Expected Reading List

Why the Leninists will win
http://www.ainfos.ca/06/dec/ainfos00127.html

Got the Hallow Points for the Snitches
http://rogueimc.org/en/2008/11/14099.shtml

The War at Home
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2008/07/377363.shtml

Manifesto of Libertarian Communism
http://www.afed.org.uk/ace/mlc.html

Civilization and It's Latest Discontents
http://www.prole.info/texts/civilization.html

The Tyranny of Structurelessness
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/hist_texts/structurelessness.html

Terrorism
http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1911/11/tia09.htm

The Anarchist Tension
http://www.geocities.com/kk_abacus/ioaa/tension.html

You Can't Blow Up A Social Relationship
http://libcom.org/library/you-cant-blow-up-social-relationship

Interview with Subcomandante Marcos
http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/mexico/sp000654.txt

On Organization
http://www.infoshop.org/library/Errico_Malatesta:Anarchism_and_Organisation

On Syndicalism
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/inter/malatesta_synd.html



An Anarchist FAQ
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/

Anarchism in Action
http://aia.mahost.org/

In additions to the zines.

Got the Hallow Points for the Snitches

Got the Hallow Points for the Snitches
confronting
snitch culture:
historical examples and current proposals

“Homeboy was talking to the po-po, we had to let everybody that was
a no-no, he thought he was on the low low, and was surprised when I
hit him with the fou(4)-fou(4)”
-Uncle Murda, “Bullet, Bullet”

With the growing wave of repression
by the state towards direct action oriented
struggles, radicals have been bombarded
with the shameful concern of snitches and
informants. In a struggle which is purely
of choice and individual realization, as opposed
to a rich cultural or family heritage, a
valor dedication to one’s community has been
shamefully neglected by some. The following
article provides a brief look into how radical
communities of the past have approached
traitors to the community, while at the same
time proposing how more unique struggles
can learn from it. It is an excerpt from the
zine; “Got the Hallow Points for the Snitches”.
To order a copy of this pamphlet, you
can contact the email below:
thegreenscare@gmail.com
As Anarchists, we fight in the face
of what appears to be insurmountable odds;
our project of liberation is the natural enemy
of the culture of authority and capitalism we
now live under. Considering that our revolt
against the institutions of domination are not
isolated pockets of resistance, and that we do
not live separately from the rest of society,
our communities are inevitably affected --and
perhaps infected-- by the culture we are aiming
to destroy.
Snitch Culture is not exclusive to Communities
in Resistance, but is one thread of
control in the larger social fabric of America.
Those in power want people to snitch on each
other-- especially those from communities
that are targeted in particular by the government
and are therefore more vulnerable to
Snitch Culture-- because snitching works to
create a climate of fear and mistrust that can
fragment the populations that threaten the
structures of power.

For example, in the war against the poor and people of
color --those that fill the prisons of America-- the State promotes
snitching as a means to perpetuate crime by creating a ‘revolving
door’ in which low-level drug dealers, addicts, and other petty
offenders are arrested and released with orders to provide more
information in order to create more arrests in order to fill more
prisons. The effects of this cycle of snitch-and-prison are that
entire communities are torn apart, families broken up, and the
United States has the largest prison population in the world.
In Anarchist circles everyone knows that Snitch Culture
breaks solidarity among activists and paralyzes our ability to wage
effective resistance. Though there is much complaining and handwringing
about the divisive role snitches play in our communities,
we have engaged in very little constructive action about this
serious and persistent problem. This zine is an attempt to educate
and foster dialogue in our communities in order to develop effective
strategies for dealing with snitches and to forge a resistance
that can withstand the attacks of power.
To start, we must realize that Snitch Culture is not a new
phenomena or only particular to Anarchists, and that many Communities
of Resistance in North America and Europe have come
up with a number of different ways –some more effective than
others-- to deal with Snitch Culture while maintaining their core
values.
There are three components --perhaps of unequal importance--
that resistance groups and others have traditionally used
to determine their response to snitches: practicality, the agreeability
to the core values of the group, and tactical benefit.
The ultra-militant Red Army Faction (RAF) in West Germany
tried to use something called “Revolutionary Discipline” to respond
to a growing number of snitches. This discipline drew heavily on
the promise of immediate personal reprisals for snitching. Snitches
both in jail and out were subject to vicious beatings and in one
case, a snitch was blinded. This type of response was practical for
the RAF because they had a number of supporters both inside and
outside of jail. Most snitches could be easily located and jumped
by supporters or actual RAF members. It was agreeable to the
RAF because it fit in with their concepts of both Revolutionary Discipline
and a glorification of violence. However, it did not prove to
be an effective tactic for reducing the impact of snitches. By the
end of the RAF’s existence, snitches were an important part of the
State’s efforts to not only disrupt, but to arrest numerous members
of the RAF-- including its leadership.

The tactics they employed did not seem to reduce
Snitch Culture within their own ranks or of other contemporary
militant radical organizations in West Germany.
The Weather Underground (WU) also had an
extreme but somewhat different strategy when confronting
the problem of snitches. The WU used terror as a
way to stop the effectiveness of snitches. They required
all members to give the names and addresses of close
friends and family and were explicitly warned --sometimes
while on psychedelic drugs-- that if they snitched,
they and their family would be subject to violent reprisals.
In one rambling message from the WU --written
after an AIM snitch took the stand against former
comrades-- published in radical periodicals at the time
and believed to have been written by Bernadine Dorn,
stated that the WU was not afraid to support the “[Charlie]
Manson approach” when it came to “bringing hell on
Earth for pig-snitches.” It went into detail about how violently
the WU would deal with snitches and their friends
and family. This approach ended up being completely
impractical for the WU because they had neither
the members nor the support to pull off such grandiose
plans. By the nature of being underground, they
were marginalized and had little ability to strike out at
snitches in any way. In fact, there is no evidence that
any snitch on the WU was ever even bothered by the
group. Whether this approach of terror was agreeable to
the core values of the WU is hard to say since the WU
position on violence and acceptable violence seemed to
change constantly. It was however, consistent with the
ultra-violent streak in the core leadership of the group.
As a tactic is was counter-productive-- it caused considerable
debate in radical circles and most of it was negative.
The cops also had little trouble turning folks associated
with the WU, and a number of the most rhetorically
violent members of the leadership either turned themselves
in, or cut deals.
No resistance group in recent times can compare
to the Black Panther Party (BPP) --and its factions-- in
terms of being completely infiltrated by snitches as well
as law enforcement! The BPP, in the popular mind, is
associated with violence and ultra-militancy. The image
of a tough leather-clad Black Panther carrying a shotgun
is an ever present part of the iconography of the radical
left. One would think that the BPP’s approach to snitches
would be similar to the RAF and the WU; however, they
took a completely different approach and relied on community
shame as a mechanism for dealing with snitches.
This was a somewhat practical approach because they
had a number of widely circulating publications and
outlets to get information about snitches out. They also
were followed closely by the radical left and had access
to a staggering number of mediums to report to the
broader cultures of resistance. It was certainly agreeable
to the ideals of the BPP, which claimed to be the voice of
specific communities and saw itself as a communitybased
organization. Tactically, the record speaks for
itself. There were a large number of snitches, many
who were not named until well after the fall of the BPP,
and the government --which was particularly brutal and
repressive in dealing with the BPP-- never had trouble
turning members affiliated with the BPP against the organization.
In Chicago, for example, the number of snitches was nearly epidemic.
While the above examples are not particularly
positive, they illustrate some of the difficulties we face
in dealing with snitches today in our own communities
--and thus the need for dialogue. However, groups like
the Irish Republican Army (IRA), the Basque Separatists
(ETA), and namely the WWII French Resistance
Fighters (The Maquis), are positive examples of Communities
in Resistance that dealt successfully with
Snitch Culture. The Maquis, according to Gestapo/Vichy
records, show that less than 5% of all detainees
were “cooperative”. William Volman, in his book, Rising
Up and Rising Down, says that the Spanish --and
French-- governments have “never been successful
in creating a culture of informants”. The key is to
learn from the mistakes of the past and forge our own
response to snitches that is practical, agreeable to our
core values, and tactically beneficial.
To understand why these groups --IRA, ETA
and the Maquis-- were successful, we have to look
not only at their formal and informal policies regarding
snitches, but at the movements as a whole. There
is precious little written in English about ETA, but from
the few sources available, Clean Hands, Dirty Wars,
it seems that ETA has been able to avoid widespread
Snitch Culture by the very nature of its resistance. It is
heavily family- and community-based; nearly everyone
knows everyone else and every Basque community has
been affected by the draconian repression of the Madrid-
State. Since most Basque are deeply attached to
their homeland, even the non-nationalists, the idea of
snitching on neighbors and comrades is wrought with
practical difficulties. Raising the stakes for squealing,
neighbors, co-workers and friends would react negatively
to the appearance of a snitch, and so anyone
caught snitching would not only have to create a new
social circle, but relocate.

