Im a Racist

[MooseMom]

I've just returned from my daily walk; this is when I do most of my thinking.   I was thinking more about my long-ago Jewish suitemate.  Yes, I understood that she thought that my view of her would change or that I wouldn't like her anymore, but what I didn't understand was WHY she would think that.  To be fair, though, she didn't really know me very well, so she had no way of knowing how I would react.  I guess I was just surprised that she thought I WOULD react in any way. 

Then I started thinking about how we learn these divisive attitudes.  Was it a good thing or a bad thing that I had no idea that being Jewish was something to be secretive about (at least SHE thought so)?  I did read the link, cariad, regarding racist artifacts, and there was information there that caught me completely unawares.  Again, is my ignorance a good thing or a bad thing?  What do we do with our history?  Does ignoring it foster more tolerance, and does knowledge provide ammunition?

Hypothetically, let's say you take Person A and Person B who have no knowledge of the history of racism in this country.  Let's say that up to now, they had lived under rocks.  You sit them down and explain immigration patterns in US history and how slavery introduced Africans into the country, and how to this day, this population remains disadvantaged in many ways (including worse pre-dialysis care, by the way).  I can see how it is possible that Person A might think, "Oh, that is terrible!  What injustice!  I must be careful not to be offensive.  I'm glad I have this information."  I can also see how Person B might think, "Hmmm...well, I don't like being around people who are not like me, so these people are offensive, and now I know how I can degrade them.  The blueprint is right there in front of me."  How do we change people so fundamentally?

When is the power of knowledge better than the bliss of ignorance?  I really don't know.

[cariad]

I've just returned from my daily walk; this is when I do most of my thinking.   I was thinking more about my long-ago Jewish suitemate.  Yes, I understood that she thought that my view of her would change or that I wouldn't like her anymore, but what I didn't understand was WHY she would think that.  To be fair, though, she didn't really know me very well, so she had no way of knowing how I would react.  I guess I was just surprised that she thought I WOULD react in any way. 

Then I started thinking about how we learn these divisive attitudes.  Was it a good thing or a bad thing that I had no idea that being Jewish was something to be secretive about (at least SHE thought so)?  I did read the link, cariad, regarding racist artifacts, and there was information there that caught me completely unawares.  Again, is my ignorance a good thing or a bad thing?  What do we do with our history?  Does ignoring it foster more tolerance, and does knowledge provide ammunition?

Hypothetically, let's say you take Person A and Person B who have no knowledge of the history of racism in this country.  Let's say that up to now, they had lived under rocks.  You sit them down and explain immigration patterns in US history and how slavery introduced Africans into the country, and how to this day, this population remains disadvantaged in many ways (including worse pre-dialysis care, by the way).  I can see how it is possible that Person A might think, "Oh, that is terrible!  What injustice!  I must be careful not to be offensive.  I'm glad I have this information."  I can also see how Person B might think, "Hmmm...well, I don't like being around people who are not like me, so these people are offensive, and now I know how I can degrade them.  The blueprint is right there in front of me."  How do we change people so fundamentally?

When is the power of knowledge better than the bliss of ignorance?  I really don't know.

I would answer your question about whether it is better to confront or ignore racism by asking if you would want discrimination against your son for having autism ignored or confronted. I see nothing to be gained in ignoring racism. If the person who is the victim of racism wants to ignore it, then I suppose that is their right. I believe the vast majority of people in this country and in the UK find racism so despicable that your person B would not get very far. Social feedback is a powerful tool, and if B decides to use this blueprint (and I don't really agree that it is a terribly effective blueprint) then B will face the consequences of that action when people recoil in horror from him or her.

Going back quite a few years in my anthro experience, we had a guy from the Peace Corps in a class and he said that in Tanzania rape is not seen as something shameful to have had happen to you, the women just accept it as part of life and it is not talked about. He stated this like he had found the answer to all of American women's problems. I was stunned. If he is to be believed, they are ignoring rape there and he sees it as so positive because women are now able to say without shame "hey, yeah, I went to the market yesterday, talked to a neighbour, picked up some eggs, was raped, found a beautiful head of lettuce, and then walked home. All in all, a pretty ordinary day." I mean, holy merde.

