STRATEGY
Click to read in Swedish

It is often said that knowledge is power, but that is one of the greatest myths of all time. Men with great knowledge are easily enslaved if they do nothing to defend their freedom. Knowledge by itself is not power, but it holds the potential for power if we use it as a guide for action. Truth will always be defeated by tyranny unless human beings, just like you and me, are willing to step forward and put our lives into the battle. The future belongs, not to ideas, but to people who act on those ideas.

If we are serious about wanting to make a difference in the world, we must be very clear about what will be required. Defeating the global powers of collectivism is a big order, and it’s much easier said than done. Here are the realities we must face.

1. There is not much that can be done by one person alone. We need lots of help, and it will have to be international in scope. National efforts will continue to be important, but collectivism is entrenched globally. The whole world is now our theater of conflict.

2. We need a corps of dedicated men and women who are prepared to devote a major portion of their lives to this mission. Much more will be required than merely supporting a political party, or subscribing to a periodical, or writing letters to politicians. The time for armchair patriotism is over.

3. We need a clear statement of positive principles. It is not enough to know what we are against. We must also know what we are for.

4. We need an organizational structure that cannot be subverted by our opponents. It must be designed, not as a pyramid with all control at the top, but as a hologram with each of the smallest units containing everything necessary to create the entire movement from the bottom up.

5. We need a comprehensive training program to expose the tactics used by agents of collectivism and to show how we can ethically counter them.

6. We need the same support mechanisms that our foes have long enjoyed: coordination, strategy, training, communications. Any plan without these elements is doomed to failure.

7. We need dependable funding to support the many services needed for organizational activities.

8. We need a strategy, not for petitioning leaders, but for becoming leaders.

9. We need to have the long view of history, realizing that our mission may not be completed in our lifetime. What we set in motion must be larger than ourselves and it must have momentum into the future.

Although worldwide in scope, Freedom Force is dedicated to political and social principles that are just the opposite of the code of collectivism embedded in the organization called the United Nations. The global structure of Freedom Force must not be taken as an indication that members are indifferent to their own countries or seek an end to national sovereignty. It is recognition of the fact that national freedom movements will be more effective if they are integrated with similar movements in other parts of the world. The enemies of freedom are united across national boundaries by their common ideology of collectivism. To oppose them effectively, we who embrace the ideology of individualism must do the same.

The power of numbers. Cooperation has a squaring effect. Two people working separately in the same community have the force of two; but, working together, they have the force of four. Three working together have the effect of nine working separately. Four have the effect of sixteen, and so on. Just imagine the influence that is possible from the cooperation of fifty or a hundred people all dedicated to the same goal.

FREEDOM FORCE IS DIFFERENT
     One of the reasons people are attracted to Freedom Force is that it is different from other organizations; yet, when they become members, many of them expect us to do exactly the same things that other organizations do. Therefore, it is important to establish policies and guidelines for what types of activities are consistent with our strategy and what types are not.

Most organizations seeking to change society are issue oriented. Political groups adopt platforms praising or condemning specific political action and seek voter support for candidates who endorse those platforms. Educational groups work to increase public awareness of the effects of specific legislation or trends in anticipation that this will translate into desirable political action. In both cases, the focus is on issues: We should do this. We must oppose that.

Freedom Force recognizes that there are so many current issues of this nature that it is impossible to deal with more than a small percentage of them at one time. Even if we succeed in swaying the outcome in one or two of them, all the rest likely will be resolved in favor of collectivism. In those rare cases where victories are won, freedom still is not secure. The same issues will return again and again until, eventually, we are defeated. That is because, even when we think we have a victory, the underlying problem remains. The underlying problem is that the power centers of society are in the hands of collectivists; and as long as that condition remains, we can never hope to succeed in the long run. Focusing totally on issues is treating the symptoms while ignoring the cause.

PUTTING OUT THE FIRES
     We who have opposed the rise of collectivism over the years have been like firefighters attempting to put out hundreds of fires set by an insane arsonist. We run here and there, back and forth, with hoses and buckets, combating one fire after another; but there are more of them than we can count; and five new ones are started for every one we put out; so we are constantly losing ground while our beautiful city is being destroyed. The reality is that we will never make headway on these fires until we find the arsonist and put him out of business. Any effort that ignores the arsonist is doomed to failure.