The IRA put a tremendous amount of energy
into prisoner support. In fact it was estimated by Gerald
O’Mann that nearly a 1/3 of all money raised by the IRA
was spent directly on prisoner support. The Irish nationalist
concept of prison support is more extensive than ours
and includes family support, the glorification of prisoners,
treating ex-prisoners like returning veterans, as well as
in-jail support. An IRA prisoner was even elected to parliament
while still in jail! This support seriously diluted the
benefits of snitching and the consequences (often violent
reprisals) greatly outweighed the benefits. The IRA, more
than any other group, was successful in reducing the punitive
nature of incarceration.
The Maquis used a combination of violent attacks
on snitches as well as “reframing” propaganda. There is
much written about the beatings and shootings carried out
by Maquis, but the historic record actually shows that the
Maquis ability to carry out such attacks was extremely limited.
They made use of very public reprisals, in no doubt
due to the monopoly on news by the occupiers, which,
in turn, increased their effectiveness. However, the use
of violence can only be seen as a partial explanation for
the success of the Maquis in resisting Snitch Culture. The
Maquis used an effective propaganda that was based on
the idea that they soon would be victorious, which made
less attractive the cooperation with illegitimate authorities
that would soon be removed. What is surprising when one
reads the memoirs of resistance fighters and the historical
accounts of everyday French living under occupation is
their firm and unshakeable belief that they would be liberated.
In fact, most French not only believed they would be
liberated, but liberated by the combined French Resistance
forces. This belief gave legitimacy to the Maquis and made
crossing them a more consequential prospect, since they
believed they would come to power-- which in fact many
did.
In our own present Communities of Resistance
there seems to be no clear theory or discipline regarding
the issue of snitches, however, as Anarchists, our inherent
critique of authority and power, knowledge of security
culture, and decentralized style of organizing are certainly
beneficial in fighting Snitch Culture. That said, the few
approaches we have used in dealing directly with snitches
have not been very successful. We seem to mainly operate
under some loose code somewhat akin to the “Revolutionary
Discipline” of the RAF. The idea that ‘Snitches get
Stitches’ is prevalent and agreeable to our politics, however
it is impractical in that we lack the sheer numbers --
both inside and outside of the jails-- to make this a reality.
‘Snitches get Stitches’ functions more like the WU idea of
terror and with the exact same results in preventing Snitch
Culture: absolutely none. Knowing this, communities have
also tried the BPP model of shame, but with the recent
evidence of government infiltration of radical groups and
organizations, former comrades turning into collaborators
with wiretaps, and friends arrested or under Grand Jury
subpoenas naming names and cooperating with authorities,
there is ample evidence that this too is ineffective and
unlikely to stem the continuing tide of snitches.
It is easy to look at all of this and grow desperate.
Snitch Culture is not a problem that can be easily solved
and the very issues at the core of it run right through the
heart of everything we are attempting. And perhaps that is
the question and answer to this issue: what are we attempting? Why are some groups, like ETA, the IRA,
or The Maquis able to successfully deny attempts by
those in power to fracture and break their cultures
of resistance? Why do Anarchists, with the goals of
destroying power and creating a new world of freedom
and mutual aid, turn into ‘cooperating witnesses’ and
sacrifice not just their own dreams but those of the
communities they belong to?
These are the questions we must ask ourselves
if we want to build Communities of Resistance that
will hopefully, one day, win. We must think of ways to
strengthen our communities of autonomous individuals
and build a resistance that is effective and sustainable
in the long-term, instead of the current haphazard and
reactive scrambling to each and every blow of government
repression.
What we can learn from the Communities of
Resistance that were successful in defeating Snitch
Culture is that they believed wholeheartedly in their
struggle. Those that were actively fighting, as well as
those who supported them, did not see any choice
but to liberate themselves from illegitimate authority
and therefore saw themselves individually as part
of something larger. This should not be read as a call
for individuals to sacrifice themselves on the altar of
the collective, but to illustrate that people who believe
in what they are fighting for, and identify themselves
personally with the success or failure of that fight, are
less likely to betray that struggle because that struggle
IS them.
However, it must be said that it is probably
easier for people to identify intimately with national
liberation struggles that have --in a sense-- simpler
goals, than with something as complex and far-reaching
as Anarchy. The Maquis wanted to overthrow the
Nazi-collaborator Vichy government and to oust the
German occupiers from France. The IRA wants to kick
the English out of Ulster. ETA wants autonomy from
Spain and France and to preserve the Basque language
and culture. These groups are fighting against one particular
source of power, whereas Anarchists are struggling
to destroy all power.
Considering the fact that Anarchy is more than
just the liberation from one particular illegitimate
authority and there are as many battlefields as there
are stars in the sky, it can become easy to feel disillusioned
or ineffective. After all, authority and capitalism
still exist and we are drowned in the propaganda
that we have reached the End of History; that the Way
Things Are will continue unabated, forever. Snitches
in Communities of Resistance are often people whose
identity with the struggle for total liberation has become
fractured, or those who, in the face of the repressive
power of the state, betray their communities
because they feel there is little chance those communities
can win.
If we are to defeat Snitch Culture in our Communities
of Resistance, we must refute the propaganda
of those in power. It means tearing up the history
books because the end is not predetermined by anyone
but us. The ways and means of building a resistance that can refute their history and can engage in a
sustainable and long-term struggle for freedom, are
the same ones needed to give Snitch Culture the final
blow. Clearly, the solution is not as simple as the suggestion
‘Snitches get Stitches,’ but is complex and
takes us in many directions.
As detailed earlier, there have been plenty of
failed experiments in dealing with the issue of snitches
and the current epidemic of snitching cannot be
stopped through random beatings or through empty
threats. While violence against snitches or collaborators
may be necessary (for example, the very public
targeting of snitches utilized by the Maquis could
prove useful) it is often harmful or useless in ending
Snitch Culture. Not only can the State outmatch us in
terms of the violence it can expend, rendering moot
a wholesale campaign of violent reprisals --as in the
case of the RAF-- it also seems counter to our politics
of freedom to use the idea of terror to coerce people
into line and could put off sympathetic or interested
individuals --much like the WU did. This should not be
read as a dismissal of the tactic of violence in our resistance,
but as strong critique of violence as a useful
tool in combating Snitch Culture.
What has the greatest possibility of working
--although it is currently not practiced to the extent
that it needs to be-- is community shame coupled with
prisoner support. Community shame has the benefit
of not being irrevocable --how can you make amends
for shooting or beating someone terribly if it turns out
they were wrongly accused?-- as well as providing a
powerful disincentive for snitches by denying them
friendship and support. Prisoner support is obviously
positive in that it helps remove the power of violence
that the State holds over people. Prisoners who feel
supported and know they will be cared for have less
reason to abandon their principles and betray their
friends. Coupled together, a strategy of strong communities
of autonomous individuals that will not allow
collaborators back in, along with a prisoner support in
which the benefits of not snitching far outweigh any
measure put forth by the State, seems to be the best
course of action. Presently, however, these tactics
have proved ineffective in the prevention of Snitch
Culture. Snitches know that they will be reviled by
some, but they can remain in our communities by
moving to where they may be anonymous or because
there are people who will not ostracize them and allow
them to return. And even though our prisoner support
is one of our strongest attributes, it fails to be the
linchpin that prevents Snitch Culture, mainly because
it is limited in scope.
What this leads us back to is the idea of building
stronger communities capable of long-term resistance
to the powers of the State. Community shame
and prisoner support lack their necessary bite precisely
because our Communities of Resistance are fractured,
with no real communication or trust amongst
groups. In tightly-knit societies like the Basque,
snitches have nowhere to go because word will travel
and they would face social isolation wherever they go.

Shame only works when communities can communicate in
a way that is informative and trustworthy. Without information
about snitches, communities cannot take steps to
isolate or shame that person; and without trust, communities
have no idea if the information is reliable or that others
will also take steps to ostracize a snitch.

In terms of prisoner support, our current Communities
of Resistance offer a heartfelt support; however,
due to our lack of infrastructure and support outside of
traditional Anarchist circles, we cannot provide the all
encompassing prisoner support of the IRA. For instance,
in most cases, we cannot offer jobs, money to families, or
pay for legal representation. Most prisoners are shunted
from public view and only a few are known on a national
or international basis. On the contrary, IRA prisoners were
glorified and at the height of the Troubles, the majority of
the murals in IRA neighborhoods were dedicated to celebrating
prisoners and their deeds. The culture of prisoner
support in the IRA fostered an environment that made it
desirable to not snitch, a desire based on a total community
support for the prisoner and family. With some exceptions,
this is something that we cannot currently provide.
Where this leaves us is on the brink of a solution.
While we do seem to utilize the effective tactics in combating
Snitch Culture --prisoner support and community
shame-- they are not actually effective in stopping it.
Snitch Culture is not an isolated problem, as mentioned
earlier, but an interrelated issue with other problems facing
our Communities of Resistance. It comes as no shock
to hear that our communities are fragmented and that
there is little communication or mutual aid between them.
The same also goes for the lack of infrastructure or support
of people not traditionally identified with Anarchists
or other radical groups. We must seriously and critically
examine our communities and search for ways that we
can do things better, not just to defeat Snitch Culture, but
to win!

The way to strengthen our communities and increase
our resistance to Snitch Culture would begin by practicing
real mutual aid. Very few groups actually work together in a
way that is interrelated and that would actually help build our
counter-infrastructure. For instance, people in cities who want
to grow their own food and those who already live on farms
could participate in projects like the Victory Gardens in Athens,
Maine, which helps disenfranchised people in both urban and
rural communities develop their own sources of organic food;
groups in different cities could pool money and have benefits to
pay for the legal costs of prisoners in other places; and those
choosing not to work could help provide daycare for working
people who have to. The ways in which we can work together
and support each other are limitless, and working together
on projects and actions is a simple but unrivaled way to build
trustworthy lines of communication based on experience-- as
well as creating networks of autonomous communities that
support each other and would not tolerate a snitch among
them.
Infrastructure is important if we are to provide support
for people in prison that would actually function as a deterrent
to snitching. For instance, we cannot always give people jobs
--if they want them-- when they are out, or provide for people’s
families if they are put away. The counter-infrastructure we do
have is largely based on entertainment, and while this is a positive
thing in our communities, we must move beyond this into
other territory. For many obvious reasons, creating an infrastructure
that does not rely on capitalism, but is our very own,
is absolutely vital to our ability to wage effective resistance.
We must also address the lack of support for our resistance
in communities outside of Anarchist circles. One way
other Communities of Resistance have been effective is that
they had a large network of support in larger society. Besides
the obvious, this larger support functioned as a way to propel
resistance and created a climate of hope --a climate that Snitch
Culture does not function very well in. This lack of support
may be due to the fact that our definition of Anarchist culture
is rather narrow. Although not true in the least, the image of
Anarchists as young black-clad punks certainly does persist and
is to an extent perpetuated by Anarchist culture. Anarchists
should proudly proclaim themselves, but should also move beyond
the stereotype and show our many faces: young and old,
queer and straight, crusty and freshly-showered.

