This essay by Louis Beam is about the criminal take over of the American government and how to reclaim it. Mr Beam served in Vietnam so he knows something about military operations. You may think that the Wikipedia's biography is inspired by malice. His Essays cover the police state and other government crimes. He wrote about Leaderless Resistance, an important concept in guerrilla operations.
Perhaps the message to take from it is that guerrillas were much more effective than regular war.
If citizens of this country ever again enjoy the blessings of liberty and true freedom, it will not be the result of a majority of its citizens having risen up in righteous indignation at governmental abuse of themselves and their culture. If a restoration of the Constitution of our forbearers occurs - with all that this implies - it will probably not be because a plurality of citizens fought for it, supported it, or cared one way or another. If lawful government is re-established it will come about because a revolutionary majority makes it happen.
An Essay by L. R. Beam
Within the American historical experience a revolutionary majority may be defined as any number of citizens sufficient to initiate general hostilities against a destructive government.
The American Revolution of 1776 defines the term, sets the precedent and provides the example for patriots of today.
Throughout most of the Revolutionary War, those patriots who were seeking to overthrow the government lacked support of over two-thirds of their fellow citizens. John Adams, one of the "radicals" in favour of the Revolution and who was later to become the second President of the United States, stated that depending on how the war was going, those fighting for freedom had the opposition of from a third to two thirds of the people. Others like Pennsylvania delegate to the Continental Congress Joseph Galloway was sure that four-fifths of the people "were or wanted to be, loyal to the King." (Galloway eventually sided with the Loyalists, as those who supported the King's government were called.) Colonel London Carter, a member of the Virginia aristocracy and a strong patriot, stated in his diary in March of 1776 (but a bare three months before the signing of the Declaration of Independence) that an observer of events in the Northern colonies was sure "nine-tenths of the people are violently against it" (independence).
The exact number of "the friends of government", as the patriots disparagingly referred to those who opposed the Revolution, cannot be stated with accuracy. As John Adams indicated, the number was in a constant state of flux, depending on political events and who was winning in the armed conflict. One thing is certain, however; the American Revolution was anything but a broad-based popular uprising of a disaffected people. Rather, it was a very unpopular rebellion of a politically radical minority who, because they possessed a clear understanding of the rights of man coupled with a deep concern for the state of relative personal freedom, were able to perceive the shackles of tyranny prior to their being presented for fastening. This discernment of tyranny at a distance not only set them apart from their fellow man but constrained them to rebel.
The radical political leaders of the Revolution such as John Adams, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Richard Henry Lee, John Hancock, and Joseph Warren, to name but a few of the more well known, had to conduct their struggle for freedom in the face of disapprobation and rejection by their peers before the time of actual armed conflict, and after its commencement to charges and cries of "incendiaries and traitors." Indeed "the friends of government" knew little restraint when it came to condemning the Republic's Founders. The Loyalists called Washington, among other things; a liar, perjurer, murderer, blasphemer, criminal, traitor, patron of villainy, and a villain's chief. The other Founders fared little better and were variously referred to as being dregs, illiberal (sic!) and violent men, despicable wretches, bandits, rude, and depraved. While thus labelled by "respectable citizens," these men led the country toward rebellion.
Correspondingly, the Founders had an analogous movement among the common people which, although the objective of overthrowing the government was the same, the methods were those resorted to by people in every age when faced with overpowering force of all-powerful government, namely, mob action, riots, uprisings, midnight forays, and harassment, intimidation, or terroristic acts directed against governmental supporters. All of these and other acts came under the single heading of patriotism so far as their perpetrators were concerned.
After a review of non-battlefield hostilities, it becomes apparent that the American Revolution was won more by mob action than by armed conflict! Thus, any idea that the Revolution was won in an ordeal of battle is out of place in view of the facts.
During the entire length of the armed conflict from 1775 to 1781, the King's armies lost only 1,512 men killed in battle; this seven-year, battle-death casualty rate was exceeded by Union forces at Cold Harbour in 1864 during the first eight minutes of a single engagement. The King's armies had previously lost far larger numbers of men in the Seven Years War (French and Indian Wars) yet pressed on to victory. An adequate explanation then of the patriots' final triumph over the government must be provided by other than a military victory.