Collectivists are the arsonists of the world and they are constantly igniting new totalitarian programs. They do this easily because they hold positions of power. At present, individualists do not have comparable power – and those without power cannot defend freedom. Nothing is going to change until the collectivists who now dominate the power centers of society are replaced by individualists. Please re-read that sentence. It is the key to understanding the strategy of Freedom Force.

THE LONG VIEW OF HISTORY
     That brings us to a sober appraisal of our timetable for victory. We tend to be impatient. We would like to think there must be some strategy that can turn everything around by the next election. We long for a man on the white horse who will sweep the elections and restore our world to safety and sanity in one fell swoop. Well, it’s not going to happen that way. It has taken our collectivist opponents a hundred years to consolidate their power, and it likely will take another hundred to replace them with individualists.

When I was a young man, I detested that thought. I was in a hurry and wanted to see total victory in my lifetime, but that was before I understood the mechanisms and strategies used by Leninists and Rhodesians. Now it is clear to me that patient gradualism is the only road that can lead the world out of darkness. Like our opponents, we, too, must have the long view of history. Although that may be discouraging at first, upon further reflection, it is not so bad after all. In fact, it is greatly encouraging to know that there is such a road ahead and that we are the ones who are charting it and putting up the signposts. The future is calling, and this is our reply. That is a very satisfying thought, but it causes us to reflect on the fact that merely advocating issues, no matter how urgent they are or how forceful we act, is not going to bring meaningful victory in the near future.

So, what is our course of action? Shall we follow all the other organizations and become crusaders on specific issues? Shall we call for an end to the income tax? A return to value-based money? Withdrawal from the United Nations and its regional organizations? A return to basics in education? A stop to illegal immigration? A reform of Social Security? An end to aggressive wars with hidden agendas? All of these and a thousand other issues cry out for immediate attention. For us to take on any of them would be to open the door to all of them. Imagine the mayhem that would arise if a chapter president decided one of these issues was so important that all members should be contacted and urged to sign a petition or write letters to someone. Then another member would say that his project was just as important and request that everyone be urged into action on that one also. And then a third member would have every reason to demand that her project is just as important, and so on. It wouldn’t be long before we would be so inundated with urgent calls to action on so many issues that we would give up in despair – especially when it eventually is realized that, because we do not now hold sufficient power, none of this effort makes any lasting difference anyway.

If our primary goal is immediate victory on specific issues, then multiple failures – which inevitably lie ahead – will be demoralizing and will cause many to abandon the battle. However, if we have the long view of history and can see consistent progress in laying foundations for the future, even while totalitarianism grows around us, we will have the great satisfaction of knowing that what we do today is not useless and that we are making a difference in the world.

THE FREEDOM FORCE STRATEGY
     So, what are we to do? The answer is clear, and the strategy that stems from that answer sets Freedom Force apart from all other organizations. It is this:

Freedom Force recognizes that, as long as the power centers of society are dominated by collectivists, the movement toward global totalitarianism will continue. Merely protesting that trend and issuing petitions or proclamations may slow the process on occasion but will make no meaningful difference in the long run. The only path to victory is to remove collectivists from positions of power and replace them with individualists.

When an advisor warned Joseph Stalin to avoid conflict with the Catholic Church, he is reported to have replied; “How many divisions does the Pope have?” Mao Tse-tung said, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” Adolph Hitler said that the first basis of authority is popularity, but then he said: "In power, therefore, in force, we see the second foundation of all authority." These expert collectivists understood the nature of power. Those who control government (the legalized use of force) and who also select the candidates are not concerned about mere letters or petitions of protest. Unless these are followed by tangible steps to acquire power of our own (where we are the ones passing the laws), it is an exercise in futility. Those without power cannot defend freedom.

How do we acquire power of our own? The answer lies in an organized campaign of citizens, who have no axe to grind except freedom-of-choice, helping each other to become influential in the power centers of society. Power centers are the groups and organizations which provide leadership for various segments of the population and which influence public opinion. These are political parties, labor unions, church organizations, media centers, schools and universities, civic and professional organizations, and others that include large numbers of people. In a representative government, it is the combination of all these organizations together that determines the policies of the nation. Political parties are important, but they are just one component of the whole. Even if we had a strong, pro-freedom political candidate, if the voters (who are influenced by many power centers) do not understand or support his policies, he cannot be elected or, if he is, he cannot implement his policies. All of the power centers must work together to accomplish a unified goal.