And obviously, our current prisoner support
must continue --and increase-- while working on
the long-term projects of building infrastructure and
widening our circles of support. Prisoner support
needs to become something that everyone in our
community is working on. Comrades must have the
full support of their communities when facing down
the courts, the jails, and the prison terms of the
State. We need to make prisoner support public and
visible, and we need to show comrades on the other
side of the wall that they are not forgotten. Murals,
benefits, sending letters and birthday cards, attending
court dates, and solidarity events are all easy
ways to show that we celebrate and stand behind
those from our communities who are behind bars.
We need to make good on the saying: they are in
there for us, so we are out here for them!
It should be clear that there is no simple
solution to the persistence of Snitch Culture in our
Communities of Resistance. This zine set out to
begin a dialog on how we can destroy Snitch Culture
once and for all. As we have seen, we may currently
be unable to prevent snitches in our fight for liberation
because we lack the community support and
infrastructure we need. This does not mean that
we should ever, ever condone snitching. Snitching
represents the most vile betrayal of one’s self and
one’s community and although we may not be able
to prevent Snitch Culture now, this does not mean
that we should not continue in the active removal of
snitches from our communities at present and withdraw
support from all collaborators immediately. But
now we know that this is not enough. To eradicate
Snitch Culture we must set ourselves upon the task
of building a long-term resistance that can withstand
the attacks of power, and that will take time and
a lot of hard work. We must create strategies that
look beyond today and will allow us to proactively
deal with State repression, not only to defeat Snitch
Culture, but to create a world made of our desires.

Excerpted from: Fire to the Prisons #4

Anarchists burn ballots in protest

Anarchists burn ballots in protest
In brief
by Paul Frazier Freelance Reporter
PUBLISHED ON 11/6/08 IN News
While millions of Americans were casting their ballots in polls across the United States on Tuesday, a group of five self-proclaimed anarchists burned theirs in front of the U.S. Post Office on 5th Avenue and Willamette Street in downtown Eugene. The group was protesting the act of voting in the United States, saying that voting does not give people real power to make a difference. Each person had a unique perspective on what should replace the current system in the United States and the world. However, they shared the belief that in addition to voting, the current systems of government and states is fundamentally flawed.They huddled together around a portable barbecue as they lit ballots on fire. As the ballots burned, many of them said the ballots were highly effective in warming their hands. "The best use of my ballot was for kindling," activist Ian Roger said.When the ballots finished burning, they were careful to not spill any ash onto the sidewalk. Then they unfurled a sign that said, "Whoever they vote for we are ungovernable." As they walked down Willamette Street to the federal courthouse displaying the sign, a woman stopped them and asked if they knew where a ballot drop box was.They laughed and collectively pointed at the barbecue.news@dailyemerald.com

http://media.www.dailyemerald.com/media/storage/paper859/news/2008/11/06/News/Anarchists.Burn.Ballots.In.Protest-3528762.shtml

NAELFPO HAS RETURNED

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASENovember 1, 2008THE NORTH AMERICAN EARTH LIBERATION FRONT PRESS OFFICE (NAELFPO) HAS RETURNED;THE VOICE OF THE EARTH LIBERATION DIRECT ACTION MOVEMENT!On the web at: www.elfpressoffice.orgWashington, DC – On Friday, October 31, 2008, the North American EarthLiberation Front Press Office (NAELFPO) re-opened its doors as the public faceand voice of the Earth Liberation Front movement.The Earth Liberation Front (ELF) is an international, underground movementconsisting of autonomous groups of people who carry out direct action in defenseof the planet. From 1996 through the current day, the ELF has committed dozensof actions throughout the United States, Europe and Canada against developers,logging companies, genetic engineering research and companies, ski resorts, SUVdealerships and more. The damages inflicted to these companies and governmentagencies have totaled well over $150 million. Since the year 2000, the FBI hascategorized the ELF as the number one domestic terrorist threat in the UnitedStates.Originally founded in the year 2000, the NAELFPO exists to report on the covertactions taken by the Earth Liberation Front and other groups and individuals indefense of the environment.The objective of the NAELFPO is to:• receive anonymous communiques from those taking direct action in defense ofthe earth• disseminate the ideology, history, and communiques of the Earth LiberationFront to the news media and public“While the federal government in the United States believes it can indict andimprison ELF members and destroy the Earth Liberation Front, they fail torealize that the ELF is an unstoppable movement based on the ideology ofprotecting the earth,” states Lisa Nesbitt, one of four new press officers forthe NAELFPO. “As long as the earth continues to be threatened by governments andcorporations prioritizing financial gain ahead of life, the ELF will exist totake direct action in defense of the earth.”Contact:North American Earth Liberation Front Press Office (NAELFPO)Tel: (202) 521-1482Web: www.elfpressoffice.orgEmail: info@elfpressoffice.org

Social Revolt

Can only social revolt destroy the system?
When does individual revolt become social revolt? Does it matter?

How to Master Secret Work

How to Master Secret Work

http://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/sections/sacp/1980/secret-work.htm