Even with controlling for income, education, and health status blacks in the US still have markedly poorer outcomes. The answer is believed to be racism and I agree with that assessment entirely. I remember the stress I used to feel as a fat kid that I was going to be menaced whenever I was out in public. Stress is a killer, and it may sound like some nebulous factor, but the stress response is very real and perfectly quantifiable. The pre-dialysis disparity you mention is just institutionalized racism, so do we ignore it or confront it?

No one spoke to the student that I mentioned earlier about why he used that word. The prof asked him for clarification when he referred to the 'colored baby' in a video we had just watched. The prof was black and this was early in the course so no one knew what to expect. She could have crushed him but she didn't, and the black student just made a curious noise but said nothing. This was not an anthro class. Anthropologists know better and if that sounds biased, so be it. My friend reported hearing it several times in her English courses with similar results, though my friend is not black. Someone in my class did eventually ask what the preferred word for blacks in this country is, and the prof gave a very detailed response that was basically common sense: there are problems with all of the words. Liot used to call his teacher 'my brown teacher' which surprised me until I thought 'well, he's 3 and her skin is brown, it is most certainly not black'. I was a bit concerned that he would call her that to her face and she would think we were calling her that, but then I realised I just wasn't giving her enough credit. I never corrected him, I just finally told him that we should call her by her name and he never said it again.

I acknowledge that it can be tricky in the margins determining what should and should not be labeled racism, but I have no doubt that when something is clearly racist like the images shown on the site I linked, we should call it out every last time. To ignore something so hideous is to become complicit. 

[MooseMom]

Oh no no no...I certainly do not advocate ignoring racism or any -ism of any sort.  I guess my question is more nuanced, and perhaps I am not stating it clearly.  I have to go back to my own experience in the UK.  Like I said, before I moved there, I was unaware of the many stereotypes held dear by different groups.  By the time I left, I was pretty well versed in these sentiments, and I can't say that this knowledge has enriched my life.  So it's not a matter of ignoring racism, rather, its a matter or questioning when you want to introduce these vile concepts to yet another generation.  I dunno...I'm just thinking out loud.  After the "his skin is black and mine is pink" episode, I dreaded the possibility that I might ever have to explain to my sweet, innocent boy that throughout history, people of one color enslaved those of another and that we are all still living with the consequences of that.  It's like having to explain murder or rape for the first time to your child.  I just that that is a body of information that I don't want to have to hand to one more generation, you know?

[cariad]

Oh no no no...I certainly do not advocate ignoring racism or any -ism of any sort.  I guess my question is more nuanced, and perhaps I am not stating it clearly.  I have to go back to my own experience in the UK.  Like I said, before I moved there, I was unaware of the many stereotypes held dear by different groups.  By the time I left, I was pretty well versed in these sentiments, and I can't say that this knowledge has enriched my life.  So it's not a matter of ignoring racism, rather, its a matter or questioning when you want to introduce these vile concepts to yet another generation.  I dunno...I'm just thinking out loud.  After the "his skin is black and mine is pink" episode, I dreaded the possibility that I might ever have to explain to my sweet, innocent boy that throughout history, people of one color enslaved those of another and that we are all still living with the consequences of that.  It's like having to explain murder or rape for the first time to your child.  I just that that is a body of information that I don't want to have to hand to one more generation, you know?

Well, I hope this doesn't sound like I'm being short with you, but it's a luxury of white people to 'dread the possibility' of having to explain racism. If you're black in this country, other races in other countries and cultures, you do not describe it as a possibility but an inevitability. So you explain it to them preemptively to try to help them cope with it when, not if, the time comes that they must face it for themselves.