IT IS A TRIED AND PROVEN FORMULA
     This is not as difficult as it may seem. We know it can be done, because it already has been done and proved to be highly successful. The formula was worked out long ago by the very forces of collectivism we must displace. It is the strategy by which less than one percent of the population can lead the other ninety-nine. All we have to do is study their organizational concepts and apply them to our own mission. That does not mean we also must embrace their ethics or their ideology. While admiring the brilliance of their strategy, we reject their use of secrecy, lies, bribery, blackmail, theft, murder, and all the other manifestation of coercion or deceit.

Consider the manner in which the Leninists and Rhodesians control the nations they dominate. Members at the top of these movements do not interact directly with the public on a one-to-one basis. There are too few of them for that. Instead, they move into leadership positions within the power centers of society. In Leninist countries, members of the Communist Party dominate government, media, education, and major business enterprises. In Rhodesian countries, members of the Council on Foreign Relations (or their counterparts, such as the Royal Institute for International Affairs) do exactly the same. In this way, the few hold levers of political and social power by which they lead the many.

In spite of widespread fuzzy thinking about so-called democracy and self rule, the reality is that the few will always lead the many. The American Revolution, held up to the world as an example of the common man rising up against the British and creating a constitutional government, is a myth. The revolution was conceived, initiated, and led by a relatively small group of far sighted intellectuals and statesmen who controlled the major power centers of the colonies. They were representatives of colonial governments, complete with functioning military units; they were the large landowners; they were the principal merchants; they owned the printing presses. In other words, American independence was won by the courage and sacrifices of common soldiers, but the soldiers were led by a much smaller group of men who were leaders of the colonial system. That is the way it always has been throughout history and that is the way it always will be. It’s just a question of which minority will lead.

WHO WILL LEAD TODAY?
     That is our challenge today: who will lead? Will it be a minority of collectivists or a minority of individualists? Unless individualists wake up to the reality of power and become mobilized within the power centers of society, it will be the collectivists who will rule the world – forever.

We, in Freedom Force, are not content with that answer. We are resolved to meet the enemy on the battlefield – the real battlefield where the real battles must be fought – within the groups and organizations that comprise the power centers of society. We are resolved to take them back, one-by-one, in a reversal of the process by which we lost them in the first place. That is why we do not pursue an assortment of hot-button issues and projects. Instead, our mission is to promote a wider apprediation for the ideology of individualism, to prepare our members to counter the deceptive tactics of collectivists, to teach the techniques of organizational work, and to assist each other to become effective leaders within community and national organizations – not our organization, but other organizations. We do not wait for the world to come to us. We go to the world, into the power centers where people already are. We support their work. We offer assistance. We seek influence by earning the right to provide leadership.

Many pro-freedom groups try to appeal directly to the masses. They design projects and slogans to appeal to as wide an audience as possible. They seek to attain a critical mass that is so large it will succeed on the basis of numbers alone. This approach is doomed, because there is far too much diversity of interest and awareness among the people to expect a critical mass on any single issue.

Our approach is different. It is the approach of our collectivist opponents. We recognize that the general population is not homogenous. It is made up of a thousand sub-groups, each with its own unique interest, life style, educational level, age group, values, theology, language, and culture. A single organization cannot provide meaningful leadership for all of these. However, it is entirely possible for a single organization to have its members become influential in the many groups within this diversity. In this way, even though each of the separate organizations maintains its unique qualities and narrow purpose, gradually they can become unified at the leadership level behind basic principles and long-term goals. Each organization, in its own way and following its own unique style, will become synchronized with the others. Everything they do will be consistent with the Creed and the Three Commandments of Freedom. When this happens, the diversity of these organizations becomes a strength, not a weakness. When they share a common ideological orientation among their leaders, critical mass will happen.

Because of this strategy, Freedom Force as an organization does not directly participate in programs that call for action on specific issues, but its members are active within other organizations that do. These may be existing organizations with which we choose to affiliate or they may be new organizations which we form for specific agendas. That is the strategy of Freedom Force.