The Green Book

Irish Republican Army The Green Book I Commitment to the Republican Movement is the firm belief that its struggle both military and political is morally justified, that war is morally justified and that the Army is the direct representative of the 1918 Dail Eireann Parliament, and that as such they are the legal and lawful government of the Irish Republic, which has the moral right to pass laws for, and to claim jurisdiction over the territory, air space, mineral resources, means of production, distribution and exchange and all of its people regardless of creed or loyalty. The most important thing is security. That means you: DON`T TALK IN PUBLIC PLACES: YOU DON`T TELL YOUR FAMILY, FRIENDS, GIRLFRIENDS OR WORKMATES THAT YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE I.R.A. DON`T EXPRESS VIEWS ABOUT MILITARY MATTERS, IN OTHER WORDS YOU SAY NOTHING to any person. Don’t be seen in public marches, demonstrations or protests. Don’t be seen in the company of known Republicans, don’t frequent known Republican houses. Your prime duty is to remain unknown to the enemy forces and the public at large. Another important thing volunteers must realise and understand is the danger in drinking alcohol and the very real danger of over-drinking. Quite a large body of information has been gathered in the past by enemy forces and their touts from volunteers who drank.Volunteers are warned that drink-induced loose talk is the MOST POTENTIAL DANGER facing any organisation, and in a military organisation it is SUICIDE. [The recruit learns from Day One that:] The Irish Republican Army, as the legal representatives of the Irish people, are morally justified in carrying out a campaign of resistance against foreign occupation forces and domestic collaborators. All volunteers are and must feel morally justified in carrying out the dictates of the legal government; they as the Army are the legal and lawful Army of the Irish Republic which has been forced underground by overwhelming forces. The Army as an organisation claims and expects your total allegiance without reservation. It enters into every aspect of your life. It invades the privacy of your home life, it fragments your family and friends, in other words claims your total allegiance.All potential volunteers must realise that the threat of capture and of long jail sentences are a very real danger and a shadow which hangs over every volunteer. Many in the past have joined the Army out of romantic notions, or sheer adventure, but when captured and jailed they had after-thoughts about their allegiance to the Army. They realised at too late a stage that they had no real interest in being volunteers. This causes splits and dissension inside prisons and divided families and neighbours outside. Another important aspect all potential volunteers should think about is their ability to obey orders from a superior officer. All volunteers must obey orders issued to them by a superior officer whether they like the particular officer or not. Before any potential volunteer decides to join the Irish Republican Army he should understand fully and clearly the issues involved. He should not join the Army because of emotionalism, sensationalism, or adventurism. He should examine fully his own motives, knowing the dangers involved and knowing that he will find no romance within the Movement. Again he should examine his political motives bearing in mind that the Army are intent on creating a Socialist Republic. Volunteers are expected to wage a military war of liberation against a numerically superior force. This involves the use of arms and explosives. Firstly the use of arms. When volunteers are trained in the use of arms they must fully understand that guns are dangerous, and their main purpose is to take human life, in other words to kill people, and volunteers are trained to kill people. It is not an easy thing to take up a gun and go out to kill some person without strong convictions or justification. The Army, its motivating force, is based upon strong convictions which bonds the Army into one force and before any potential volunteer decides to join the Army he must have these strong convictions. Convictions which are strong enough to give him confidence to kill someone without hesitation and without regret. Again all people wishing to join the Army must fully realise that when life is being taken, that very well could mean their own. If you go out to shoot soldiers or police you must fully realise that they too can shoot you.Life in an underground army is extremely harsh and hard, cruel and disillusioning at times. So before any person decides to join the Army he should think seriously about the whole thing. The nationhood of all Ireland has been an accepted fact for more than 1,000 years and has been recognised internationally as a fact. Professor Edmund Curtis, writing of Ireland in 800 AD says that ‘she was the first nation North of the Alps to produce a whole body of literature in her own speech’, and he is told how the Danes were driven out or assimilated by a people ‘whose civilisation was a shining light throughout Europe’, prior to the Norman invasion of 1169 with which there ‘commenced more than 8 centuries of RELENTLESS AND UNREMITTING WARFARE that has lasted down to this very day’. The objective of the 800 years of oppression ‘is economic exploitation with the unjustly partitioned 6 counties remaining Britain’s directly controlled old-style colony’ and the South under the ‘continuing social, cultural, and economic domination of London’. This last led to Irish savings being invested in England ‘for a higher interest rate’ and many hundreds of thousands of boys and girls from this country had to emigrate to England to seek the employment which those exported savings created. Another aspect of economic imperialism at work is the export of raw, unprocessed materials: live cattle on the hoof, mineral wealth, fish caught by foreign trawlers etc. Further, from 1958 on, the Free State abandoned all attempts to secure an independent economy, and brought in foreign multi-national companies to create jobs instead of buying their skills and then sending them home gradually. ‘Africanisation’ is the word for this process elsewhere. Control of our affairs in all of Ireland lies more than ever since 1921 outside the hands of the Irish people. The logical outcome of all this was the full immersion in the E.E.C. in the 1970’s. The Republican Movement opposed this North and South in 1972 and 1975 and continues to do so. It is against such political economic power blocks East and West and military alliances such as NATO and the Warsaw Pact. It stands with our Celtic brothers and the other subject nations of Europe, and with the neutral and non-aligned peoples of the Third World; it seeks a third, socialist alternative which transcends both Western individualistic capitalism and Eastern state capitalism, which is in accordance with our best revolutionary traditions as a people. The position of the Irish Republican Army since its foundation in 1916 has been one of sustained resistance and implacable hostility to the forces of imperialism, always keeping in the forefront of the most advanced revolutionary thinking and the latest guerrilla warfare techniques in the world. The milestones, the battle honours won, the bloodstained trail of sacrifice, imprisonment, hunger strikes, executions, yet with telling blows delivered to the enemy, often in the heart of British imperialism itself, commanding the open admiration of freedom-loving peoples around the world. Note: The moral position of the Irish Republican Army, its right to engage in warfare, is based on: a) The right to resist foreign aggression b) The right to revolt against tyranny and oppression c) The direct lineal succession with the Provisional Government of 1916, the first Dail of 1919 and the second Dail of 1921. In 1938 the seven surviving faithful Republican Deputies delegated executive powers to the Army Council of the I.R.A. as per the 1921 resolution. In 1969 the sole surviving Deputy, Joseph Clarke, reaffirmed publicly that the then Provisional Army Council and its successors were the inheritors of the first and second Dail as a Provisional Government. Economic imperialism is evident on every main road and city street of Ireland: in Banking, Insurance, Merchant Marine, the Motor Industry, Mining, Fisheries, Industry in general, I.C.I., cultural imperialism epitomised in the Conor Cruise O’Briens of this Island, has been reinforced since the Treaty sell-out by successive Free State Governments via mass media, R.T.E., and the press and through education. The injustice of being as an individual politically impotent, the injustice of unemployment, poverty, poor housing, inadequate social security, the injustice of the exploitation of our labour, our intelligence and our natural resources, the injustice of the bloody-minded destruction of our culture, our language, music, art, drama, customs, the inherent injustice of the state repression which is necessary to maintain the present system as a whole. [So long as partition lasts a unified national concentration on correcting these injustices is not possible. ‘We must therefore first of all break the British connection’. The I.R.A. promises a democratic and socialist state]: A Government system which will give every individual the opportunity to partake in the decisions which will affect him or her: by decentralising political power to the smallest social unit practicable where we would all have the opportunity to wield political power both individually and collectively in the interests of ourselves and the nation as a whole. Socially and Economically we will enact a policy aimed at eradicating the Social Imperialism of today, by returning the ownership of the wealth of Ireland to the people of Ireland through a system of co-operativism, worker ownership, and control of the industry, Agriculture and the Fisheries. Culturally we would hope to restore Gaelic, not from the motivation of national chauvinism but from the viewpoint of achieving with the aid of a cultural revival the distinctive new Irish Socialist State: as a Bulwark against imperialist encroachments from whatever quarter. Internationally our alignment would hopefully be with the progressive Governments or former colonies like ourselves with the dual purpose of mutual advantage and of curbing the endeavours of imperialistic military and economic power blocs throughout the world. A new recruit’s immediate obstacle is the removal of his (her) ignorance about how to handle weapons, military tactics, security, interrogations etc. An O.C.’s might be how to put a unit on a military footing; an I.O.’s how to create an effective intelligence network; a Cumann Chairman’s how best to mount a campaign on a given issue, e.g. H Blocks etc., and for all members of the movement regardless of which branch we belong to, to enhance our commitment to and participation in the struggle through gaining as comprehensive an understanding as possible of our present society and the proposed Republican alternative through self and group education. Before we go on the offensive politically or militarily we take the greatest defensive precautions possible to ensure success, e.g. we do not advocate a United Ireland without being able to justify our right to such a state as opposed to partition; we do not employ revolutionary violence as our means without being able to illustrate that we have no recourse to any other means. Or in more everyday simple terms: we do not claim that we are going to escalate the war if we cannot do just that; we do not mount an operation without first having ensured that we have taken the necessary defensive precautions of accurate intelligence, security, that weapons are in proper working order with proper ammunition and that the volunteers involved know how to handle interrogations in the event of their capture etc., and of course that the operation itself enhances rather than alienates our supporters. Even the given situations of adequate bomb warnings are exploited which is again our mistake in not having sufficiently considered our defensive before going on the offensive: the so-called Bloody Friday being the prime example. Either we did not stop to consider that the enemy would ‘Dirty Joe’ us on the warnings or we overestimated the Brits’ ability to handle so many operations. But regardless of which is the case we made the mistake and the enemy exploited it. Other more everyday examples: the enemy exploits the mistake of a volunteer who stays in his own home by arresting him; he exploits the careless dumping of war materials by lifting them or, as is the most recent tactic, by assassinating volunteers who return to pick the materials up; he exploits I.R.A.-sticky [Official IRA] confrontations by staying out of the way to allow the subsequent detrimental publicity and effect on support to run its course; he exploits I.R.A.