[cariad]

Oh come on Cariad. I became aware of Saul Alinski during the last election cycle. I have been tempted to actually read some of his books instead of only excerpts here and there, but really I couldn't care less about his rantings on how to bring about societal upheaval outside of the manner in which Obama has used his protocols as Alinski's own son testified in a NYT opinion.

Oh, come on, Hemodoc. I decided to purchase Rules for Radicals and am already over one quarter of the way through it. It is absolute poetry. The man has a way with words and has reignited a bit of hope in the world that maybe there are people like him left. Plus, it will help me with my upcoming project, so all around, $12 well spent. I've even stopped midway through The Cleanest Race to give this my full attention.

Have a good day Cariad and think about why Alinski and his ideas are dangerous to America.  Have a good night.

Had a good day and night so far, thanks. Why don't you explain to me how his ideas are so 'dangerous to America'? Excerpts can be taken out of context. I've gone to the source and can tell you that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Show me with quotes and honest interpretation of his teachings, or failing that, why don't you give it a rest?

[Hemodoc]

Oh come on Cariad. I became aware of Saul Alinski during the last election cycle. I have been tempted to actually read some of his books instead of only excerpts here and there, but really I couldn't care less about his rantings on how to bring about societal upheaval outside of the manner in which Obama has used his protocols as Alinski's own son testified in a NYT opinion.

Oh, come on, Hemodoc. I decided to purchase Rules for Radicals and am already over one quarter of the way through it. It is absolute poetry. The man has a way with words and has reignited a bit of hope in the world that maybe there are people like him left. Plus, it will help me with my upcoming project, so all around, $12 well spent. I've even stopped midway through The Cleanest Race to give this my full attention.

Have a good day Cariad and think about why Alinski and his ideas are dangerous to America.  Have a good night.

Had a good day and night so far, thanks. Why don't you explain to me how his ideas are so 'dangerous to America'? Excerpts can be taken out of context. I've gone to the source and can tell you that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Show me with quotes and honest interpretation of his teachings, or failing that, why don't you give it a rest?

I see no reason to go back to the type of books I read in my own radical days of college like Fear and Lothing on the campaign trail, Jerry Rubin's Steal this book teaching people how to defecate in the street to get attention and surprise. I hope you enjoy the book, but no thanks, I have other more important issues to occupy me at the present time. But do enjoy.

[cariad]

Oh come on Cariad. I became aware of Saul Alinski during the last election cycle. I have been tempted to actually read some of his books instead of only excerpts here and there, but really I couldn't care less about his rantings on how to bring about societal upheaval outside of the manner in which Obama has used his protocols as Alinski's own son testified in a NYT opinion.

Oh, come on, Hemodoc. I decided to purchase Rules for Radicals and am already over one quarter of the way through it. It is absolute poetry. The man has a way with words and has reignited a bit of hope in the world that maybe there are people like him left. Plus, it will help me with my upcoming project, so all around, $12 well spent. I've even stopped midway through The Cleanest Race to give this my full attention.

Have a good day Cariad and think about why Alinski and his ideas are dangerous to America.  Have a good night.

Had a good day and night so far, thanks. Why don't you explain to me how his ideas are so 'dangerous to America'? Excerpts can be taken out of context. I've gone to the source and can tell you that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Show me with quotes and honest interpretation of his teachings, or failing that, why don't you give it a rest?

I see no reason to go back to the type of books I read in my own radical days of college like Fear and Lothing on the campaign trail, Jerry Rubin's Steal this book teaching people how to defecate in the street to get attention and surprise. I hope you enjoy the book, but no thanks, I have other more important issues to occupy me at the present time. But do enjoy.

I am enjoying. Your answer is a cop out. You told me to think about how his ideas are dangerous to America and I can not see a single reason so I am asking you to enlighten me and you say you have better things to do all of a sudden. You don't know what you are talking about. By the way, Steal This Book was also wonderfully well written. By Abbie Hoffman. It was trying to make a point which clearly eluded you.