An answer, in great part, lies in the violence and vigilante action carried on by the patriots against the government and its supporters! Though most Americans today are familiar with the Boston Tea Party, few know much about the secret organization that conducted it, the Sons of Liberty. Led by Samuel Adams, John Hancock, Dr. Warren ("the greatest incendiary of them all"), and Paul Revere, they met in secret, dressed in disguises, and carried out vigilante actions under the cover of darkness. This revolutionary Ku Klux Klan was as much dreaded by "the friends of government" as its ideological offspring, the Klan, ever was by unruly Blacks. The Sons of Liberty and other similar groups were responsible, during the course of the conflict for independence, for causing tens of thousands of Loyalist to flee the country (the Klan was usually satisfied with merely running undesirables out of the county).
The means were simple and effective. Terror and intimidation were directed against the Loyalists. Methods used to create these twin scourges of "the friends of government" included, but were not limited to, whippings, coats of tar and feathers, banishment, church burnings (if run by a Loyalist preacher or used for a Loyalist meeting place), confiscation of property, and wherever deemed necessary - death of any one of several reliable methods.
Other patriotic groups formed throughout the thirteen colonies to carry on a relentless persecution of "the friends of government." Each organization operated independently of the other though often exchanged information on Loyalists.
Often these ad hoc associations went by the name of "Committees of Public Safety," though the name as well as the tactics employed varied from place to place. Thus in the colony of New York, the patriots bluntly called themselves "the oppressors of the friends of government" and stated proudly that they tarred and feathered governmental supporters with the "decorum that ought to be preserved in public punishments." Boston had its mysterious "Joyce Junior" who led a group of Knight Riders and enforcers who saw to it that those who did not display the necessary revolutionary mentality were properly punished. The rebel Continental Congress established "associations," whose purpose was to locate the Loyalists and turn their names over to the local vigilante to be dealt within the manner they deemed proper. In every colony, if the accusation was one of giving information to government agents, the traitor to liberty was hanged by the neck or dealt with in some other terminally appropriate manner.
Even religious leaders were not exempt from the patriotic purges that cleansed away supporters of the king. Preachers who failed to support the cause of liberty (or who had forgotten that David slew Goliath rather than turning the other cheek) were run out of town on a rail in the glowing light of the flames from their quickly disappearing church. This was considered leniency, others were forced to flee to England or Canada in fear of their lives.
By the end of the conflict in 1781, for every government Red-Coat killed on the battlefield, seventy Loyalists had been driven from their homes and forced to settle in England or Canada, totalling over one hundred thousand people.
The government and its "friends" accused the revolutionary freedom fighters (whom they often called "the Sons of Anarchy") of "committing the most shocking outrages" and of "daily invasions upon private property" while led by men who were "well known incendiaries and traitors," whose chief purpose in life was to commit "crimes against the Constitutional authority of the State" (historically, government's which have oppressed and abused their citizens justify their actions based on the "law" or "Constitutional authority").
No doubt, had the effort to overthrow the government been unsuccessful, the Founding Fathers and their citizen supporters would have been hanged by "the friends of government," as the very worst sort of traitors and terrorists.
In summary of the American Revolution, while Washington's determined and skilful leadership of the army, no doubt made victory possible, it did not assure it. The Spirit of '76 - a massive campaign of terror directed by patriotic citizens against all those who supported the government was the deciding factor that brought freedom to America.
American Constitutional liberty was born in mob pressure, fostered by secret societies, nurtured during seven years of intimidating violence, and institutionalized at the expense of well over a hundred thousand people. With this American history in mind, one who is faithful to the ideas of the Founding Fathers of this nation can have nothing but contempt and suspicion of the motives (or ignorance) of those people both within and without the government who would condemn citizens of today "for taking the law into their own hands" in defence of their rights.
Had those who desired liberty in 1776 waited until a numerical majority of their fellow citizens were ready to "wake-up" (as the saying is today) to fight for the overthrow of the government, or had they hesitated in the use of "illegal" force and violence (force and violence are never legal except when used by those in power) against their governmental enemies, they would have all died in their old age as law-abiding subjects of the King - minus their freedom.
Patriots of 1775 considered the sympathies of less than a third of the people sufficient to begin general hostilities against their oppressors. Herein lies the historical context of the American revolutionary majority. It has been wisely said that those who do not know and understand history can repeat its successes.
In America today, the manacles of slavery and destruction once forged in London by the King are now forged in Washington. Acts of tyranny are carried out in the name of the federal government rather than in the name of the Throne. The vicious enforcers of dictatorial policies often call themselves F.B.I. or I.R.S. agents instead of his Royal Majesty's troops or tax collectors of the Realm. Substituting for the Redcoats of the British are the "bluecoats" of the bureaucrats and in far greater numbers. Though babblings for "the divine rights" of kings to rule have ceased, modern fools prattle of "democratic majorities" composed of an illiterate electorate enfranchised for the purpose of dispossessing the descendants of the Founders. While different in nomenclature the end results are exactly the same - the dark, cold, tight chains of slavery.