- Loyalist confrontations by moving in behind the I.R.A. unit and attacking it, plus again the detrimental international publicity. We exploit the enemy’s mistakes by propagating the facts. So it was with their murderous mistakes of the Falls Road curfew, Bloody Sunday and internment, which were exploited to our advantage support-wise as was the murder of John Boyle in Dunloy. Tactics are dictated by the existing conditions. Here again the logic is quite simple. Without support Volunteers, Dumps, Weapons, Finance, etc., we cannot mount an operation, much less a campaign. In September 1969 the existing conditions dictated that the Brits were not to be shot, but after the Falls curfew all Brits were to the people acceptable targets. The existing conditions had been changed. Likewise at present, for example, although the leadership of the S.D.L.P. has proved itself to be collaborationist and thus an enemy of the people, at various stages since 1974 we could have employed the tactic of making them subjects of ridicule by tarring and feathering them when for instance they were members of an Executive which tortured and interned Irishmen, which penalised rent and rates strikers etc., or when they recently declared at Westminster in a debate on H Block that ‘ Life should mean Life and there should be no Political Status’. The defensive precaution in the latter example being of course that the people be made aware beforehand that they actually did make such an utterance. The rule of thumb for all our actions can therefore be clearly seen to be that we must explain by whatever means we have at our disposal why we bomb, why we punish criminals, why we execute informers etc. We do not exclude taking an action which does not completely fill the criteria of this analysis on how to conduct the struggle. Many instances have arisen and will arise again when we have had to step outside these general terms of reference to our immediate detriment propaganda-wise and support-wise. However even in such an eventuality, if we rationalise our action, get our defensive before our offensive, try to ensure that we have an alternative, relatively unaffected area of support from which to operate if the support in the area which the detrimental but unavoidable action takes place, we are adhering as best as possible under the circumstances to a proper conduct of the war. THE ENEMY: CATEGORISE - CURE: The enemy, generally speaking, are all those opposed to our short-term or long-term objectives. But having said that, we must realise that all our enemies are not the same and therefore there is no common cure for their enmity. The conclusion then is that we must categorise and then suggest cures for each category.Some examples: We have enemies through ignorance, through our own fault or default and of course the main enemy is the establishment. The enemy through ignorance we attempt to cure through education though such an attempt is obviously futile if we do not firstly educate ourselves. Our means are marches, demonstrations, wall slogans, press statements, Republican press and publications and of course person-to-person communication. But as has already been stated, we must first educate ourselves, we must organise the protests and demonstrations efficiently, we must be prepared to paint the wall slogans and to sell and contribute to Republican press, Publications and Press statements. The enemy through our own fault or default is the one we create ourselves through our personal conduct and through our collective conduct of the struggle: the wee woman whose gate or back door gets pulled off its hinges by a volunteer evading arrest and who doesn’t get an apology as soon as possible afterwards or more preferably has the damage repaired by one of our supporters; the family and neighbours of a criminal or informer who has been punished without their being informed why. In brief our personal conduct as well as our conduct of our Republican activities must be aimed at if not enhancing support, at least not creating enemies unnecessarily. The establishment is all those who have a vested interest in maintaining the present status quo in politicians, media, judiciary, certain business elements and the Brit war machine compromising the Brit Army, U.D.R., R.U.C. ( r ) [reserve], Screws, Civilian Searchers. The cure for these armed branches of the establishment is well known and documented. But with the possible exceptions of the Brit Ministers in the ‘Northern Ireland Office’ and certain members of the judiciary, the overtly unarmed branches of the establishment are not so clearly identifiable to the people as our enemies as say armed Brits or R.U.C. It is our task therefore to clearly identify them to the people as such and again depending on the existing conditions and our ability to get our defensive before our defensive, effect a cure. Execution, as earlier stated is not the only way of making this category of establishment enemy ineffective: we can variously expose them as liars, hypocrites, collaborators, make them subjects of ridicule etc., e.g. The ‘Mason-Superthug’ poster image, the ‘Captain Nervewreck’ cartoon strip, the Conor ‘Booze’ O’Brien pun etc. GUERILLA STRATEGY: Many figures of speech have been used to describe Guerrilla Warfare, one of the most apt being ‘The War of the Flea’ which conjured up the image of a flea harrying a creature of by comparison elephantine size into fleeing (forgive the pun). Thus it is with a Guerrilla Army such as the I.R.A. which employs hit and run tactics against the Brits while at the same time striking at the soft economic underbelly of the enemy, not with the hope of physically driving them into the sea but nevertheless expecting to effect their withdrawal by an effective campaign of continuing harassment contained in a fivefold guerrilla strategy. The strategy is: 1. A War of attrition against enemy personnel which is aimed at causing as many casualties and deaths as possible so as to create a demand from their people at home for their withdrawal. 2. A bombing campaign aimed at making the enemy’s financial interest in our country unprofitable while at the same time curbing long term financial investment in our country. 3. To make the Six Counties as at present and for the past several years ungovernable except by colonial military rule. 4. To sustain the war and gain support for its end by National and International propaganda and publicity campaigns. 5. By defending the war of liberation by punishing criminals, collaborators and informers. While one of our chief considerations in deciding tactics is the concern for our friends, relatives, neighbours, our people in the midst of whom we operate, the enemy is simply dealing with an impersonal, inferior foreigner, a ‘Paddy’, ‘Musck-Savage’ or ‘Bog-Wog’, and with the great added advantage of all the resources and back up of a conventional army, para-military police, etc., e.g. M.R.F., S.A.S., plain clothes units, covert surveillance teams etc. At this juncture the most obvious differences between the Brits and the I.R.A. volunteer, apart from the fact that the Brit is an uninvited armed foreigner who has no moral or historical justification for being here in the first place, are those of support, motivation and freedom of personal initiative. The Brits support, his billets, dumps, weapons, wages, etc., are all as stated earlier provided for by involuntary taxation. His people who pay the taxes have never indicated nor indeed have they been asked to indicate by any democratic means their assent to his being here at their expense. The I.R.A. volunteer receives all his support voluntarily from his people. A member of the I.R.A. is such by his own choice, his convictions being the only factor which compels him to volunteer, his objectives the political freedom and social and economic justice for his people. Apart from the few minutes in the career of the average Brit that he comes under attack, the Brit has no freedom or personal initiative. He is told when to sleep, where to sleep, when to get up, where to spend his free time, etc. The I.R.A. volunteer, except when carrying out a specific army task, acts most of the time on his own initiative and must therefore shoulder that responsibility in such a way that he enhances our necessary stated task of ensuring that his conduct is not a contributory factor to the Brit attempt to isolate us from our people. By now it is clear that our task is not only to kill as many enemy personnel as possible but of equal importance to create support which will carry us not only through a war of liberation which could last another decade but which will support us pas t the ‘Brits Out’ stage to the ultimate aim of a Democratic Socialist Republic. Resistance must be channelled into active and passive support with an on-going process through our actions, our education programmes, our policies, of attempting to turn the passive supporter into a dump holder, a member of the movement, a paper seller etc., with the purpose of building protective support barriers between the enemy and ourselves, thus curbing the enemy’s attempted isolation policy. And of course the more barriers there are, the harder it is for the enemy to get at us while at the same time we increase the potential for active support in its various forms. The immediate protective barriers are of course, our own security, the other branches of the movement, our billets, etc. But we must build up other barriers by championing the various causes in our support areas through involvement in the various enemy structures which have been brought down as a result of the war: Policing, Transport, Bin-Collection, Advice-Centres, etc. The alternative to our plotting such a course is obvious. IF, for example, we have an area with a unit of I.R.A. volunteers and nothing else: No Sinn Fein Cumann, no Green Cross committee, no local involvement, etc., after a period, regardless of how successfully they have been against the Brits, they end up in jail leaving no structures behind: no potential for resistance, recruits, education or general enhancing of support. [It will be seen from the foregoing that despite all the political and military training and advice, the recruit must be warned that jail is something he will almost inevitably experience. Interrogations are frequently simulated in training to increase the volunteers’ awareness of what confronts them, which brings us to Green Book II]
Irish Republican Army The Green Book II Volunteers Oath "I do solemnly promise to uphold and have belief in the objectives of the IRA and obey all orders issued to me by the Army Council and all my superior officers" ANTI-INTERROGATION I. ARREST Most volunteers are arrested on or as a result of a military operation. This causes an initial shock resulting in tension and anxiety. All volunteers feel that they have failed, resulting in a deep sense of disappointment. The police are aware of this feeling of disappointment and act upon this weakness by insults such as “you did not do very well: you are only an amateur: you are only second-class or worse”. While being arrested the police use heavy-handed `shock` tactics in order to frighten the prisoner and break down his resistance. The prisoner is usually dragged along the road to the waiting police wagon, flung into it, followed by the arresting personnel, e.g., police or Army. On the journey to the detention centre the prisoner is kicked, punched and the insults start. On arrival he is dragged from the police wagon through a gauntlet of kicks, punches and insults and flung into a cell. What A Volunteer Should Do When Arrested 1. The most important thing to bear in mind when arrested is that you are a volunteer of a revolutionary Army, that you have been captured by an enemy force, that your cause is a just one, that you are right and that the enemy is wrong and that as a soldier you have taken the chance expected of a soldier and that there is nothing to be ashamed of in being captured. 2. You must bear in mind that the treatment meted out to you is designed to break you and so bleed you of all the information you may have with regard to the organisation to which you belong. 3. They will attempt to intimidate you by sheer numbers and by brutality. Volunteers who may feel disappointed are entering the first dangerous threshold because the police will act upon this disappointment to the detriment of the volunteer and to the furtherment of their own ends. Volunteers must condition themselves that they can be arrested and if and when arrested they should expect the worse and be prepared for it. II. INTERROGATION After the prisoner has been placed in a cell, he may be left for some time alone. During this lull, police officers, `The Interrogators`, will crowd around the outside of the cell door from time to time, shouting threats and insults, telling the prisoner what they will do to him when they go into the cell. After some time the interrogators will enter the cell and ask the prisoner to make a confession. During this period he may be subjected to assaults and abusive language, depending on the circumstances surrounding the charge. At this stage he will be fingerprinted and other questions will be put to him, related to the specific charge or other charges. Usually his name and address will be taken, place of employment, occupation, educational standard and so forth. After this he will be again isolated in his cell while his `interrogators` check his identity, usually with local police, his home and place of employment. In this period of time the police will attempt to establish his political beliefs, if any, his associates, his police record, if any, and in this way build up a file on him. Most probably `his associates` and general pattern of movement will give a pretty good idea to the police, if the person is involved in or is sympathetic to a political organisation. Armed with this body of information the police will re-enter the cell and accuse the prisoner of all sorts of activity. If the evidence does not indicate a degree of guilt on the specific charge, he will be accused of all kinds of vague activity. The purpose of these vague accusations is to implant a feeling of guilt in the prisoner. If, however, the police have some evidence or strong beliefs, linking him with a specific charge, pressure will be applied immediately. This pressure will take the form of physical and psychological torture, most probably he will be punched and kicked around the cell while they scream at him to make a confession, indicating to him that they know all. One or more of the interrogating officers will act in a particular and brutal manner, if they fail to get a confession or on admission of guilt they will leave the cell, telling the prisoner they will be back and threatening him with the most barbaric forms of torture, implying that they extracted confessions from better men than he. Another set of interrogators will enter the cell, possibly carrying a file with the prisoner’s name written on it. They will act quite friendly and sympathetic towards him, telling him that they do not condone the activity of the previous interrogators, that they were mad, crazy and possibly they will kill him when they come in later, they will go to extremes to impress the prisoner of their own sympathy towards him, and ask him to make a confession to them indicating that they do not want the previous interrogators `to get at him again`. They will probably guarantee him that if he makes the confession they will not allow the former interrogators to re-enter the cell, this will be coupled with a warning that otherwise they cannot guarantee him safety. When the prisoner refuses to confess they will pretend to become very annoyed and disappointed at his lack of co-operation. They may strike him across the face or in the stomach while telling him that he ought to be thankful to them, that they saved him from the previous interrogators and indicating that his behaviour and attitude is a thankless way to repay their kindness. The interrogators will then open up a file and pretend to read extracts from it, related to the prisoner’s past life and activities, even the most intimate and private aspects of his life will be read to him, and possibly a general account of his movements and associates. Most of this information may have been supplied by his friends, employer, school, family, or girlfriend, it may also be `Pub Talk`, local gossip, information supplied by touts or information extracted from other prisoners. This detailed information is designed to frighten the prisoner and to shatter his confidence in his associates and organisation. If, however, they get no confession, they will leave the cell, but before doing so they will give the prisoner their names and tell him to ask for them at any time he wishes to, again indicating that the next set of interrogators are crazy, drunk, and will do him severe damage, then they leave the cell. After a period of time another set of interrogators will enter the cell, again these interrogators will be particularly brutal and nasty towards him. They will attack him immediately in a most hostile and vicious manner, suggesting to him that if he did not confess to the former interrogators he will confess to them, they will let him know that they have a reputation for getting confessions from people like him, implying that everyone they met confessed before they were finished with them. The torture used will now take on a three-fold purpose: 1. Physical Torture. 