Aboveground/Underground: An Introduction to Firewalls

“If they want to be both effective and protected, each member of a resistance movement must make an essential decision: choosing between public and clandestine action. Having one foot in each camp puts everyone at risk.”

— Aric McBay, peasant-activist and author

Within a resistance movement, organizations that adopt different tactics generally coexist. The choice of tactics is based on the political, technical and economic environment, but also on the skills and experience of the members of the movement. It is possible to classify these tactics into two main categories. On the one hand, theAboveground (literally “above ground”), which includes legal and non-violent actions carried out in the open (demonstrations, public meetings, sit-ins, hunger strike, happening, communication campaign, etc.). On the other hand, theUnderground (“underground”) to distinguish illegal and dangerous activities that should in principle be carried out clandestinely (intelligence, sabotage, rioting, guerrilla warfare, expropriation, etc.).

Often misunderstood, this distinction is nevertheless vital in order to increase the effectiveness of a resistance movement. It is found theorized by the Canadian peasant-activist Aric McBay^[1] In his book Full Spectrum Resistance (2021) as well as in the manifesto Deep Green Resistance (2011). A long-time environmental activist, he studied historical resistance movements (Nelson Mandela's ANC, Nelson Mandela's ANC, Black Panther Party, Earth Liberation Front, civil rights movement, anti-colonial movements, anti-colonial movements, French resistance to Nazism, etc.). This separation between public (legal) action and clandestine (illegal) action was also noticed by our opponents, for example the French military strategist David Galula. This renowned counterinsurgency expert studied (and fought) post-war anti-colonial movements in Asia and North Africa^[2]. In short, the firewall is an essential principle of security culture for any revolutionary movement worth its salt.

In this article, you will learn:

• The differences between face to face and covert operations
• Why shouldn't the same activist never Do both
• The strategic importance of the diversity of tactics within a movement

Public action, clandestine action: what are the differences?

Public action can be distinguished from clandestine action by a few general characteristics:

• Open public action is non-violent, while clandestine action is often more aggressive;
• The risk (prison, injury, death) incurred by underground activists is generally much higher.

It is obviously the legal framework in force that sets the threshold and determines the border between public and clandestine operations. This framework is constantly evolving according to the activities of the resistance and the reaction of the regime in place. As McBay recalls, this border is not set in stone:

“The separation between open face tactics and covert tactics is not fixed. It depends mainly on two things: on the social and political context and on the audacity of the resistance fighters.”

In an authoritarian or totalitarian regime, it goes without saying that any form of political opposition is forbidden. Nonviolent actions must therefore also be carried out underground. This was the case of the French Resistance to Nazism, which had to take care to secretly distribute its tracts, brochures and newspapers.

In this article, of course, we are taking the example of a liberal regime where political opposition is tolerated.

Unveiled nonviolent action (Aboveground)

Uncovered nonviolent activism is defined as follows by political scientist Gene Sharp:

“Nonviolent action is a generic term that includes dozens of specific methods of protest, of non-cooperation And ofintervention. What they have in common is that resistance fighters lead the conflict by performing certain acts — or by refraining from doing so — by means other than physical violence.^[3].”

Gene Sharp lists 198 specific methods of nonviolent struggle divided into these three main categories. In the category of nonviolent protest and persuasion (which is also the least disruptive to the system), he mentions written statements, petitions, leaflets, pickets, symbol displays, symbolic noises, vigils, vigils, chants, parades, chants, parades, parades, fake funerals, parades, false funerals, protest meetings, silence, turning your back, etc.

In the non-cooperation category, Gene Sharp cites social or economic boycotts, elections boycotts, student strikes, workers' strikes, refusal to pay taxes or rent, withdrawal of bank deposits, civil disobedience, or even non-cooperation by government agencies.

The third major category includes methods of non-violent intervention, that is, those “that actively disrupt the normal functioning of the policy or system through deliberate interference, whether psychological, physical, social, social, social, economic, or political”:

“A large number of methods fall into this category; fasting, sit-ins, nonviolent raids, nonviolent raids, nonviolent obstructions, nonviolent occupation, overcrowding of facilities, alternative social institutions, alternative communication systems, reverse strikes, stay-at-home strikes, strikes while staying at home, nonviolent land takeovers, nonviolent land seizures, nonviolent land takeovers, defiance of blockades, capital seizures, selective clientele, alternative economic institutions, administrative systems overload, demand for imprisonment, stay-at-home strikes, nonviolent land seizures, nonviolent land seizures, and parallel governments.”

After this overview of actions that generally respect the legal framework of liberal regimes in the West, let's move on to clandestine operations.

Clandestine action (Underground)

“Clandestine tactics need to be practiced secretly to avoid repression or simply to be undertaken.”

