Agitational gerilia. Part of 2

The essence of advocacy is such that it can be carried out by one person. It is obvious, however, that the forces of such lone activists, no matter how loyal they are to the cause of the liberation movement, are not enough to effectively fight against anti-people regimes. In this regard, the question of the ORGANIZATION is very important for the participants of the agitation and propaganda campaign.

It should be understood that the creation of an organization is not an end in itself. This step, first of all, aims to unite forces and coordinate the actions of activists in the framework of a common cause. It should also be understood that the strength of the organization is not in its size, but in its structure and compliance of this structure with the goals for which the organization is created.

At present, technical means, as well as the use of international experience, allow anti-people regimes to carry out a sufficiently effective control over the activities of their citizens. In addition, the population, morally degraded under the influence of consumer values ​​or fearful of repressive measures, behaves, for the most part, passively. In this situation, the creation and functioning of a large organization is inexpedient and impossible, since it is impossible to plan the creation of a mass association without having at least a hypothetical support for the masses themselves.

It is also important that the mass organizations themselves managed to discredit themselves in the eyes of the population. Since to support the activities of a large organization, more often than not, substantial financial resources are required, such organizations often turned out to depend on their sponsors - as a rule, opposing groups of the anti-people regimes themselves. This, as well as various "growing pains" of mass organizations - the struggle for supreme leadership over them, conflicts of different internal currents - contributed to the decline of their authority and actual significance.

Finally, one should remember about such organic shortcomings of any large organization, such as inactivity, resource-intensiveness, bureaucracy and nomenclature within the organization. These shortcomings, which begin to manifest themselves in the period of the quantitative growth of the organization, reach their peak during the period of its highest power, provoking a loss of influence and the decline of the organization.

At the same time, the greatest effect from the organization’s activities is achieved precisely in the period preceding growth; Moreover, it is this effect that is the cause of the growth of the organization, attracting the masses of sympathizers into its ranks. Thus, the highest achievements of a “mass” organization are accomplished at a time when its organizing core has not yet acquired a ballast of “extra people” - that is, before the “mass” organization becomes a mass in the proper sense of the word.

Given all the above, activists should abandon attempts to build a large mass organization in favor of a different form. Considering the small number of activists themselves, as well as the capabilities of modern technical means, this form is represented by a widely ramified structure consisting of autonomous units-cells.

AGITATION GURILYA

2 Part: ACTIVIST CELL

Obviously, a cell means a small union of activists; Probably, the largest number of such a union should not, and can not exceed 10-12 people, because the search and collection of even such a small number of activists is fraught with many difficulties.

To a greater extent, a number of practical considerations, in the first place: compactness, stealth and easy handling, are in favor of the small cell number — which is obvious. Within a small association, it is much easier to detect such negative phenomena as the unreliability or negligence of participants, and take appropriate measures. On the other hand, a small number of participants makes it possible to more effectively distribute roles between them and establish interaction, as well as to more easily overcome the resulting friction. Even with the small means of each activist individually, in the sum, the cell has relatively large resources and the ability to distribute them in space and time.

At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the shortcomings to which the small number of organizations leads: a small number of participants and material resources limit the possibility of holding large actions for the cell; also, the requirements for each participant are increased, separately. Finally, a small number, in itself, determines the absence of the organization’s “safety margin”: the loss of even one participant will have a very significant effect on the plans and capabilities of the cell; and the loss of several is, in fact, equivalent to the disintegration of the cell.

However, these shortcomings, although they do occur, are not as significant under current conditions as the shortcomings of mass organizations. In addition, the effect of these shortcomings can be further reduced by merging the cells themselves into a larger structure, which will also be considered.

Now that the advantages and disadvantages of the cell as the main organizing unit of the agitation and propaganda struggle have been identified, we can proceed to consider the principles of its structure.

Due to the specific nature of the tasks of the cell and the limitations on its size, activists should not waste time on fruitless attempts to give the cell a strictly ordered formal structure. Distribution of roles between the participants is much more expedient to make before each new action in a new way, taking into account new goals and objectives, external conditions and the available forces and resources.

Any attempts to usurp the rights of control of a cell, due to the extremely small number of the latter, will have the most disastrous consequences for it. In this regard, the most rational way of managing a cell strategy is collegial — that is, a simple vote of participants on a particular issue; at the same time, every activist in the cell should have the right to initiate and submit proposals. Tactical leaders (for example, to carry out any action) should be chosen by voting in advance; within the framework of the event, for the management of which the head was chosen, submission to him must be unquestioning.