A numerical majority of today's citizens cannot read these footprints of tyranny nor understand where they lead. In this they are no different than their counterparts of 200 years ago. Modern governments have mass communications to subtly guide the thinking of their subjects; thus is seen the phenomenon of today's citizen rushing forth to place the cuffs of bondage upon his own wrist by irrationally clamouring (as he has been indoctrinated) for more laws and government to solve problems created by an excess of both. This mental inversion, whereby the citizen wilfully aids in efforts to subjugate himself, is of no small import for those who treasure their liberty. The implications are many, but the consequences could be singular: a governmentally programmed democratic majority may, as they dance along to mental tunes played by an electronic band of orchestrated communication, gleefully drag down (with their self-fastened chains) everyone else in the black hole of oblivion.
Only one thing seems capable of closing the yawning mouth of the pit and that is the formation of a new revolutionary majority coupled with resurrection of the Spirit of '76. Anything short of this seems certain to pass on to today's children an increasingly difficult task of freeing themselves from transistorized chains of governmental control. Such a legacy is the bequeathal of cowards, not free men.
The first American Revolutionists accused those who ruled them of excessive taxation, interference with property rights, illegal search and seizure, not protecting the citizens from incursions by several thousand Indians, policies destructive of the general welfare, and "altering fundamentally the form of our government," among other things.
Today the federal government taxes its subjects for forty percent of their income, instead of the three percent (less than a dollar twenty a year) tax of the King; interferes with the ownership and use of virtually every description of property; authorizes everything from game wardens to I.R.S. agents to search, arrest, or seize property without a warrant. It allows fifteen million aliens to illegally cross its borders in less than a ten-year period; and conducts a policy of systematic extermination of its young men through no-win wars, and subjects the Founders' children to enforced equality. Each of the acts, individually amounts to altering fundamentally the form and purpose for which the federal government was created. Taken as a whole, they are a cry for - nay - a demand for, a new campaign of terror conducted against the government and its friends in the great American tradition of 1776.
An examination of the depth and magnitude of policies fostered by federal rulers detrimental to the people of present day America make the abuses of the English King's government pale into insignificance. One thing is clear; comparison of the criminal acts of the two governments makes those who value their liberty and freedom long for the bitter days of English despotism.
While there are many similarities between the first American Revolution and the second (coming soon at a place near you), there are also significant differences.
The first and paramount dissimilarity is that while our heroic Forefathers fought to overthrow their legally constituted government and were thus revolutionaries in the truest sense of the word, those who seek to break the quickly tightening bands of servitude today war against an illegal government that imposes itself upon the people under the colour of the law. By the Washington regime's disobedience to and violation of the bonds of the Constitution, established by the Founders of this country, it has made of itself an unlawful body with no more right to govern the American people than has the present Queen of England. That the government survives despite the crimes it has committed is explainable only because the atrocities it systematically imposes are papered over with a veneer of legality. Propaganda that numbs the mind keeps people from rising against those who abuse them.
There is no law in this country - other than power, which currently rests with the Pirates of the Potomac, who pose as our lawful government while using over powering force to quell those who resist their destructive policies. The Constitutional Revolutionist of today is actually fighting for a transfer of power from those who can make no legitimate claim to power, to those who inherently hold it as a natural right - the lawful citizens of this country.
Another salient difference between the first American Revolution and the second is the contrast between the quality of the people of then and now. Our ancestors were strong men, who stated often that they were resolved "to die as free men rather than live as slaves." They were conditioned to doing their own thinking while at the same time ever holding before themselves the guiding lights of honour and duty.
Today, raised in the lap of luxury, many people gladly exchange their freedom for the right to accumulate material possessions. Not one person in fifty can truthfully state that his opinions are the result of independent research rather than the mindless acquisition of pre-programmed "opinions" obtained by indulging in endless hours of obeisant T.V. watching (that modern day golden calf of those lost in the mental wilderness). Further, most Americans do not know the meanings nor values of honour and duty, the two great concepts of higher man.
It is quite clear that the virtue of the present generation has declined to such a miserable degree that most people will never voluntarily help to make themselves free. Consequently they will have to be made to make themselves free.