STRIKING AT THE ROOT OF EVIL, NOT ITS BRANCHES
     The strategy of Freedom Force is perfectly summarized in this letter from a member:

FREEDOM FORCE WON’T WORK!
     When I received the following email, I was frustrated by the realization that, in spite of my efforts to explain the strategy of Freedom Force on our web site, there still are people out there who don’t get it. The subject line of this letter was: “Been there, done that,” and the message was that Freedom Force won’t work. The writer, who obviously was an informed and seasoned freedom warrior, had concluded that the masses are too ignorant and brainwashed to respond to the Freedom Force message, and there is nothing we can ever do to win them over.

I had dealt with this issue in several places on our web site but it was clear that I had failed to make my point. I decided that, if all those words hadn’t done it, writing more of them would make no difference. So I moved the email into my Delete folder and went on with my work. But the letter gnawed on me for the next few days and, finally, I couldn’t resist the opportunity to have one more try at it. I retrieved the email and wrote a response, both of which follow.

This was my reply:
     Thank you for your thoughts on why Freedom Force will not work. Normally, I would just comfort myself with the knowledge that "You can't win them all" and move on to the positive task of continuing to build our movement. However, the points you raised are shared by many, especially those who have been in the battle for a long time and have become weary of the struggle. As you said in your letter, you have "been there, done that," and it appears that you have given up all hope of victory. I am taking the time to address these points because, although I, too, have been in the trenches for many years, I have come to an entirely different conclusion.

If you have been following the standard strategy of all previous efforts on behalf of freedom - spreading the word, attending seminars, reading books, writing letters of protest, conducting petition drives, and similar educational activities - you have not followed the core strategy of Freedom Force. Your pessimism is based on the assumption that the only way to restore freedom is to educate the majority. That is never going to happen and, if our strategy were based on that impossibility, I would have to share your pessimism. But that is not our strategy. That is not how collectivists achieved control over society, and that is not how we will replace them.

For the past one hundred years, totalitarians in the competing branches of collectivism (Nazism, Leninism, and Rhodesism) did not gain control over the nations that became their initial power base by appealing to the masses for intellectual support. They did so by first capturing control of the power centers of those nations (including but not limited to political parties and, as you mentioned, schools) and then appealing to the masses through the use of simple slogans. Their most powerful weapon has always been propaganda to create the emotions of hatred, fear, and greed.

We can learn much from our enemies. While we certainly reject their ideology and their ethics, we must acknowledge that some of their strategies have merit. I am referring here to the strategy of winning the masses, not by writing letters, circulating petitions, or conducting educational campaigns, but by gaining influence within mass-membership organizations and fielding political candidates (and other leaders) who champion simple issues which elicit an emotional response. There is nothing unethical about this strategy, provided, of course, that there is no deception and that the issues are genuine. For example, what could be more emotional - and genuine - than a 9/11 truth campaign, or a campaign to restore national sovereignty, or one to restore the purchasing power of our money, or one to throw out fraudulent electronic voting machines? Those of us who would be defining the terms of debate and writing the slogans would have a profound allegiance to the principles in The Creed of Freedom, but we would not expect the masses to understand or even to be interested in them. They will forever be motivated by material interests, emotions, and slogans. Instead of complaining that we will never educate the majority, we should accept that reality of human nature and make it work for a free society. There will always be some small group that will lead the majority. Our Founding Fathers knew this. Our enemies know this. Now we must come to grips with it - or perish.

The point of all this is that achieving political influence indirectly through the power centers of society is old hat to our collectivist opponents, but it is a brand new concept for many within the freedom movement. I venture to say that you have never tried it. In short, you have NOT been there, done that.

Huxley's quote is profound but it is missing an important qualification. He says that "social organization is at once necessary and fatal. Men are forever creating such organizations for their own convenience and forever finding themselves the victims of their home-made monsters." This has the ring of truth, but there is a question that must be answered before we can agree or disagree. The question is: "What KIND of social organization?" In Huxley's time, the United States already was abandoning its heritage of individualism in favor of collectivism, so there were only three kinds of social organization in existence: barbarism, theocracy, and collectivism, which was the latest arrival and rapidly becoming the system-of-choice in the Western World. If those were our only choices, then we would agree with Huxley's pessimism. But if we open our minds to the possibility of a social organization based on the principles of individualism, then we must adamantly disagree. The members of Freedom Force are not interested in perpetuating the same tragic social organizations of the past. We are working to build a new model that will break the mold and change the course of future history.

