Saul Alinski: Hero of The Left!

Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior MemberPosts: 7,198 Senior Member
Saul Alinski's name has been mentioned a few times in the last few weeks within threads discussing the leftist policies in this country. He was the author of the the book "Rules For Radicals." For those that are not that familiar with this man and who he was, I have attached an image that encapsulates the philosophy and methods for converting America to a socialist state. It's amazing how much of this program has already been completed, and how many liberals agree with this.


JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
«1

Replies

  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,709 Senior Member
    That article describes what Obama was doing to the letter and there's sixteen or seventeen more liberals in the running to take up where he left off.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,351 Senior Member
    I thought these were his "Rules for Radicals"...

    1. "Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
    2. "Never go outside the expertise of your people."
    3. "Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
    4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
    5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."
    6. "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
    7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
    8. "Keep the pressure on."
    9. "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."
    10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
    11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside."
    12. "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
    13. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,198 Senior Member
    edited April 4 #4
    The article doesn't say those are the rules. It says that those principles were part of Alinski's policies for creating a "social state." This was mentioned in my personal post on the subject.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”- - - - - - -Joseph Goebbels

    Alinsky seems to have had some help formulating his philosophy from Marx, and a few others along the way.  People too lazy or stupid to study history have a tendency to repeat the mistakes of previous societies.

    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,198 Senior Member
    edited April 4 #6
    Teach said:

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”- - - - - - -Joseph Goebbels

    Alinsky seems to have had some help formulating his philosophy from Marx, and a few others along the way.  People too lazy or stupid to study history have a tendency to repeat the mistakes of previous societies.

    Absolutely! Why else would the MSM keep repeating demonrat talking points for days or even weeks on end? We have the lying, hypocritical demonrats spouting the lies, and then the media reinforces them. Public schools have deprived students the knowledge of real history since the 60's, so none of the present-day students know anything about the past, or they have a distorted view. I read somewhere that Alinski actually asked for and got permission to audit the Chicago organized crime bosses so he could understand their methods and tactics they used in the everyday "business" of a crime family. Makes you wonder why the demonrats kind of emulate organized crime.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 19,898 Senior Member
    ... and come from Chicago!
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,798 Senior Member
    zorba said:
    ... and come from Chicago!
    Or NYC...
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 19,898 Senior Member
    That too!
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    edited April 4 #10
    Don't forget the Commiefornicators- - - - - -Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, Adam Scatt, Camel Toe Harris, "Any Twosome Newsome", etc.- - - -etc.- - - - -etc! 
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,733 Senior Member
    I have a question for you defenders of Saul Alinski:

    Let's pretend that Saul Alinski was not just an evil man whose initial goal was to install an authoritarian Soviet-style dictatorship by committee, in place of our present governing philosophy that purports to maintain individual freedoms...just for the sake of advancing the discussion.

    Assuming the above, it should be obvious to anyone that Alinski believed that "the end justifies the means," because the end result will be so wonderful that any means are justified to get there. It's a tricky subject that scholars and philosophers have grappled with since William Shakespeare posed it in his play, "Julius Caesar," a few hundred years ago.

    So...what is the end, that will justify Alinski's means? What is the authoritarian government going to do, once it has complete control? Does anybody really believe that a government that has absolute power is going to give a damn about 'social justice?'


  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,198 Senior Member
    edited April 7 #12
    bisley said:
    I have a question for you defenders of Saul Alinski:


    Hard to believe there are certain people here who actually defend his works. And we wonder how genocidal maniacs rise to power. Weak-minded and intellectually inferior people will always be the blind followers and defenders of tyrants. 
    There is at least one of those fools.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • earlyagainearlyagain Posts: 3,806 Senior Member
    Being uneducated and under age during Alinski's time. All I know of him is what's here in this thread and what is available on wikipedia.

    The points highlighted in the pictured column contained in the OP do sound like leftist philosophy, except the debt. That's a newly adopted Republican tactic used to compete politically with the Democrats santa clause tactics of gaining public support.

    Wikipedia's portrayal of him reads like he was more concerned with community activism than radically changing central government. It also further reads like his association with left wing/Democratic party politicians like Obama and H. Cliinton were over blown by right wing pundants for cheap sensationalism. Sounds like he would have just about as much disdain for them as the righteous Right.

    Books about political philosophy contain ideas for intellectual consideration. If the ideas are repulsive, why not just reject them and move on? This man has been given press and attention not by the left, but by the right, at least concerning my peripheral.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,733 Senior Member
    early,

    Feel free to change the subject back to the evils of Republicans, any time you want. But, understand that when you do that, you have avoided the question of what it is that justifies the sleazy political tricks, by either side. To be more specific, even if we all accept the premise that any underhanded tactic may be used to win power, the most obvious 'next' question is, "what will you do with that power?"