2. Subtle Psychological Torture. 3. Humiliation. 1. Physical Torture The physical torture will be in the form of beatings, kicking, punching and twisting of limbs, it may even be burning from cigarette ends. 2. Psychological Torture This will be in the form of threats to his family, his friends and himself, e.g. threats of assassination and threats to castrate him 3. Humiliation This takes the form of stripping the prisoner of his clothes and remarks passed about his sexual organs. This period of interrogation may last for as long as two hours or more and at the end of that period they may produce a factual or faked confession from an associate. Failing to get their confession they leave the cell, telling him they will be back and when they do come back they will break every bone in his body. This process can continue for seven days without a break, the minimum of sleep is allowed and if they deem it necessary, no sleep will be allowed. Lack of sleep causes the prisoner to become confused. Because of the existing laws which authorise the police to detain a person for seven days, it means in effect that the process of interrogation can continue to disorientate their victim, due in the main to lack of sleep. Interrogation can have many different phases, depending on the evidence or information which the police have gathered. It is obvious that a volunteer captured carrying out an operation is already seen to be guilty, especially if captured with a weapon, bomb etc., in this case the police have all the evidence needed to obtain a conviction and interrogation becomes unnecessary. Most likely the volunteer will be beaten up in the police stations for what he has done, not for what he knows, if interrogated under these circumstances it will be to get information on the organisation to which he belongs and on his comrades. Another shady aspect directly related to interrogation is blackmail and bribe. When the police cannot obtain a confession they may attempt to blackmail the volunteer, this may be in the form of threats to spread scandalous stories about the volunteer, stories or threats may be designed to hit at the character of the volunteer such as a threat to tell his comrades or his organisation that he told everything or that he had been working for them for years. The other phase of this shady interrogation is bribe. A volunteer may be promised money, a passport and a safe passage to any country he so desires if he co-operates. THE INTERROGATION - ANALYSIS The best defence in anti-interrogation techniques is to understand the techniques as practised by police forces. The purpose of interrogation is to get a confession. If the interrogators knew what they were searching for there would be no need for interrogation, therefore interrogation is necessary only when the police are unaware of information, which would lead to a conviction. The best anti-interrogation is to SAY NOTHING. All police forces work from a story, suspicion or clue, therefore when a volunteer is arrested they strive to build on that clue, on that suspicion and the only way that can be done is to obtain information from their victim. They usually start by questioning their victim, writing down a recording of what he says, comparing this information with information already in their possession, looking for differences which contradict the information previously gained, going back to their victim, pointing out these differences, resulting in the victim changing his alibi in order to suit this difference. The police will again check this new story with other information and again look for a difference or mistake narrowing the prisoner’s alibi down until finally it breaks. All of these changes in his statements will be recorded and used as evidence against him, evidence which will without doubt be accepted by the court and so lead to his conviction. This cannot be over stressed: when arrested SAY NOTHING. Ask to see your solicitor and doctor immediately and keep on doing so. DO NOT INDULGE IN CONVERSATION WITH THE POLICE. After the prisoner had been placed in his cell, we have seen earlier in the lecture how the police had crowded outside the cell door shouting insults and banging on the door. The purpose of this exercise is to frighten the prisoner and so arouse anxiety in their victim. When anxiety has been aroused all natural, rational defence barriers break down or weaken. When this happens the prisoner becomes irrational and becomes more prone to interrogation, in other words an anxious man is easier to intimidate by interrogation than a cool, calculating person. During the time the prisoner is left alone in the cell he should, in as far is as possible, ignore the police, the threats and the insults and he should marshal all facts surrounding his arrest. He should bear in mind that he can be detained for no more than seven days if he remains silent or possibly years in prison if he speaks. Most volunteers speak from a sense of fear thinking mistakenly that if they speak, torture or ill treatment will not be used. It is a recorded fact that interrogators are guided by a simple rule of thumb: `If a prisoner won’t speak he may be innocent and interrogation may be a waste of time, if he speaks a little there is always more and so interrogation is necessary`, therefore the prisoner who speaks a little in order to avoid abuse is in effect inviting more abuse from his interrogators who will always assume there is something more. Therefore the best defence is to remain COOL, COLLECTED, CALM, and SAY NOTHING. We have seen earlier in the lecture how the first batch of interrogators will enter the cell usually insulting, shouting and beating the prisoner. Volunteers should understand that this first batch of interrogators usually fingerprint, ask name, address etc. At this stage a little is known about the prisoner and therefore the task of the interrogator is to identify him positively. Again the prisoner must bear in mind that everything he says will be recorded and compared with existing information in the possession of the police. The purpose of abusing the prisoner at this stage is called the `softening up period`, usually one or more will act in a particularly nasty manner. This interrogation may last not more than one hour and is only a preliminary investigation. The purpose of using heavy-handed techniques and sheer hostility is an opening for the following batch of interrogators, whom we have seen act in a particularly sympathetic manner. This set of interrogators, we have seen, acted in a friendly and sympathetic manner towards the prisoner, offering him cigarettes and friendship. Volunteers should be well aware and on guard against this feigned friendship. These interrogators pretend to be sympathetic towards the aims and objects of the movement, going to lengths to impress the volunteer, pretending that they too believe in a united Ireland. They will, no doubt, tell the volunteer that their father or grandfather was in the same organisation and that they were forced by economic circumstances to join the police force and they are now merely passing the time until they are pensioned off. They will try to convince the volunteer it is in his interest to make a confession to them in order to escape from the previous interrogators who, they claim, are anti-Republican and no and are not interested in getting a confession but are only interested in beating the prisoner up. The volunteer should understand that these seemingly kind police officers may be acting the tough cop with his comrades who had been or are arrested. Finally we have seen how these interrogators, pretending to become upset, had stretched forward and beat the volunteer about the face and body, declaring that their advice and friendship was being returned or repaid with a stubborn attitude and a refusal to make EVEN A PART OF A CONFESSION. This technique is as old as police forces, they attempt to win over the friendship and trust of the prisoner, hoping that if their prisoner falls into that trap he will become upset, not so much at the punching about the face which he received from them but at his own refusal to co-operate: this perhaps is the most dangerous type of interrogation and one which leaves the prisoner in a psychological vulnerable position. Another technique is called TOP SECRET FILE TECHNIQUE, this involves the interrogators bringing into the cell a file with the prisoner’s name printed on it. The police will open this file in the presence of the prisoner as we have seen earlier in the lecture. They proceed to read from this file parts of the prisoner’s past life, even to the most intimate details and a general account of his movement and friends, especially those associated or known to have contacts or sympathies with a political organisation, e.g., Sinn Fein. They also have information gathered from various sources such as employer, neighbours, PUB TALK OR LOCAL GOSSIP. Very often the PUB TALK and gossip is factual, this arises from the volunteer or volunteers in general speaking in pubs under the influence of alcohol, telling close friends and girlfriends and boasting in a bravado manner about their exploits and the exploits of others. This type of bravado is POSITIVELY DANGEROUS, not only to the volunteer and his associates but to the Movement in general. Another dangerous aspect of interrogation is `an associate’s confession`, this involves an interrogator approaching the volunteer with a signed or unsigned, factual or unfactual confession of an associate. Volunteers must understand, (in the first place) this confession may be a hoax and in the second, even if it is a factual confession of his associate, this confession is not an indication of guilt and will not be accepted in court unless his associate who made the confession is prepared to turn State or Crown witness and is prepared to swear its truth in the witness box. Very often a volunteer may break under severe physical and psychological torture and make a confession, but rarely is prepared to turn Crown or State witness and swear against his comrades. If this technique is employed by the police DON`T FALL FOR IT, it is a trick to weaken the volunteer and so get him to make and sign a statement. Another dangerous technique employed is bringing the prisoner who made a statement into the same room as the volunteer who refuses to co-operate, usually they are left on their own and the prisoner who made a statement may try to entice his comrade to do likewise. If this happens to you always bear in mind that you are not alone because the room is always bugged and any talk is recorded. Another important point to bear in mind is when the prisoner who confessed and perhaps implicated you approaches, don’t launch a verbal attack on him because this verbal attack on him would be an implication of your guilt. Always speak friendly to him and suggest he must be mistaken, that he is ill and advise him to seek medical attention. Another important point to be remembered and one which is extremely important, DON`T GET INVOLVED IN A POLITICAL CONVERSATION, this technique is a universal tactic and one which recurs repeatedly. When volunteers refuse to make a confession and when all other tactics of interrogation have failed, the police usually, if not always, attempt to get the volunteer to speak on political matters. This is a technique which many volunteers fail to recognise, its purpose is to fling the volunteer off balance, to sound out his political thinking, to break his silence and so make it easier for him to speak freely. This tactic has been used against volunteers and very often to their own detriment. When a volunteer has been arrested and the usual terror tactics used against him, this display of friendship has a weakening effect upon him and can be explained in psychological terms. As we have seen earlier in this lecture, these seemingly friendly interrogators will give their names to the prisoner before they leave the cell, telling him that the next set of interrogators are crazy, anti-Republicans who are out to do him harm, they will tell him to call upon them at any time he so wishes and they will do their best to save him from brutal treatment. All volunteers must understand and understand in the clearest possible way that no interrogator is his friend, that they are the enemy, the instruments of coercion, the tools of suppression and a more dangerous enemy than the interrogators who will beat him up. These people act a part in a well-rehearsed play, and are using subtle psychological techniques in order to undermine the morale of the volunteer. All volunteers are well versed in brutal treatment as