You say that our organization eventually will be subverted into the service of collectivism, because that has been the fate of most similar movements in history. You may be correct. Who can know for sure what will transpire in the next few hundred years; but you should go back and ponder the effect that The Creed of Freedom will have on those who follow in our footsteps. Here again, Freedom Force has introduced an entirely new element into the mix. No other freedom movement in history has ever had an immutable statement of principles to serve as a perpetual gyroscope for future action.

Will it work? I cannot say with certainty that it will; but nothing like it has ever been tried before, and I sincerely believe it will function exactly as intended. Even if the gyroscope should run down in a hundred years or so, at least we would have the satisfaction of knowing that we helped to usher in a century of freedom and left behind a clear record for succeeding generations to study and improve for the next cycle. A hundred years of freedom and tranquility is the worst-case scenario. That's the down side. On the up side, there is every reason to believe that The Creed of Freedom has within it the power to keep spinning for as long as man inhabits the planet.

WHY WE REJECT PASSIVE RESISTANCE
     A member recently sent a letter to concur with our strategy of not getting bogged down in endless calls to action on “emergency” issues and focusing instead on replacing the people in power who are causing those emergencies. Then he wrote:

The following comments are an expanded version of my reply:

Thanks for your thoughtful letter. The concept of passive resistance has attracted a great deal of support in recent times, and it is tempting to consider it as a strategy for dramatizing public opposition to totalitarianism calling itself homeland security. Here are my thoughts on this issue.

1. If we embarked on such a program, at the outset we would have to be clear about how far we intend to go with it. Bumper stickers and billboards are easy, almost fun; but would we urge our members to go all the way and actually defy the laws? That is the logical extension of any resistance campaign, and not to do so would be hypocrisy. So, what we would be endorsing is, not just civil disobedience, which is a sanitized phrase, but actually violating laws.

2. If we urge citizens to break the law, we would be asking them to become criminals in the eyes of the state. That would make us criminals also – as conspirators to break the law. We would be handing our opponents a golden invitation to close down our operation and throw us all in prison. From that point forward, we would be spending all of our time either behind bars or defending ourselves in court. Forget everything else. Let me repeat that. Forget everything else we are trying to do.

3. Violating laws we think are unjust, unconstitutional, or immoral is honorable and, at times, the only moral thing to do; but how many people are prepared to do that? We have been living under an increasing number of unjust, unconstitutional, and immoral laws for the last 100 years, the tide slowly rising with each session of our state and national legislatures. Why do we suddenly draw the line here and now? What is there about the present that makes it different in principle than the past? There is, of course, nothing different in principle, so we would have to answer by saying there comes a time when enough is enough, and we have finally come to that point.

4. So far so good, but is it true that the American people in general truly have had enough? Are they really fed up to the point where they are now willing to go to prison in defense of their principles and ideals? In my opinion, the answer is no, not even close. In spite of all the bravado about “Prying my gun from my cold, dead hand,” the reality is quite different. Most men are willing to fight to the death as part of an organized military force with leadership and discipline, led against a foreign enemy, and when motivated by national pride and loyalty to country; but, when confronted one at a time by jackboots from their own government, the vast majority would tumble like a stack of marbles.

5. It can be argued that, if the number of resistors were large enough to clog the law-enforcement system, the government would have no choice but to yield. That is fantasy. For many years, the government has contemplated the possibility of large-scale dissent and rebellion and has implemented procedures and facilities to handle it. I believe that collectivists at the top actually are eager for this turn of events, because that would give them the ultimate justification to suspend even the pretense of constitutional law.

6. When thinking of Gandhi or M.L. King as passive-resistance role models for our movement, we must remember that India’s movement for independence and the Civil Rights movement in the US were both supported by a sympathetic media. Gandhi and King were portrayed in the press as high-minded leaders for a noble cause. Without this positive reinforcement in the media (and from government sectors as well) neither movement would have had any chance of success. If Gandhi and King had been portrayed as criminals and troublemakers who deserved to be prosecuted, they would have had no following. It would be foolish to expect Freedom Force or any other legitimate pro-freedom group to have the support of a sympathetic media. Any program of passive resistance on our part would soon be portrayed as a militia or quasi-terrorist program – and the public would believe it.