    When the left has finally succeeded in convincing the majority of voters that anyone who opposes them is evil...then, what? What is it that they want to do that requires full government control of every aspect of our lives? Saul Alinski, as far as I can tell, simply advocates manipulation of enough poorly informed voters to obtain political power - not what to do with that immense power.

    You tell me what governments do, that have unrestricted power - I already know, because I study history, but I would like to know your thoughts on it, if you can stop equating one party to the other for long enough to think about it.
  • earlyagainearlyagain Posts: 3,806 Senior Member
    They're going to do the same thing as the Republican right with acquired power. Turn it in to monetary profit.

    Without a need to boost ratings, the tactical tug of war seems more irritating than critical to me.

    Unrestricted power has its roots in the income tax. The cats out of the bag. Briefly bantered in Tennmike's Davey Crockett thread. 

    The sterling right versus the evil left don't wash with me. I'm not signing any passes for anyone. Nor will I subscribe to the theory of ignorant masses. If everyone except those of my persuasion. Whatever that persuasion is. Is inferior. That raises me and my peers onto the pedestal of elitism. No thanks. I'll try to leave those delusions in our nation's capitol.
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,198 Senior Member
    Wikipedia's soft-ball coverage of Alinski is pathetic. He was a communist. Left-wing radicals from the 60's and 70's got their ideas from his books.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    One of those radicals was Hilary Clinton.  In terms of the possible consequences of the radicals gaining power, this country came within a hair's breadth of starting down the slippery slope of  eventual destruction with the 2016 election.  Politicians in general are too weaselly to be trusted, even the ones who pander to us conservatives, but to equate the republicans' greed to the democrats' pursuit of power for power's sake is foolish.  
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • earlyagainearlyagain Posts: 3,806 Senior Member
    edited April 8 #18
    Wikipedia's soft-ball coverage of Alinski is pathetic. He was a communist. Left-wing radicals from the 60's and 70's got their ideas from his books.
    I consider this to be absolutely possible. At least the softball part.

    Teach.
    Im somewhat soured on the red alert notion of the Democratic left's pursuit of total control from exaggerated alarm I recieved in my NRA periodicals back in the late nineties and early 2,000's. Further carried on after the 2016 election to the point where shortages and price gouges became the gun owners mandatory contribution to opportunism. I don't see the current pull of socialism gaining traction. But Ive been warned. So between now and November 2020, if it developes wheels, it should be easy to spot.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    edited April 8 #19
    NRA- - - - -that's a classic example of getting a little too cozy with the people you're supposed to be against.  They have gotten used to living large on the contributions of their constituents, while doing little or nothing to actually accomplish their mission.  The final few sentences of "Animal Farm" comes to mind- - - - -where it's hard to tell the difference in the 'higher order" animals and the farmers they're partying with.  Other than constantly begging for more money, what does the NRA actually accomplish toward protecting our rights?  They're using the same tactics as the politicians they're supposed to be watchdogs over.  The phrase "Politics makes strange bedfellows" ignores the romance that preceded the consummation of the adultery!      
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • earlyagainearlyagain Posts: 3,806 Senior Member
    I  saw this guy on the news yesterday.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Yang
    What I find interesting, is his length of time of activism. Yet I had never heard of him. He has no following of consequence. 

    The next election cycle is only ever two to four years away. Give and tax can only go so far. Transnational corporations have some amount of immunity from state control. 

    So far, the alarm has been exaggerated. That could change. But it won't happen in secret.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,351 Senior Member
    edited April 8 #21
  • earlyagainearlyagain Posts: 3,806 Senior Member
    The conservapedia link is only marginally different than the wikipedia one.

    He's an admitted communist, at least according to his Playboy interview admission.

    Being a subversive is a label that could be applied to people like Thomas Paine or maybe even any of us some day.

    Admiration by Hillary Clinton, the Obama's or the Tea Party doesn't necessarily equate to political association.
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,198 Senior Member
    I trust snopes about as much as I do wikipedia....which is not much. That said, there are a lot of links to the title "How to create a social state by Saul Alinsky." Although there is no definitive answer of who the source is, I don't doubt that the 8 steps outlined in the article are the communist goals of the traitorous Democrat party and there is no doubt in my mind that this effort is well on it's way to be accomplished unless there is serious intervention on the part of the voters and patriots. I wouldn't even be concerned about this if there wasn't a lot of truth to what the list contains.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,351 Senior Member
    I am not sure what it is, but some folks give Alinsky way too much credit. The mention of his name makes some people piss themselves. He was some jackass left wing social warrior that happened to write a book about some rather effective tactics he used. Those tactics can be used by anyone-- not just the left. That is like saying that Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" can only be used by the Chinese-- everyone in military and business should have read that book already. "Rules for Radicals" is a must read for anyone interested in political or social activism.