practised by police and the Army. They understand what physical torture means, but now you will have to understand the meaning and application of psychological torture, perhaps the term is an uncommon one, but its effects are far reaching. We have seen earlier in the lecture how the ‘heavy squad’ now enters the scene and proceeds to attack the volunteer in a most vicious and brutal manner. This shock treatment is well rehearsed and is meant to push the volunteer into a physical and mental corner, in other words they hope that their shock treatment will knock the volunteer off balance, and off guard in the hope that he will confess. They will shout statements to the effect that they have a reputation for extracting confessions, that they have never yet failed and that he will not fool them. Now we must analyse this approach, the first thing of importance we note of importance is the shouting in conjunction with the physical torture. The shouting as we shall see is a more important interrogation technique than the physical torture. Again, why shout? Why boast? Why tell the volunteer that they are experts at extracting information? This shouting and boasting is merely an assurance to the police that they can get a confession, it is the first obvious sign of their own weakness, a compensation for their own shortcomings and all volunteers should and ought to look upon this display as a modern war dance. Just as primitive people held war dances, and built totem poles in order to compensate themselves for their own known weaknesses, so two frustrated interrogators will shout and boast in front of the prisoner to compensate themselves for their own weakness. The best anti-interrogation technique when a volunteer finds himself in this situation, is to look upon the police officers as he would look upon primitive people, wearing the head of a dead animal, hoping that by doing this they gain the strength or cunning of the animal whose head they wear. All volunteers should look upon shouting, boasting policemen as they would look upon primitive people doing a war dance. PSYCHOLOGICAL TORTURE We have seen that this type of torture is widespread and usually in the form of threats to the volunteer in question, to his friends and family, threats to assassinate him, to blacken his character, to castrate him; loss of sleep, poor quality of food and continuous noise. This in conjunction with the physical torture and fear of physical torture builds up anxiety and borders on hysteria. All of this is designed to smash down the volunteer’s natural defence mechanism, usually a person held for a period of time, perhaps seven days, living in an environment of fear and indecision, constantly being threatened, cut off from all natural contacts, deprived of his usual social surroundings, lack of sleep etc. This can and does form disorientation and disillusionment: during this period the volunteer will get no sleep or very little sleep, living this type of vague existence for a number of days and can leave its mark and deserves an independent lecture. [The sexual overtones of some interrogation techniques are graphically described in a section devoted to humiliation.] HUMILIATION We have seen that this type of interrogation technique invariably is stripping the prisoner of all his clothes and remarks passed about his sexual organs. Volunteers should be aware of the proven fact that clothes are an important aspect of the individual’s character or make up. By removing his clothes the interrogators hope to remove the volunteer’s character and make up, psychologically this is symbolic and by doing this the police like to humiliate the volunteer and so lift away the barriers, just as they find barriers preventing them from getting a confession. A person’s clothes become symbolic of this barrier and by removing them they hope to remove the natural defence mechanism of the volunteer. The second part of the humiliation is to pass derogatory remarks about the volunteer’s sexual organs. This is quite common in all police stations, North, South, and in England. Volunteers should attempt to understand the mentality which underlies this act and so be better prepared to meet this angle if and when it happens to them. Just as they removed the volunteer’s clothes, which symbolised a defence mechanism or natural barrier, so too by passing derogatory remarks about the volunteer’s sexual organs they attempt to humiliate the volunteer and by so doing to weaken his will to resist. The mere act of doing this has deeper undertones than one would guess. Volunteers should understand that from a psychological point of view this act is called a penis complex. This complex is inherent in the homosexual and although the interrogators themselves may be married men with a family it indicates suppressed homosexual tendencies. When the volunteer realises and understands this proven fact he should not have great difficulty in triumphing over his interrogators. He should look upon them as homosexuals with the immunity of the establishment, as people who become sadistic from the homosexual tendencies, which underlie them. The police sometimes attempt to use blackmail and bribe in the last vain attempt to obtain a confession. All volunteers should ignore this type of carrot dangling. Blackmail rarely works effectively and can backfire against the police in libellous action and so bad publicity. Bribe never works, despite the fact that a volunteer may be offered money and protection in exchange for information. He should bear in mind that when he is of no further use to the police they drop him and the protection means nothing, for example, Kenneth Lennon. [Lennon was found dead in a ditch after the IRA tracked him down - in England.] While being tortured in a brutal, physical manner it is important that a volunteer should consolidate his position, he should realise that it’s seven days if he keeps silent, perhaps seventeen years if he speaks. It’s no easy thing to dismiss physical torture as a small or meaningless thing. It is by no means small and by no means meaningless to the receiver. From time immemorial, from histories recorded as far back as the Babylonian Empire up through the days of Imperial Rome, from the Spanish Inquisition to Nazi Concentration Camps, Free State and British police stations, come stories of how people coped and defeated the attempts of police to beat information from prisoners. One notable technique was the prisoners’ ability to form images in their minds or on the surrounding walls. People who were brutalised found that by directing their powers of concentration away from their interrogators and diverting it to images formed in their own mind they could in effect overcome the physical pain. Some people pictured images in their own mind or in the mind’s eye, this picture may have been a flickering candlelight, a leaf or a flower, but by concentrating upon it, by building it and by stabilising it, it seemed to attract their concentration so strongly in fact, that the physical abuse became meaningless. This mental exercise is called by some psychologists ‘mind over matter’ and is said to be a highly successfully and invincible anti-interrogation technique. Little is known of the laws surrounding this technique but all authorities associated with its research maintain that people under severe physical and mental pressure seem to adapt themselves to this state. People without previous experience or knowledge of the subject, but who under interrogation stumbled across this technique maintained that it worked but they did not know why. Again, some people found that by staring at a certain spot on a cell wall they experienced a similar sensation. It may be that the ancient Indian practice of Yoga has close or similar sensations, but one thing is certain is that when a person’s concentration is directed away from his interrogators he seems to triumph and perhaps torture is a method employed by police to hold the prisoner’s attention on them. This advice should be at least considered by volunteers. In conclusion, if and when arrested: SAY NOTHING, SIGN NOTHING, SEE NOTHING, HEAR NOTHING. A technique at present being practiced by the Brits and Police is one of shock aimed psychologically. This involves exposing blown up photographs, usually of dead bomb victims, dead soldiers and policemen and more often than not the corpses of the suspect’s comrades. The technique behind this tactic is to arouse emotions of hysteria in the suspect and by doing so to disorientate him temporarily. All volunteers must understand and be fully aware of the anxiety, the shock and the hysteria it can arouse in the unprotected suspect. By understanding this technique and by looking at it logically and the tactic behind it, volunteers should be ready to meet the situation of that nature with confidence, in the knowledge that its purpose is to shock the volunteer into confession. Another tactic of this nature is throwing the limb or limbs of a corpse into the cell of a suspect. To the best of our knowledge this tactic has only been used once, but successfully, again in the Miami Showband case. [Members of the Miami Showband, a popular group from the Republic, were ambushed and murdered during the wave of sectarian assassinations in Armagh in the mid-1970’s by the UVF. 3 members of the band were murdered and 2 injured. 2 UVF members died in their botched attempt to blow up the band’s bus as they tried to destroy the bus and bodies with bombs.] The best protection while being interrogated is LOYALTY to the Movement. This implies LOYALTY to all YOUR COMRADES and PROTECTION of all members of the Movement, a deep and unmoving POLITICAL COMMITMENT to the ideas of the Socialist Republic, CONSTANT AWARENESS that you are a REVOLUTIONARY with a sound POLITICAL base, NOBLE and JUSTIFIABLE CAUSE, and a deep and firm belief that those holding you and interrogating you are MORALLY WRONG, that you are SUPERIOR in all respects, because your cause is RIGHT and JUSTIFIED
Irish Republican Army Court Martial The I.R.A. Court Martial Procedure. 1. A Court-martial is set up by the O/C of any Unit or by the C/S to try any Volunteer on a specific charge or charges. 2. The Court shall consist of three members of equal rank or higher than the accused. 3. The Convening Officer will appoint one member of the Court as President. 4. When a Court-martial is set up by a Unit O/C, the Adjutant of the Unit, or some member of the Unit delegated by the Adjutant of the Unit to do so, will act as Prosecuting Counsel. When the Convening Authority is the C/S, he may appoint any officer other than the Adjutant General to act as Prosecution Counsel. 5. The accused may call on any Volunteer to act as his defence Counsel, or, if he so desires, may defend the case himself. 6. A copy of the charges shall be supplied to the accused in reasonable time before the case is heard to enable him to prepare his defence. The Convening Authority may either supply the accused with a summary of the evidence it is proposed to place before the Court, or arrange for a preliminary hearing at which the witnesses for the prosecution will give oath, a summary of their testimony. At such preliminary hearing, neither defence nor prosecution counsel will be present, but the accused may cross-examine the witnesses. The evidence shall be taken down in writing from each witness, shall be read over to him and signed by him. If the accused wishes to make a statement or give evidence on oath he must be cautioned that anything he says may be taken down and used in evidence, at any subsequent hearing of the case. 7. If the accused objects to any of the three officers comprising the Court, his objection will be examined by the remaining two members, and if upheld, the member objected to will be replaced. 8. The Convening Authority will ensure that the Prosecuting Counsel is in possession of all the facts relevant to the case and that all prosecution witnesses are present at the Court. 9. The Convening Authority will supply the Court with a copy of the charges and with copies of General Army Orders. 10. During the hearing of the case, all witnesses will be kept in a separate room as in the case of a Court of Inquiry. The only persons present in the Court shall be members of the Court, the accused, the defence Counsel (if any) and the witness under examination. 11. The oath will be administered as in the case of a Court of Inquiry. 12. At the start of the case, the President will read each case to the accused and ask him if he pleads guilty to the charge. 13. Witnesses when called to testify will be cross-examined first by the Prosecuting Counsel and then by the Defence Counsel, or by the accused if conducting his own defence. Witnesses may be questioned by any member of the Court. Should either Counsel wish to recall a witness who has already testified, permission of the Court must first be obtained. The Court may recall any witness. Witnesses may not leave the precincts of the Court without permission from the Court. 14. At any time it so desires, the Court may go into private session to decide on points which may arise, such as the admissibility of evidence. 15. When all witnesses have testified, Defence Counsel will sum up and make closing address to the Court. This will be followed by summing up and closing address of the Prosecuting Counsel. The Court then goes into private session to consider its verdict and sentence. 16. For breach of any General Army Order, the Court shall not have power to impose a lesser penalty than that laid down in such order. 17. The verdict and sentence of the Court shall be set down in writing and signed by the three members. This, together with a summary of the evidence, must be forwarded by the President to the Convening Authority. Sentence is subject to the ratification of the Convening Authority. Note: In the case of the death penalty, sentence must be ratified by the A/C. 18. The accused may forward an appeal against the verdict or sentence or both to the Adjutant-General who will place it before the Competent Authority. The appeal should be forwarded by accused through his O/C. who in return will forward it to the Adjutant-General with a signed copy of verdict and sentence and a summary of the evidence. The Competent Authority may order a new trial or reduce the penalty but may not increase the penalty imposed by the Court.

