Of Rebels and Radicals

Comment: This was organized rather quickly summarizing the Rules for Radicals in comparison to Rebels. Alinsky interestingly cited the forefathers quite often and compared his efforts to those of the founding brothers. As you read Alinsky's rules think about the Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun and Sun Tzu: The Art of War. I believe there are some parallels. Also do not forget that the likes of Margaret Sangar, John Dewey, Roger Baldwin, Earl Warren, Gloria Steinem, Ralph Nader, Tom Hayden, Jesse Jackson, Billie Jean King, Bill Moyers, Bill Ayers, Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama, Mitt Romney, and Michael Moore are all progressives. Some were connected in some way with Saul Alinsky's work. Its kind of scary to think these people have little interest in a Constitutional America.

I am attaching to this blog post some additional documents for your review.

Hillary Clinton's College Paper on Alinsky

Alinsky's Book:  Rules for Radicals

Of Rebels and Radicals
Declaration of Independence verses Rules for Radicals

The American forefathers are often depicted as rebels due to their defiance of tyranny. They were open about their calling and cause. Rebels find themselves rooted in principles that they aspire towards and the American Forefathers aspired towards Judeo-Christian principles. Others see those principles as just and rally to the cause. In the case of the American forefathers, they wrote a Declaration of Independence stating their grievances and principles as guide posts for the rebellion:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation (Jefferson, 1776).

Subversive actors are most often depicted as radicals who are extremist ideologues favoring fundamental and drastic changes in political, economic, institutions, habits of the mind, and social conditions within a society. The etymological meaning of radical is a medieval philosophical sensibility from the Latin word radicalis meaning "of or having roots”. Radicals are the political sense of “reformists" via a notion of drastic “change from the roots” or to fundamentally change away from the status quo. Radicals are considered subversives as they operate within a functioning society to undermine core values, principles, ethics, and virtues in order to replace them incrementally with their ideology. Radicals rarely have a large following and remain as a negligible portion of society but derive their influence from controversy and disruptive conduct. 

Figure 1: Saul Alinksy

Saul Alinsky, Figure 1, was a radical who sought to fundamentally change the United States and is thought of as the father of modern community organizing, the modus operandi for socialistic and communistic reforms. Community organization is different than the democratic processes of community leadership. Community organizers seek to create hostile circumstances from which they derive direct influence and power over decision-making bodies of governments, institutions, and corporations. The hostile means include but not limited to picketing, boycotts, sit-ins, petitions, and influencing electoral politics. These activities are not the end but instead a vehicle to a little known or hidden agenda. Community organizers are generally of three types; faith-based, coalition building, and grassroots. The Faith-based and grassroots efforts are built on the works of Saul Alinsky who was active from the 1930’s to 1972 before dying of a heart attack.

Alinsky was born in 1909 to Jewish Russian immigrant parents in Chicago, Illinois. During Alinsky’s formative years the United States was in the midst of the Progressive Movement which was circa 1890 to about the late 1920’s. Progressives were through out the political spectrum; Democrats and Republicans. As the Progressive movement ended, Alinsky began his activist life which concluded with the release of the book, Rules for Radicals, in 1971.

Figure 2: Rules for
 Radicals

Alinsky opens the book's, Figure 2, first chapter with a errant quote from the Bible citing “The life of man upon earth is a warfare…”; Job 7:1 (Alinsky, 1971, p. 4.). The correct citation follows; “Is there not a time of hard service for man on Earth? Are his days also like the days of a hired man?”; Job 7:1 NKJV, GB, NIV. Job likens human life to forced service in the army, the mercenary, or a hired man - a servant or slave. He feels that without meaning or purpose life for him is empty (Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1999, p. 495.). Attempting to leverage theologies and faith in support of theory based ideological personal beliefs is not uncommon among those who have inconsequential faith themselves. Although, the errant citation indicates Alinsky’s disposition was that he was at war in which the pivotal cornerstone was ‘change’. Alinsky comments, "WHAT FOLLOWS IS for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be (Alinsky, 1971, p. 4.).“ Alinsky builds a case in which the have-nots are justified in conducting a war against those who have. This has been the call, the mantra, of the socialistic and communistic movement throughout the 20th and 21st century.

