is that they begin to realize the injustice of the regime and fight it, although the methods are inadequate and splash out on ordinary citizens hi P.S. in these cases, the authorities themselves bring them (or psychological drama) hi
  12. Vitaly Anisimov
    Vitaly Anisimov 30 January 2014 20: 58
    Quote: starhina01
    In Europe America, lone wolves (for example, Breivik) have recently begun to appear; their whole point is that they begin to realize the injustice of the regime and fight it, although the methods are inadequate and splash out on ordinary citizens hi P.S. in these cases, the authorities themselves bring them (or psychological drama) hi

    Well, dear, I understood you perfectly what you are driving at ..)) and what are you leading .. bully (the authorities themselves bring them (or psychological drama)) It’s all about education! what in the childhood lays (first of all, parents and then the state ..) And if you let everything go by their own grades here maydaunas and Breiviki appear .. and we have mujahideen skinheads in Russia, etc. Liberalism however ..
  13. alone
    alone 30 January 2014 21: 32
    in order to raise the country to the right level, the people and authorities need to work and work purposefully for the interests of the state. It is impossible to raise the country by revolutions, pogroms and empty ambitions. For example, China !!
    1. Grbear
      Grbear 31 January 2014 07: 26
      in order to raise the country to the right level, the people and authorities must work and work purposefully for the interests of the state

      Does the state need the works of power and people? Nonsense. This people needs power and a state that cares about it. And the task of the people is to create tools for managing them (although they will always mind, especially power).
  14. shelva
    shelva 30 January 2014 23: 55
    There were always people who were not satisfied with the existing order. They could be controlled or self-controlled by someone. They could gather in small groups, large ones, or remain alone. And the reasons for their appearance can be very different, but more often - social and less often - political. Patients of mental hospitals should not be taken into account - "special article".
    You can deal with this phenomenon using their own methods, which have been sufficiently studied by the special services.