Blog

Thoughts on Organization

One of the biggest problems faced by preppers is the whole ‘OPSEC’ and group building thing. Finding decent people out there. That is one of the main obstacles to preparing for any of the ‘post-collapse’ tactics that we all talk about, and that I promote/ train: you need TEAM. Whether  for defending a retreat or a subdivision, or fighting foreign enemies, you can’t do it without team.

First you need decent people.

Then you need to train to an acceptable standard.

The combination of those two things will give you a chance of producing a TEAM: it’s an ongoing evolution – conducting effective training will in itself help select and bond the team, while good training can also have character building effects on people.

In this article I will talk a little bit about the building blocks for an effective tactical organization. This will not be about the logistical/auxiliary/Intel side, but that needs to be there in order to allow a tactical group to remain effective.

As a bit of background to this article, you may find it useful to read these two:

‘The Squad – Size and Organization’

‘More on The Squad & the Assault Cycle’

So the main problem is finding people. After that, it is lack of effective training. So, let’s keep this small, keep it local. I think that a mistake that many who are more on the prepping than tactical side make, is that they can’t find suitable people, or bring themselves to trust anyone, and part of this is the assumption that whoever you link up with must get immediate access to your retreat and stuff. That is a huge impediment. An easier way would be to step back from the whole “we are going to all meet at your retreat and can stuff” and just meet socially.

MVT offers resources to find people close to you. Whether you meet them at a training class, or on the MVT Forum, you can meet people with a like minded interest in training, without having to bare your soul or let them know the secret location of your Mountain House stash (my preciousssss….). This gives you the option of training partners. If it develops into a relationship of mutual trust, then that is a good thing. In NOVA, via the forum, we have started some meet ups. All it is is a small group of scoundrels meeting in a den of iniquity for a few drinks. I tell you, it’s a great way to get out of baby duty for an evening ;-)

forum-logo

_______________

Read the rest on the MVT Forum:  Forums › Tactics & Leadership › Teamwork & Leadership

 

 

25 responses to “Thoughts on Organization”

  1. That’s one of the best-articulated opinions on the BLM events, that I’ve seen. Thanks for that.

    Are your team organizations drawing heavily from British military organization, or is this just an adapted concept you’ve created for civilians? I just ask because they are decidedly different than US taskorg.

    You list a grenadier in your taskorg. How do you envision this role?

    • It’s a mix, an amalgam. Brit Army sections are eight men, 2 x 4 man fire teams. US Army is 9 men, 2 x 4 man fire teams plus an additional squad leader. USMC has a 13 man squad. I have used the 8 to 12 man squad in the past. It’s best adapted to be flexible and suit civilian use, for example you can build with 4 man teams – you may never get to the size of a 30 man platoon, but you can still operate like a platoon with a half-size 12/13 man squad. Think assault cycle.
      Grenadier: an actual grenadier if you have any. He is the TL’s buddy, the other two would be the close support pair. He could also specialize as a breacher. METT-TC right? ;-)

  2. We sometimes defeat ourselves. We are rightly suspicious of the self-appointed commander and his motivations. However, someone needs to be in charge. It would be absolutely fantastic if these things could be worked out in advance, but I doubt it. For now I will not follow anyone I have no prior knowledge of, Bunkerville fiasco in mind. I envision a small group of patriots sporting MVT patches that arrive on scene and get together to intelligently pick a leader. From what I’ve seen of those that attend Max’s classes, I would gladly get together with 12 if them and submit myself to operate under who was chosen to command.

    Max, did you get my email on the leadership training?

    Ernie

  3. A primary requirement for militias is that they pick their leaders. If someone appoints himself, (the afformentioned Colonel Bob types) it is nothing more than a paramilitary group (doesn’t comply with guidlines originally established for the militia). Well said Max. Even though a war didn’t start there, it wasn’t because there weren’t individuals trying to start one. :ell, one of them is a defacto “Leader”, what a joke.

    • I also think the npg, militia, whatever must elect their leaders, very much in the way the colonial militia of 1775 did it. They had many combat veterans of the French and Indian Wars among them, as well as many common farmers and village folk. They drilled and trained together, and picked the men to lead who not only had the experience, but in the eyes of the group, the judgement to get the town through whatever the situation. The militia captain, although in charge, was expected to consult with his troops (time permitting) before committing them.
      I think that historical example is a good model to follow and dovetails with what max and you wrote.

      • Followup- the Bundy ranch is an example of self-appointed ‘colonels’. The Lexington militia on April 19, 1775 is a better example to follow. Capt John Parker, elected by the Lexington militia, formed up his company on Lexington Green as 800 British Regulars marched in. Men on both sides were spoiling for a fight, but Capt Parker realized the colonists could not fire first, and ordered ‘stand your ground, and do not fire unless fired upon. But if they wish to have a war, let it begin here’. Only minutes later, realizing that he faced overwhelming numbers of Regulars, he ordered his men to disperse, rather than surrender his arms, or to be the first to fire. That is the kind of judgement under pressure you want. The kind of guy who insists that he be in charge regardless of the qualifications of anyone else in the group probably doesn’t have that maturity and judgement, never mind the tactical skills.