    There is no evidence that the list in the OP can be credited to Alinsky. What it amounts to is a Facebook meme disguised as a news clipping. A credible argument can be made that the items on that list are part of a communist agenda and that Alinsky's tactics are being used to try to achieve them. If this is something that you are opposed to, it would be wise to first identify and understand what is really happening (not some false Facebook crap-- for all you know this could have been part of a communist plot to keep people ignorant). "All warfare is based on deception"- Sun Tzu. Once you find the truth, it is easier to identify their tactics and counter those tactics. And there is not a darn thing wrong with using Alinsky tactics against them.

    "If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain to be in peril."-- Sun Tzu.

    "Never go outside the expertise of your people."-- Saul Alinsky
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,503 Senior Member
    Jerm... this whole "commies are coming to get us!" thing?

    You're doing it wrong. 😉
    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,733 Senior Member
    .
    I am not sure what it is, but some folks give Alinsky way too much credit. The mention of his name makes some people piss themselves. He was some jackass left wing social warrior that happened to write a book about some rather effective tactics he used. Those tactics can be used by anyone-- not just the left. That is like saying that Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" can only be used by the Chinese-- everyone in military and business should have read that book already. "Rules for Radicals" is a must read for anyone interested in political or social activism.

    There is no evidence that the list in the OP can be credited to Alinsky. What it amounts to is a Facebook meme disguised as a news clipping. A credible argument can be made that the items on that list are part of a communist agenda and that Alinsky's tactics are being used to try to achieve them. If this is something that you are opposed to, it would be wise to first identify and understand what is really happening (not some false Facebook crap-- for all you know this could have been part of a communist plot to keep people ignorant). "All warfare is based on deception"- Sun Tzu. Once you find the truth, it is easier to identify their tactics and counter those tactics. And there is not a darn thing wrong with using Alinsky tactics against them.

    "If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain to be in peril."-- Sun Tzu.

    "Never go outside the expertise of your people."-- Saul Alinsky
    Have you actually read "Rules for Radicals," or just the excerpts that some lefty political science professor has cherry-picked from it?

    Saul Alinski wrote this book in 1971, after seeing the failures of the more violent leftist radicals to win over the population. His passion was revolution, and he correctly analyzed that to be successful, they needed patience, rather than violence, to avoid the backlash among the less radical members of the movement and the 'undecideds,' that was caused by violence. He believed that a successful revolution was developed like a three act play, in which reformation occurred in the first two acts, followed by the final confrontation between 'good' and 'evil,' that takes place at the end of the third act.

    I don't see how anyone could read Alinski and not see that the Democrat Party has adopted their own cherry-picked excerpts from it as their template for a non-violent revolution, in which the government can be changed from what it became after the original revolution. I don't know when it actually began, but it has never been more evident than Obama's rise from nothing to become president. Through his eight years, we got a good glimpse of what such a revolution in government would be like.

    In one sense, I have made your point for you, that Alinski was just a political scientist that gave advice for conducting a revolution successfully. He was not the devil, himself - he was simply a leftist  intellectual who recognized the flaws in all of the previous socialist revolutions, and his ideas for making them work were grabbed by a new generation of leftists who believe that it will finally succeed, because this time they could employ it against a society of free people who could not squash it without breaking the laws that they want to live by. They, like all of the existential foreign enemies of this country, believe that our existing freedoms will defeat us.

    I think that Obama's presidency was the third act of Alinski's play, but that the "final dramatic  confrontation and resolution" won't occur until the 2020 presidential election, or maybe even later. I believe that Alinski's 'playbook' will fail, because the people who are attempting to execute the plan are corrupt to the core, but also because the American people recognize that our government, however deeply flawed, is still much better than any socialist government that has ever existed. Alinski claimed not to be ideologically driven (which is obviously not true, to me), but those who employ his ideas are ideologically driven, and obviously so, to even the least well-informed among us. They simply want power.

    Like all who are acclaimed as theoretical geniuses, Alinski's ideas make some sense, but when actually tested, they frequently fall short, because of the unforeseen human failures of those who must execute them...or maybe just because they were always wrong.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,351 Senior Member
    bisley said:

    Have you actually read "Rules for Radicals," or just the excerpts that some lefty political science professor has cherry-picked from it?
    Nope. I never really had an interest in political or social activism. I was never shown excerpts in college either-- all I ever hear regarding Alinsky is cherry picked from "conservatives". But to satisfy my curiosity, I got a copy coming tomorrow. I will let you know what I think.

  • earlyagainearlyagain Posts: 3,806 Senior Member
    Is there anything in particular about the Obama Presidency becides the ACA that qualifies as the culmination of evil leftist subterfuge???

    To me his legacy looks like the same wall street cronyism put him in power and reaped the benefits as what fuels the rightists???
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,198 Senior Member
    His judicial nominations and executive orders were a big part of that "fundamental change of the USA." He also needed the Wall Street cronies for their money and political support.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,351 Senior Member
    His judicial nominations and executive orders were a big part of that "fundamental change of the USA." He also needed the Wall Street cronies for their money and political support.
    Why would a bunch of Wall Street cronies willingly give money to eliminate a capitalist system?
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.