7. This is not a question of courage but one of strategy. It is praiseworthy to be willing to go to prison, if necessary, for what we believe is right, but this resolve needs to be weighed against other possibilities. If other options are open to us, we need to consider if any of them might be more effective for our purposes. We need to see if there are things we can do out of prison that would be more effective in promoting our cause than what we can do in prison. If there are, then it would be foolish to choose the option with the lesser chance of success. That would be like throwing ourselves into the teeth of enemy machine-gun fire when we had the option of moving, unseen, through a gully and attacking from behind. Yes, it would be courageous to sacrifice one’s self in a frontal attack. But, if there is a better option, it would be an irrational act of suicide and a lost chance for victory. So we must ask: Is there a better option for us? I believe there is. In fact, I believe that the Freedom Force strategy of recapturing the power centers of society by constitutional and legal means, not only is a better option, it is the only one with any chance of success.

In summary: While others are writing letters of protest from the comfort of their homes or practicing civil disobedience, the real battle is raging in the power centers of society – the organizations that shape the political and social policies of the nation. The battle will continue there for decades to come – even within the New World Order, which is already upon us. No matter how long it takes, members of Freedom Force will be there and, ultimately, will prevail.

TILTING WINDMILLS WITH LEGAL ARGUMENTS
     Every once in a while, we receive a reprimand from someone who feels we are not standing our constitutional ground because we do not advocate challenging the government in court on various legal issues. One of the claims we often hear is that the government of the United States is a corporation and, by various illegal measures over the years, it has reduced American citizens to the status of chattel – a legal Strawman with no rights – and that the government owns all our property and even our identities. There are numerous web sites offering historical records and legal opinions in support of the claim that, if only we can get these records and opinions admitted into a court of law, judges will be blown away by it and will have to concede that the federal government, as it now stands, is a criminal syndicate with no jurisdiction over any American, except a few who are employed by the government itself and possibly those who are descendants of slaves. It is argued that taking this issue to the courts is the only way to recapture our freedom. We get letters all the time from folks who think that, because we do not agree with this, we are slackers or, worse, that we have sold out. The following sentiments in a recent letter are typical:

This was my reply:

I wish I had the time to give your letter the extensive response it deserves. Let it suffice to say that I strongly disagree with your proposed solution. These are the reasons:

1. Although there undoubtedly is some merit to the legal arguments in defense of the Strawman hypothesis, I am not convinced that this is the foundation of the government’s present totalitarian stance. If it were, there would be no need for the so-called Patriot Act or any similar legislation so eagerly sought by collectivists. As I see it, our problems have gradually developed from an accumulation of too many restrictive laws, too many creative interpretations by the Supreme Court, too many unchallenged executive orders, and too much indifference on the part of the American people. Even if the United States were not a corporation, and even if there were not two classes of citizens, and even if government documents did not use upper-case letters, and even if there were no Strawman concept in law, and even if there were no Social Security numbers, or any of the other things of which you complain, we still would be in exactly the same predicament. You are chasing a phantom.

2. Your proposed solution is based on the assumption that, if we could only get certain historical documents and legal opinions admitted into court, and if we could only get courageous and principled lawyers to present them, judges will have no choice but to rule against the federal government that employs them. Freedom Force has no intention of building its strategy on such a naïve assumption.

3. It is one thing to talk boldly about our rights and the technicalities of law, but unless you control law enforcement and the judicial system, you are wasting your time. Our collectivist leaders control the police, the courts, and the military – to say nothing of the media, the educational system, the monetary system, and every other aspect of our social fabric. There are only two ways to change that. One is by a sudden, violent revolution, and the other is by a gradual, peaceful revolution; but it must be a revolution in any event. In other words, the collectivists who now dominate the power centers of society must be replaced by individualists. Any thought of bringing that about by a successful violent revolution under the present circumstances would be suicidal, to say the least. So our only realistic option is the long-term strategy of patient gradualism, exactly the same strategy used by our collectivist opponents. That is the strategy of Freedom Force.