  5. One of the greatest challenges in forming a civilian defensive group is balancing a non-ridged command structure while still attaining the unity of command required for combat operations. In this I think it’s fair to say that such an organization requires an even greater degree of leadership than a military unit, a unity of command that must be achieved with a soft touch. In non-authoritarian leadership styles this means developing a vision and getting people to really buy into that vision. When that happens people within the organization can be allowed greater autonomy to achieve clearly defined goals and objectives that reflect the leaders intent. But the foundation of individual leadership in such an organization starts with competency/legitimacy where one can lead by example. This is one of the greatest opportunities provided by running team scenarios as it helps identify leaders via performance and those who are all talk.

    “Nothing in war is more important than unity of command”- Napoleon

    A good resource on Building a M.A.G(Mutual Assistance Organization):
    http://www.amazon.com/MAGS-Prepping-Organize-Assistance-Situation/dp/1493517856/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1399586252&sr=1-1&keywords=MAGS

  6. Guido, yes, “The Militia Act of 1792”, and the “1903 Dick Act. TC, I was refering to a specific “leader” that you would all recognize the name of. The individual in question repeatedly tried to instigate situations, and spread rumors of things that were not true. The info I received, came from a friend who was there, and witnessed it first hand (not a rumor). I applaud your proactive efforts, guys like you and my buddy are the reason it didn’t turn into a bloodbath.

  7. Well thought out, if there is a we then we have to start with buddy pairs then teams, not playing mini-military militia games.

  8. There are two main reasons I started concentrating more on teaching the buddy team course (RBTEC). 1) The buddy team is the basic building block, and you need to figure out the in’s and out’s of that, before the “team” stuff. 2) Even if you can’t get four guys together, most people have a buddy to do it with. I have no problem sending students to Max for further training, I’d rather concentrate on the buddy team class curiculum, since my teaching time is limited. I would rather have a student tak a class from both of us anyway, to get different “takes” on the same topics. “Tools in the toolbox”, right?

    • Well said JC. IMO your training concept is a great reflection of present day reality. People first search out a buddy, probably basic human psychology or something.

      IMO FreeFor has to start from the ground up not this mini-me army/marinecorps/sealteam6 nonsense of big mil playtime. Max says it best in the ” be know do” paragraph.

      I basically wrote that at Mosby’s site and then some of his followers jumped in with the usual big mil sarge knows best or else attitude. IMO that attitude has produced decades of clown fail.

  9. “We are all the militia, and the only way to earn it is not with grandiose names and ranks, but by training and commonality of purpose.”

    Well said. The way we did it was we started training with the guys we had,with the experience they had. We may not have known much about modern combat or trained for it at first-but then…
    We had a guy join who is a recently returned from Afghanistan ranger SSGT.
    The Staff SGT. brought a whole lot to the group,and became the leader because he knows his shit-knows how to train people,knows modern combat techniques.
    We started with guys who’s last combat was Vietnam,and Desert Storm.
    A whole lot has changed since then-the basics are still the same-t

    Just my two cents,but the way to go is find an NCO with recent combat experience who is not a douchenozzle-and let him train your group-it works.

  10. Wow,lost an entire sentence when I posted…

    Should be- the basics are still the same,but some tactics have changed-it pays to know both old and new. (as long as old isn’t trench warfare)

  11. A successful unit will be built bottom up and not top down. NCOs have gained experience as soldiers before being promoted, Every CPT has spent years as a LT. The idea is that the guy above you in the organization has done previously, what you are doing now, and should be passing along the benefit of his experience.

    The Militia Act of 1792 makes very interesting reading. National standards were set in arms and organization – and mirrored the arms and organization of the standing army. If fact, there was a higher proportion of Cavalry and Artillery in the militia, than in the standing army. That this goal was never achieved was illustrated in the War of 1812, but militia units with good leaders performed well, and those with bad leaders were beat like a drum by the British Army.

  12. Man…

    I love this place. There is so much knowledge, wisdom, experience, and “coolness” (meaning calm, thoughtful, reflection) in this post. It really is too bad that so many of us are separated by such great distances. The group that posts here, as a unit, would a force to be reckoned with.

  13. One thing we need to remember about the militia in the revolutionary war was that the militia had been fighting an ongoing conflict with the French and Indians for an extended time and did work together in large groups as adjuncts to the British army. That is how George Washington became a general. He had been fighting at various levels of command his entire life.

    The closet we have to that now are the mustered out military we have as part of the civilian militia. If I was in a pick up group and some one wanted to lead I would ask to see his dd214. We could go from there.

  15. Max,

    Great stuff. Harsh but sadly true. We discussed this every issue in depth at the NC PATCON. Only 3 units sent reps, but it was a start. Keep them coming, your advice is always welcome.