This is Part-2 of my 3-Part series on Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.
Alinsky Part 1
Alinsky Part 3
What is an Organizer? Alinsky writes that “The organizer is in a true sense reaching for the highest level for which man can reach-to create, to be a “great creator, to play God.”
“The function of an organizer is to raise questions that agitate”
“He is challenging, insulting, agitating, discrediting. He stirs unrest, dissatisfaction and discontent.”
“The job of the organizer is to maneuver and bait the establishment so that it will publicly attack him as a “dangerous enemy”.”
Given Alinsky’s own words, it isn’t hard to see why so many on the left considered then Senator Obama a savior. As a self-professed professional “community organizer”, an Alinsky acolyte, Obama was, in leftist circles, literally a “great creator”.
Alinsky teaches that there are three types/groups of people in the world (Alinsky’s Words in Bold and Italics):
– “The Have-Nots” Democrats exploit this group of Americans the most, advancing progressive policies designed to make and keep them dependent upon government. Minorities, women and children top their list.
– “The Have-a Little, Want-Mores” This group of Americans is basically the middle class.
– “The Haves” During the Obama administration Democrats branded these Americans as the “1%”. President Obama himself seems to believe that you become the 1% when your income grows to $250K/year. Most of the Democrat Political leadership (Clintons, Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Deblasio, Gore, etc.) is extremely wealthy, as are their donors (George Soros, Hollywood Actors/Actresses/Directors, Union Bosses, etc.). As shown in my previous Alinsky post, there is no such thing as hypocrisy to Alinskyites.
Look for progressive policies couched in these three groups. It’s essential that they be pitted against one another, agitated, insulted, discredited and stirred up for the organizer to move his/her agenda. Division, not unity, is Alinsky’s calling card.
COMPROMISE: The clarion call of the progressive, and an essential component to a successful radical. How often do we hear politicians, in both parties, talking about compromise, as if that is the only thing that matters. Compromising where one’s principles must be abandoned, one’s security is diminished, or one’s country weakened, isn’t a good deal at all. Obama’s Iranian negotiations stand as a prime example.
“to the organizer, compromise is a key and beautiful word. If you start with nothing, demand 100 per cent, then compromise for 30 per cent, you’re 30 per cent ahead.”
“Conflict is the essential core of a free and open society.” Alinsky teaches how to create it. Ferguson, MO is a case study in how it’s done, and how devastating its effects can be.
“Before men can act an issue must be polarized. Men will act when they are convinced that their cause is 100 per cent on the side of the angels and that the opposition are 100 per cent on the side of the devil. He knows that there can be no action until issues are polarized to this degree.”
My final blog in this Alinsky series will contain the specific tactics Alinsky teaches organizers to employ.
Pingback: More Radical Lessons from Saul Alinsky’s Rules’ for Radicals :: Conservative GovernmentConservative Government
Pingback: Radical Lessons from Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals :: Conservative GovernmentConservative Government
Pingback: Top 10 Stories of the Week (17 May - 23 May 15) :: Conservative GovernmentConservative Government
Pingback: These Are The 3 Big 2016 Election Issues :: Conservative GovernmentConservative Government