It is important to understand that collegial management does not at all eliminate the possibility of conflict within the cell, it only translates it into a different plane: personal relations between activists participating in the cell. Therefore, the cell itself is required to pay special attention to the personal qualities of its members and candidates; activists, if they are truly committed to the cause of the liberation movement, should get rid of their unworthy tendency to assert themselves at all costs and be able to look at things from the actual side, eliminating themselves from emotions.

The operational capabilities of a cell, in many respects, depend on its material resources. It is important to note that the material support of the cell should be carried out only at the expense of the funds of its members, the shares of their financial contribution must necessarily be equal. Purchase of all materials and / or equipment required for carrying out any action must be carried out in advance. Naturally, all the necessary purchases should be made at the optimum price-quality ratio, and the “accounting” of the cell should be fully known to all its participants.

On the other hand, to carry out long-term storage of large sums of money and evidence of the costs of the cell, if possible, should not be, for conspiracy considerations. For the same reasons, it is necessary to minimize relations with various financial institutions, as well as to avoid consistency in relations with suppliers of materials, equipment and services.

It should be mentioned about such a subject as the “form” of the organization — that is, its “appearance”: name, symbolism, etc. Activists should refuse to give their cell any real form at all, since it is an extremely harmful element. For agents and supporters of anti-people regimes, the “form” of an organization is a unmasking element that facilitates its search and liquidation. The very members of the organization, excessive concerns about its “form” distract from the main activity - in this regard, activists should avoid such ugly things as ritualization, wearing distinctive symbols, etc.

However, activists should not forget about the opportunities provided by the use of imaginary "forms": camouflage for various official organizations, the creation of organizations, "dummies", consisting of one symbolism, etc. Naturally, the use of such methods is permissible only in the case of real need. We must also not forget that deception in working with the population is the prerogative of anti-people regimes, unworthy of the cause of the liberation movement.

All these requirements — lack of structure, “form”, leaders, self-sufficiency — all are designed to ensure the autonomy and survivability of the cell in the face of opposition to anti-people regimes. It should, however, be remembered that such an informal organization can act effectively only if each of its participants, individually, is fully committed to the common cause and works with maximum efficiency.

It is also important to note that the cell as such does not necessarily have to be a single “team”, constantly working together - in this case, it is a network for the exchange of information, initiatives and materials between lone activists. The cell participants themselves do not have to maintain constant and / or direct contact between themselves; they can be members of other organizations; they are not even geographically close to each other, limited to technical means of communication.

That is, there is a transformation of a closed autonomous unit - into a widely ramified network, possibly a “multi-layered” one, consisting of an unknown number of subnets, single activists and random elements (sympathizers, intermediaries, etc.).

It is obvious that such a network, having an arbitrary and unknown number of elements, cannot have a clear structure, no leader, no control at all. However, it is not deeply obvious that such a network possesses simply colossal vitality and enormous material and creative possibilities.

Naturally, such a non-structural network is not an organization in the usual sense of the word. Each member of the network is directly familiar with only a few other elements of it; Physical exchange of materials is difficult and possible only on the scale of the “subnet” cell (and even then, not always). Transmission of messages from the end to the end of such a network is possible only through a chain of elements, which takes time and leads to distortions; in general, the organization is clumsy.

On the other hand, this “organization” - which, from a fundamental point of view, is not such - in the case of a sufficiently large number, is almost invulnerable. Even in the case of a dissection of the network, each of the resulting segments will retain a very significant supply of resources to continue the struggle. In addition, the extensive branching of the network allows you to hold shares of enormous scale.

However, such a network is not “absolute weaponsIn the hands of activists. The lack of actual management leads to the need for a throw-in of initiatives — which may well not be supported. Ignorance of the true scale of the network leads to the fact that all large-scale actions are planned, in fact, blindly. Messages on the long path from the addressee to the addressee are distorted. The loss of some elements that are peculiar “gateways” (using the terminology of computer networks) between subnets can lead to the loss of communication with many activists. Finally, building a truly large-scale network can take a lot of time.

But the most significant drawback of such a network is its dependence on a subjective factor — on each individual activist. The network will be functional only when each participant is active. The apathy, lack of initiative, the inactivity of every activist involved in the network directly and adversely affects the activities of the network as a whole. In this regard, it is necessary to mention once again the high responsibility that each person who joined the ranks of the liberation movement imposes on himself.

However, with all its flaws, the Network consisting of cells and single-handed activists (which will be designated that way in the future) is the form of organization that most closely matches the current realities of the world and the goals of the liberation movement. With full dedication from their side, as well as maintaining loyalty to the principles of the liberation movement, the Network is a powerful tool for the agitation and propaganda struggle.

Now that the principles of the ORGANIZATION, within which activists are to act, are defined, the keystone of this organization - ACTIVIST itself should be considered in more detail. This is the next section.