— Aric McBay

Aric McBay provides this list of tactics that are almost always limited to clandestinity:

• Clandestine intelligence activity;
• Escape;
• Sabotage and equipment takeover;
• Attack of enemy troops;
• Bullying;
• Assassination.

The study of the French Resistance to Nazism over the period 1940-1944 sheds light on the nature and function of clandestine organizations. For example, the Alliance intelligence network:

“In total, the Alliance network, equipped with a staff, stations, radios, and heads of regions, will bring together some 1,500 resistance fighters, often soldiers, but also civil servants or members of liberal professions, whose mission is to infiltrate strategic locations, ports, Wehrmacht command centers, ports, Wehrmacht command centers, air installations, submarine bases, in order to provide accurate military information to Intelligence Service [UK Foreign Intelligence Service] that collects their harvest through clandestine radios. Each agent carries a pseudonym, usually animal names — Marie-Madeleine, Chief of Staff, is “Hedgehog”, her deputies “Aigle”, “Basset” or “Ermine” — which will lead the Gestapo to nickname the network “Noah's Ark”^[4]“.”

The Resistance had also planned operations on French territory aimed at considerably disrupting Nazi Germany's defense capabilities at the time of the Allied landings.

“The plans aim to hamper the occupying forces as much as possible at the time of the Allied landings:

• The Green Plan, prepared in conjunction with Résistance-Fer, consists in paralyzing the rail network.
• The Tortue Plan, which later became Bibendum, aims to paralyze the road system in the north-western quarter of France.
• Plan Violet provides for the sabotage of telephone lines.
• Plan Bleu provides for the use of high-voltage lines to deprive electrified railways and coastal areas of power.

The Red Plan foresees the outbreak of guerrilla warfare from six areas that are difficult to access: Morvan, Massif Central, Pyrénées, Alps, Jura, Vosges. Considered as “reduced areas”, these areas should serve as a refuge and base for the Maquis whose mission is to harass the German rear.

Finally, the Cayman Plan foresees actions to be taken in the event of a second landing in Provence to liberate the South-West and certain Alpine sectors.^[5].”

Thus, clandestine operations are often considered decisive actions due to their great material impact.

The usefulness of partitioning

For this part, we are reproducing an entire excerpt from the book Full Spectrum Resistance (Volume 1) by Aric McBay dealing with the firewall:

“Resistance movements protect themselves by separating sections. Open and the sections clandestine. Most of us work in open-faced groups. However, as we saw in the previous chapter, various reasons justify the creation of underground groups: to escape persecution, to publish underground newspapers, to put into practice direct action.

Organizations that work in the open can communicate with and mobilize a large number of people, and for the most part adopt low-risk tactics. They rarely use tactics that are very illegal or require great discretion. Clandestine groups, on the other hand, act secretly; they are small groups of highly involved people who have made the choice to take risks.

Illegal groups protect themselves in particular through secrecy and compartmentalization. They know that they will always face repression, but that they will be protected and supported by their allies. Open organizations, on the other hand, protect themselves primarily by increasing their numbers and by taking deep roots in resistance communities; and if members risk prison or death, other members of the community will step forward to take their place.

The organizational needs of public groups and underground units are fundamentally different, which is why effective resistance groups generally have a firewall between the two: members of a public group cannot be simultaneously active in underground organizations. If this rule is not respected, the state can easily identify and track members of clandestine groups, infiltrate and compromise them. It is also dangerous for people working with their faces uncovered, as they could be involved in actions for which they do not have adequate safety skills. On a daily basis, members of clandestine organizations adopt appropriate coverage, the attitude of “normal” or even conservative people, and avoid recklessly committing crimes.

It can be very dangerous to mix open and clandestine actions within the same organization, given the very different nature of their needs. A public group, but too confidential and exclusive, will be isolated or marginalized; it will lose the strength of numbers and the community roots on which it depends, and will become easy prey. Moreover, a group that regularly breaks the law and threatens the interests of the powerful, without having adequate security measures in place, will not last long.”

The reader will be able to see for himself that many environmental groups and organizations in France do not respect this basic rule of compartmentalizing open activism and clandestine activism.

The importance of tactical diversity

“Powerful movements consist of complementary groups that can use different tactics.”

— Aric McBay

It is common in activist circles to see tactics dismissed or criticized for ethical or moral reasons. On the one hand, we have supporters of the dogma of non-violence who condemn en masse any form of direct action against industrial sites or infrastructures.^[6]. On the other hand, proponents of direct action such as the anarchist theorist Gelderloos say that all oil and gas wells should be plugged, except when this would risk causing famines. These idealists seem to believe that virtue leads to victory, as if respecting any moral compass had already made it possible to win a political or economic competition. If that were the case, heads of state, the ultra-rich, and other CEOs of big companies would be the most virtuous people in the world. What do you prefer? To become a model of virtue or to maintain life on this planet?