Catechism of a Revolutionary

The Duties of the Revolutionary toward Himself
1. The revolutionary is a doomed man. He has no personal interests, no business affairs, no emotions, no attachments, no property, and no name. Everything in him is wholly absorbed in the single thought and the single passion for revolution.
2. The revolutionary knows that in the very depths of his being, not only in words but also in deeds, he has broken all the bonds which tie him to the social order and the civilized world with all its laws, moralities, and customs, and with all its generally accepted conventions. He is their implacable enemy, and if he continues to live with them it is only in order to destroy them more speedily.
3. The revolutionary despises all doctrines and refuses to accept the mundane sciences, leaving them for future generations. He knows only one science: the science of destruction. For this reason, but only for this reason, he will study mechanics, physics, chemistry, and perhaps medicine. But all day and all night he studies the vital science of human beings, their characteristics and circumstances, and all the phenomena of the present social order. The object is perpetually the same: the surest and quickest way of destroying the whole filthy order.
4. The revolutionary despises public opinion. He despises and hates the existing social morality in all its manifestations. For him, morality is everything which contributes to the triumph of the revolution. Immoral and criminal is everything that stands in its way.
5. The revolutionary is a dedicated man, merciless toward the State and toward the educated classes; and he can expect no mercy from them. Between him and them there exists, declared or concealed, a relentless and irreconcilable war to the death. He must accustom himself to torture.
6. Tyrannical toward himself, he must be tyrannical toward others. All the gentle and enervating sentiments of kinship, love, friendship, gratitude, and even honor, must be suppressed in him and give place to the cold and single-minded passion for revolution. For him, there exists only one pleasure, on consolation, one reward, one satisfaction – the success of the revolution. Night and day he must have but one thought, one aim – merciless destruction. Striving cold-bloodedly and indefatigably toward this end, he must be prepared to destroy himself and to destroy with his own hands everything that stands in the path of the revolution.
7. The nature of the true revolutionary excludes all sentimentality, romanticism, infatuation, and exaltation. All private hatred and revenge must also be excluded. Revolutionary passion, practiced at every moment of the day until it becomes a habit, is to be employed with cold calculation. At all times, and in all places, the revolutionary must obey not his personal impulses, but only those which serve the cause of the revolution.
The Relations of the Revolutionary toward his Comrades
8. The revolutionary can have no friendship or attachment, except for those who have proved by their actions that they, like him, are dedicated to revolution. The degree of friendship, devotion and obligation toward such a comrade is determined solely by the degree of his usefulness to the cause of total revolutionary destruction.
9. It is superfluous to speak of solidarity among revolutionaries. The whole strength of revolutionary work lies in this. Comrades who possess the same revolutionary passion and understanding should, as much as possible, deliberate all important matters together and come to unanimous conclusions. When the plan is finally decided upon, then the revolutionary must rely solely on himself. In carrying out acts of destruction, each one should act alone, never running to another for advice and assistance, except when these are necessary for the furtherance of the plan.
10. All revolutionaries should have under them second- or third-degree revolutionaries – i.e., comrades who are not completely initiated. these should be regarded as part of the common revolutionary capital placed at his disposal. This capital should, of course, be spent as economically as possible in order to derive from it the greatest possible profit. The real revolutionary should regard himself as capital consecrated to the triumph of the revolution; however, he may not personally and alone dispose of that capital without the unanimous consent of the fully initiated comrades.
11. When a comrade is in danger and the question arises whether he should be saved or not saved, the decision must not be arrived at on the basis of sentiment, but solely in the interests of the revolutionary cause. Therefore, it is necessary to weigh carefully the usefulness of the comrade against the expenditure of revolutionary forces necessary to save him, and the decision must be made accordingly.
The Relations of the Revolutionary toward Society
12. The new member, having given proof of his loyalty not by words but by deeds, can be received into the society only by the unanimous agreement of all the members.
13. The revolutionary enters the world of the State, of the privileged classes, of the so-called civilization, and he lives in this world only for the purpose of bringing about its speedy and total destruction. He is not a revolutionary if he has any sympathy for this world. He should not hesitate to destroy any position, any place, or any man in this world. He must hate everyone and everything in it with an equal hatred. All the worse for him if he has any relations with parents, friends, or lovers; he is no longer a revolutionary if he is swayed by these relationships.
14. Aiming at implacable revolution, the revolutionary may and frequently must live within society will pretending to be completely different from what he really is, for he must penetrate everywhere, into all the higher and middle-classes, into the houses of commerce, the churches, and the palaces of the aristocracy, and into the worlds of the bureaucracy and literature and the military, and also into the Third Division and the Winter Palace of the Czar.
15. This filthy social order can be split up into several categories. The first category comprises those who must be condemned to death without delay. Comrades should compile a list of those to be condemned according to the relative gravity of their crimes; and the executions should be carried out according to the prepared order.
16. When a list of those who are condemned is made, and the order of execution is prepared, no private sense of outrage should be considered, nor is it necessary to pay attention to the hatred provoked by these people among the comrades or the people. Hatred and the sense of outrage may even be useful insofar as they incite the masses to revolt. It is necessary to be guided only by the relative usefulness of these executions for the sake of revolution. Above all, those who are especially inimical to the revolutionary organization must be destroyed; their violent and sudden deaths will produce the utmost panic in the government, depriving it of its will to action by removing the cleverest and most energetic supporters.
17. The second group comprises those who will be spared for the time being in order that, by a series of monstrous acts, they may drive the people into inevitable revolt.
18. The third category consists of a great many brutes in high positions, distinguished neither by their cleverness nor their energy, while enjoying riches, influence, power, and high positions by virtue of their rank. These must be exploited in every possible way; they must be implicated and embroiled in our affairs, their dirty secrets must be ferreted out, and they must be transformed into slaves. Their power, influence, and connections, their wealth and their energy, will form an inexhaustible treasure and a precious help in all our undertakings.
19. The fourth category comprises ambitious office-holders and liberals of various shades of opinion. The revolutionary must pretend to collaborate with them, blindly following them, while at the same time, prying out their secrets until they are completely in his power. They must be so compromised that there is no way out for them, and then they can be used to create disorder in the State.
20. The fifth category consists of those doctrinaires, conspirators, and revolutionists who cut a great figure on paper or in their cliques. They must be constantly driven on to make compromising declarations: as a result, the majority of them will be destroyed, while a minority will become genuine revolutionaries.
21. The sixth category is especially important: women. They can be divided into three main groups. First, those frivolous, thoughtless, and vapid women, whom we shall use as we use the third and fourth category of men. Second, women who are ardent, capable, and devoted, but whom do not belong to us because they have not yet achieved a passionless and austere revolutionary understanding; these must be used like the men of the fifth category. Finally, there are the women who are completely on our side – i.e., those who are wholly dedicated and who have accepted our program in its entirety. We should regard these women as the most valuable or our treasures; without their help, we would never succeed.
The Attitude of the Society toward the People
22. The Society has no aim other than the complete liberation and happiness of the masses – i.e., of the people who live by manual labor. Convinced that their emancipation and the achievement of this happiness can only come about as a result of an all-destroying popular revolt, the Society will use all its resources and energy toward increasing and intensifying the evils and miseries of the people until at last their patience is exhausted and they are driven to a general uprising.
23. By a revolution, the Society does not mean an orderly revolt according to the classic western model – a revolt which always stops short of attacking the rights of property and the traditional social systems of so-called civilization and morality. Until now, such a revolution has always limited itself to the overthrow of one political form in order to replace it by another, thereby attempting to bring about a so-called revolutionary state. The only form of revolution beneficial to the people is one which destroys the entire State to the roots and exterminated all the state traditions, institutions, and classes in Russia.
24. With this end in view, the Society therefore refuses to impose any new organization from above. Any future organization will doubtless work its way through the movement and life of the people; but this is a matter for future generations to decide. Our task is terrible, total, universal, and merciless destruction.
25. Therefore, in drawing closer to the people, we must above all make common cause with those elements of the masses which, since the foundation of the state of Muscovy, have never ceased to protest, not only in words but in deeds, against everything directly or indirectly connected with the state: against the nobility, the bureaucracy, the clergy, the traders, and the parasitic kulaks. We must unite with the adventurous tribes of brigands, who are the only genuine revolutionaries in Russia.
26. To weld the people into one single unconquerable and all-destructive force – this is our aim, our conspiracy, and our task.