A great objective of revolutionary majorities is that of thrusting freedom upon those who are too weak to make themselves free while providing its blessings for the stronger, more noble elements of the race. This is done in the firm belief that under sound government, future generations will be naturally healthy in mind and spirit. The revolutionary patriot benignantly grants freedom to others while establishing framework that will allow posterity to be both free and strong. Other than the "great commission" of the Lord, no calling is as exalted or as honourable. These two significant differences - one of law, one of character - between the first struggle for freedom and the present one is deserving of substantial thought and analysis by those capable of so doing. Consider what type of self-preserving behaviour can be expected from a government that already wades to its knees in the blood of young men deliberately sacrificed to the false god of Internationalism. Were the government really intent on opposing Communism, it would start a war in Washington and work its way to Vietnam. What behaviour can be expected from a people who willingly pass their sons through the fire to be consumed? Each of these concepts deserve most careful examination.
Opposing the federal purveyors of mass murder and the "the friends of government" who make such perfidy possible are men who trace their political lineage to times of Magna Carta, and who are mental as well as physical descendants of the Founding Fathers. They believe, as did their forbearers, that government is a social contract entered into by people of a similar mind for their mutual benefit. This agency created by the people can only, legitimately, be their servant - never their master. Further, it cannot possess lawful authority to deprive those who create it (or their heirs) of natural rights. In normal times men who arrayed themselves against the criminal acts of government would be called Constitutionalists, but "these are the times that try men's souls" as well as test their courage. Thus contemporary patriots become known as Constitutional Revolutionists determined to overthrow every vestige of unlawful government doing so with a firm belief that honour demands and duty requires the reestablishment of the law of their fathers.
It can be realized then, that those who remain guilty of loyalty to the present illegal government in the District of Columbia are chargeable with treason to the Constitution of the United States and deserving the same fate of their historical predecessors who, in the name of the King, trampled upon sacred rights of Englishmen in 1776.
It should be stated in their defence, however, that most of those who are participants in this odious transgression against the good of our noble forbearers do so in complete ignorance of the law. Having obtained ninety-five percent of their misinformation from government licensed T.V. and the remaining five percent from conversations with others who are also completely maladroit at obtaining facts on their own, they are victims of methodical thought control which began during their childhood and has been continued at a subliminal level throughout their lives.
Though no doubt the maxim "ignorance of the law is no excuse for its violation" makes these people criminals, the mitigating circumstances of their lawlessness should be considered by those who are seeking to re-establish lawful rule in this country.
A period of grace, commensurable with what the struggle will allow, is in order, thus providing the present supporters of unlawful government an opportunity to defect as they became cognizant of the law.
By this fraternal act to the erring members of our race we serve not only the interest of justice but, at whatever point in time the grace period is of necessity terminated, all excuse for collaboration with the enemy will have been removed. Having held long aloft the olive branch of peace and forgiveness, no just complaint can be made by those who failed to avail themselves of it, when with the other hand, the terrible swift sword of vindication falls upon their necks.
Even after the patriots of today have invoked "the Spirit of '76," and have successfully dammed the Mississippi with rotting corpses of the lying politicians, criminal bureaucrats, racial traitors, communists, assorted degenerates, cultural distorters, and those who resist the implementation of lawful Constitutional government, these patriots will have exhibited far more restraint and benevolence than the present government of the United States. For while Constitutionalists of today war against those guilty of the most heinous crimes upon our people, usurpers in Washington destroy in mind and wherever possible the bodies of those guilty of nothing more than having white skin.
Coalescing within America today is a second revolutionary majority whose members in the spirit of their forbearers are resolved to die as free men rather than to live as slaves. Like their noble ancestors, today's revolutionary majority must fight for the children of carping critics just as fiercely as for their own families. Emulating its predecessor, obedience is given only to the dictates of the code of natural law. For once again the enemies of liberty use the law of the nation as their shield - yea - even their justification for destroying freedom of the people. A government exceeding the power granted by their fathers - they are not bound to obey but bound to resist.
John Adams said, that "freedom is a counter balance for poverty, discord, and war," and that if the revolutionary struggle failed, it would be because moderates tried to find a "middle ground" and to conduct "half a war," for freedom. Likewise, today's tired voices are heard calling for politics as usual - moderation as always. Such thinking has allowed generations to die in chains in former times and will so again if adhered to.
The age of the conservative like that of the dinosaur, has ended. Now begins a new age, destiny calls for her great men who by their iron will alter the pages of history from that of a tale of shame, cowardice, and decline, to a saga of glory, bravery, and rebirth. Soon, very soon, we will have a revolutionary majority...
Back to Main Page
Errors & omissions, broken links,
cock ups, over-emphasis, malice [ real or imaginary ] or whatever; if
you find any I am open to comment.
Email me at Mike Emery. All financial contributions are cheerfully accepted. If you want to keep it private, use my PGP Key. Home Page
Updated on 18/07/2012 18:38