At ATR, we have already decided: we believe that the priority for any serious resistance fighter should be to actively engage in promoting the unique objective of the collapse of the technological system. Promotion which, in order to be carried out as effectively as possible, must be carried out with open face, in order to be able to benefit from the tactics that are most likely to convince and train a large number of people: communication (in person and via all available media, including social networks), recruitment, recruitment, collective organization of a culture of anti-tech resistance, etc.). Without the wide dissemination of this single objective, any action taken would risk the dispersion and ultimately the neutralization of its revolutionary potential. Before wanting to act, let's not forget to “think strategy”: there is no point in choosing tactics without a global strategy that allows us to give direction and purpose to concrete action. Likewise, there is no point in pretending to be designing a strategy when you are unable to briefly state a clear, unique and specific objective to be achieved. And there is no point in promoting a materially harmless objective that will be immediately picked up by the system. The rest of us, like all resistance fighters of our time, should demand the pure and simple end of the technological system that prevents humanity from otherwise living on this Earth. Disseminating this objective among contemporary resistances must be our top priority. Otherwise, we will once again witness the reproduction of recent history: legal and clandestine resistances will be recovered by technocracy and taken advantage of to expand the techno-industrial empire.

One thing must be understood: the separation between open public action and clandestine action is purely strategic. This rule increases our chances of winning, and has nothing to do with ethical or moral considerations. In his writings, Aric McBay repeatedly recalls that a powerful movement is a movement composed of diverse organizations capable of operating across the broadest possible spectrum of tactics.

“All members of resistance movements should understand how diverse approaches and the existence of underground organizations can benefit them and strengthen their struggles. The role played by underground groups in the past should be known to everyone, so that they are not swept under the carpet of history, as unorthodox groups such as the Deacons for Defense often are.”

The Deacons for Defense was an armed self-defense group formed in 1964, mainly in the southern United States, by African American civil rights movement activists. Still written by the ruling classes, the story celebrated the pacifist Marthin Luther King and erased the role played by the Deacons for Defense. The same historical revisionism is observable with regard to Indian anti-colonial resistance, where Gandhi's non-cooperation alone would have caused the British to capitulate. In the West, virtually no one has heard of the anarchist Bhagat Singh^[7], a figure in the independence movement almost as well known as the Mahatma in India. And for good reason, Singh advocated revolution by arms and organized direct actions against the English occupier. He was among the leaders of the underground struggle.

It is because of the threat represented by radical underground organizations that the frightened authorities ended up agreeing to negotiate with the most moderate ones. And if the leaders of moderate organizations had been less stupid and more strategic, they would never have compromised with the power/occupier. In this regard, let's remember that ATR is a legal organization operating in the open and uses only non-violent tactics. However, we will not accept never of compromise with the technocracy that builds, administers and develops the industrial system that threatens the survival of mankind and most other species. The continuation of life on our beautiful blue planet Is not negotiable.

Summary table

In order for the reader to have a quick overview of the tactical differences between open-faced groups and clandestine groups, we have reproduced the table below provided by Aric McBay with a few additions and modifications.

Criteria
Open face groups
Clandestine groups
MembershipMembership is generally open: anyone known to a member of the organization can join. However, some organizations may select their members according to certain criteria (skills, motivation, general attitude, etc.) as any company would. Membership is closed or closely monitored. Members only know the identity of the individuals in their area of action. The recruitment process is most often done by co-optation and can take some time to test the candidate.
Public image and external communicationThe group tends to attract attention and has public relations on their behalf. Members can openly assert their desire for change and their willingness to resist. The group tends not to be noticed or to distract all attention (except that concerning its actions). Links with the outside world are made through anonymous press releases or press offices.
Internal communicationInternal communication (with and between groups) is open, frequent, and explicit. Communication between groups is limited, monitored, concise, and encrypted.
Decision makingSome of these groups can be largely participatory with an emphasis on democratic, transparent, and participatory decision-making. But others can also be organized in a more hierarchical manner, as is done in most NGOs (Greenpeace, WWF, Sea Shepherd, etc.). Members often appear to be apolitical or conformist. The decision-making process is only known from within, and the choices depend on the function of the members and the structure.
ActionsMembers can move from group to group to share skills. Movement between groups is very limited, but the exchange of skills is still important.
Objective communicated to the publicThe actions are being announced to increase media attention and coverage. Targeted areas are those where the enemy is stronger or more concentrated (for example, business districts) with the desire to mobilize citizens or gain wider support. The group makes no advance announcement, except for occasional misinformation about future actions. Targeted areas are those where the enemy is weakest or the most dispersed. The group does not care about getting the support of the population, but it is ready to develop its network of supporters, and it aims to avoid reprisals that may be directed at the people.