THIS IS NOT A STUDY GROUP OR PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY
     There are many organizations that promote personal freedom primarily from an ideological or philosophical perspective. Their web sites often display charts and graphics illustrating how the perfect society should function. In some cases, the utopia is based on the concept of volunteerism with no government at all. In others, the utopia is based on the concept that high ideals and correct thinking will change our planet for the better if only supported by a sufficient number of people. The assumption is that people don't really have to do anything except be enlightened and have the right attitude. If the numbers are great enough, a critical mass will be achieved, and the totalitarians that now dominate society will, somehow, lose their power, and governments will become servants of the people. Typically, these movements have no plan for confronting the oligarchy. They have no stomach for struggle, conflict, or controversy. They enjoy the safety of ivory towers where the present rulers will leave them alone (for now) because they pose no significant threat. They spend their days drawing up master plans for a future utopian society; but, meanwhile, the Goths are at the gates. No, they are INSIDE the gates and living in the palace. It is essential to have an ideology and a plan for how to build a better world, but what is needed NOW is for the philosophers to leave the ivory towers and draw their swords to help us recapture the city.

Putting that into context of the real world of today, it is time for all philosophers to follow the strategy of Freedom Force and do everything in their power to become influential in the groups and organizations that comprise the major power centers of society. That is where the battles are being fought. Unless we can win those battles, we cannot win the war. And, unless we win the war, we will never have an opportunity to build our utopia.

Does that mean that philosophical movements are useless? Not at all. In fact, the more the better. Each in its own way can contribute critical thinking and fresh concepts to the vision we seek of a better world. But I urge the leaders of all of these groups to come together in common support of the principles expressed in The Creed of Freedom and, further, to become ambassadors of Freedom Force and carry these concepts to the members of their respective organizations. In this way, we can build a massive, international movement that, although it has different appeals for different people, will be united in principle. This is the only path to victory.

LOCAL CHAPTERS
     Local chapters are the centers of Freedom Force activities. They serve geographical areas that, typically, are represented by a local phone directory. They vary in size depending on population density and the dynamics of each group. A minimum of six members is required to form a chapter, but the optimum number is between fifty and one hundred. Some large, metropolitan areas with strong leadership may have several-hundred members or more. There are no exclusive geographical areas. Anyone who gathers six or more members together is entitled to form a chapter.

Although there is no limit to the size of a single chapter, human nature will provide its own limit. When a group becomes too large, one of the members will step forward and enlist five others to break away and start a new chapter in the same area. If the need is valid, many of the members from the too-large chapter will transfer to the new chapter, and the proper balance will be achieved without formulas or directives from headquarters. This process is not viewed as an affront to the original chapter president. Rather, it is the expected process by which chapters multiply.

An important function of a chapter is to bring together people of like mind simply so they can meet each other. Many are convinced they are alone and that no one else understands or cares about what is happening in the world. They are not aware that there are many others, exactly like themselves, each one isolated and psychologically defeated merely because they don't know the size and strength of their own numbers. Personal networking is the starting point for breaking that pattern. Once that is accomplished, the real work of the chapter is to create teams to undertake mission projects.

Chapter activities fall into five categories:

1. Public Information. This includes distributing educational materials, sponsoring public forums, broadcasting video programs on public-access TV, participating in call-in radio programs, writing letters to editors, placing advertisements, and operating a voters' information service. These activities are not always done directly by Freedom Force (for reasons explained previously) but sometimes through other organizations, many of which are created by our members.

2. Membership expansion. This includes distributing printed materials and recordings and holding private meetings for invited guests.

3. Training. This includes conducting classes and workshops related to our Internet courses.

4. Networking. This includes holding social and recreational events interspersed among business events.

5. Mission. This is the ultimate purpose of Freedom Force. It includes guidance and support for member participation in outside organizations.

Those who cannot be active in community organizational work can help in other ways, such as recruiting, assisting with clerical tasks, running errands, greeting people at public meetings, or hosting social functions. For those who are unable to do these things, providing financial support is, by itself, important. Regardless of your talents or aptitudes, there is plenty for you to do in Freedom Force.

Updated 2009 July 25

Back