In the book, "Rules For Radicals", Alinsky assesses the Ends and Means through a relativistic lens of the Post-Modernist that was strongly present during his adult life. The Post-modern movement questioned everything that was considered set in stone in either a deconstructive or a structuralist approach. Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser was a structuralist. Alinsky leans in this direction as well as evidenced by the relativistic, go with the flow Ends and Means rules:

1. One's concern with the ethics of means and ends varies inversely with one's personal interest in the issue (Alinsky, 1971, p. 26.).
2. Judgment of the ethics of means is dependent upon the political position of those sitting in judgment (Alinsky, 1971, p. 26.). In war the end justifies almost any means (Alinsky, 1971, p. 29.).
3. Judgment must be made in the context of the times in which the action occurred and not from any other chronological vantage point (Alinsky, 1971, p. 30.).
4. Concern with ethics increases with the number of means available and vice versa (Alinsky, 1971, p. 32.). The less important the end to be desired, the more one can afford to engage in ethical evaluations of means (Alinsky, 1971, p. 34).
5. General success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics. There can be no such thing as a successful traitor, for if one succeeds he becomes a founding father. (Alinsky, 1971, p. 34.).
6. The morality of a means depends upon whether the means is being employed at a time of imminent defeat or imminent victory (Alinsky, 1971, p. 34.).
7. Any effective means is automatically judged by the opposition as being unethical (Alinsky, 1971, p. 35.).
8. You do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments (Alinksy, 1971, p. 36.).
9. Goals must be phrased in general terms like "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," "Of the Common Welfare," "Pursuit of Happiness" or "Bread and Peace (Alinsky, 1971, p. 45.).

The Ends and Means rules are cast in an amoral venue. The outcome is not pursued but instead a result of actions that disrupt, diminish, deter, and deny the status quo.  In classic form of information warfare (IW), ambiguity, innuendo, deceit, and truths are leveraged in order to diminish, deny, disrupt, destroy, deter, etc… their enemies morale and ability to fight back. The "Rules for Radicals" are a set of relativistic guide posts that leverage and reflect war fighting concepts.

1. Power is not what you have but what your enemy thinks you have (Alinsky, 1971, p. 127.).
2. Never go outside the experience of your people (Alinsky, 1971, p. 127.).
3. Wherever possible go outside of the experience of the enemy (Alinsky, 1971, p. 127.).
4. Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules (Alinksy, 1971, p. 128.).
5. Ridicule is man's most potent weapon (Alinsky, 1971, p 128.).
6. A good tactic is one that your people enjoy (Alinsky, 1971, p. 128.).
7. A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag (Alinsky, 1971, p. 128.).
8. Keep the pressure on (Alinsky, 1971, p. 128).
9. The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself (Alinsky, 1971, p. 128.).
10. The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition (Alinsky, 1971, p. 129.).
11. If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counter side (Alinsky, 1971, p. 129.). 
12. The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative (Alinsky, 1971, p. 129.).

By invoking the Rules for Radicals and the rules for Ends and Means, Alinsky was seeking specific outcomes layered behind the apparent.  Many folks jumped onto actions and efforts that seemed genuine on the surface but are ruses for the layered objectives. Alinsky alluded to some of these objectives; 1) The real action is in the enemy's reaction, 2) The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength. 3) Tactics, like organization, like life, require that you move with the action (Alinsky, 1971, p. 136.). People power is the real objective; the proxies are simply a means to that end (Alinsky, 1971, p. 181). Then Alinky retorts citing Lincoln’s frustration with the Civil War, ”My policy is to have no policy.” as a supreme tactic (Alinsky, 1971, p. 166. ). The goal according to Alinsky is to be a quick moving target and keep the enemy reacting. In short, always be on the offensive.

Comment: These Rules for Radicals have become apparent and entrenched character actions of the left. 

"...Under careful scrutiny, progressive liberalism's distortion of the normal ability to reason can only be understood only as a product of psychopathy... The modern liberal mind, it's distorted perceptions and it's destructive agenda are the product of deeply disturbed personalities," Lyle Rossiter, Jr M.D.

NOTE: Many people try to vet urban legends and rumors through Snopes.com. Snopes was founded by Barbara and David Mikkelson. Snopes is considered to be a liberal propaganda machine by the right. Snopes has affiliation with the New York Times and the owners have appeared on almost solely left leaning media outlets.  In reading their postings, they often use left tactics, language, and take left leaning positions.  Is the Owner of Snopes.com a Liberal?  The Snopes.com site claims to be apolitical.  Snopes for all intents should be considered a mechanism to obfuscate truths; rule 8. 

For a deeper exploration into the Original Intent please see the series American Democracy and the Judeo-Christain Bible

References:

Alinksy, S. (1971). Rules for radicals: a practical primer for realistic radicals. Random House: New York

Jefferson, T. (1776), The charters of freedom: The united states declaration of independence. Resourced 14 February 2014 from http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html.

radical. (n.d.). Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. Retrieved February 14, 2014, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/radical

Thomas Nelson Publishers. (1999). King james: bible commentary. Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville

Wess, R. (1987). Leadership secrets of Attila the hun. Warner Books: New York. Radicals