[lmunchkin]

Oh my Goodness!  I have read this entire thread and find myself agreeing with Hemodoc!  Shock, Huh? I didnt know that my views were racist cause I agree or disagree with Osama.

Ive never been to a physiciatris, maybe I should go see one!  Care to join me Hemodoc, Sluff or any other who do not like Osama.  I know he is OUR PRESIDENT and so was all the others!  But I guess we need a pysciatris (?).  Oh my God, I can't spell either, now I know I need a shrink!

Seriously, I do believe Osama is devoted to his family which is a Good thing!

lmunchkin
 

[Hemodoc]

Oh come on Cariad. I became aware of Saul Alinski during the last election cycle. I have been tempted to actually read some of his books instead of only excerpts here and there, but really I couldn't care less about his rantings on how to bring about societal upheaval outside of the manner in which Obama has used his protocols as Alinski's own son testified in a NYT opinion.

Oh, come on, Hemodoc. I decided to purchase Rules for Radicals and am already over one quarter of the way through it. It is absolute poetry. The man has a way with words and has reignited a bit of hope in the world that maybe there are people like him left. Plus, it will help me with my upcoming project, so all around, $12 well spent. I've even stopped midway through The Cleanest Race to give this my full attention.

Have a good day Cariad and think about why Alinski and his ideas are dangerous to America.  Have a good night.

Had a good day and night so far, thanks. Why don't you explain to me how his ideas are so 'dangerous to America'? Excerpts can be taken out of context. I've gone to the source and can tell you that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Show me with quotes and honest interpretation of his teachings, or failing that, why don't you give it a rest?

I see no reason to go back to the type of books I read in my own radical days of college like Fear and Lothing on the campaign trail, Jerry Rubin's Steal this book teaching people how to defecate in the street to get attention and surprise. I hope you enjoy the book, but no thanks, I have other more important issues to occupy me at the present time. But do enjoy.

I am enjoying. Your answer is a cop out. You told me to think about how his ideas are dangerous to America and I can not see a single reason so I am asking you to enlighten me and you say you have better things to do all of a sudden. You don't know what you are talking about. By the way, Steal This Book was also wonderfully well written. By Abbie Hoffman. It was trying to make a point which clearly eluded you.

Oh, that weirdo. Sorry, I read a couple by Rubin as well. I quit reading when I got the defecating in a bank scenario or something like that. If you want to lift up that sort of low life radical, that is your business. That was over thirty years ago during my Boston liberal phase. Glad I got over that and learned to read a much better book. It is called the BIBLE. Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth. I will pass on all of the other stuff. No thanks. No cop out, just exercising my constitutional rights.

Thank you,

Peter

[MooseMom]

Oh no no no...I certainly do not advocate ignoring racism or any -ism of any sort.  I guess my question is more nuanced, and perhaps I am not stating it clearly.  I have to go back to my own experience in the UK.  Like I said, before I moved there, I was unaware of the many stereotypes held dear by different groups.  By the time I left, I was pretty well versed in these sentiments, and I can't say that this knowledge has enriched my life.  So it's not a matter of ignoring racism, rather, its a matter or questioning when you want to introduce these vile concepts to yet another generation.  I dunno...I'm just thinking out loud.  After the "his skin is black and mine is pink" episode, I dreaded the possibility that I might ever have to explain to my sweet, innocent boy that throughout history, people of one color enslaved those of another and that we are all still living with the consequences of that.  It's like having to explain murder or rape for the first time to your child.  I just that that is a body of information that I don't want to have to hand to one more generation, you know?

Well, I hope this doesn't sound like I'm being short with you, but it's a luxury of white people to 'dread the possibility' of having to explain racism. If you're black in this country, other races in other countries and cultures, you do not describe it as a possibility but an inevitability. So you explain it to them preemptively to try to help them cope with it when, not if, the time comes that they must face it for themselves.

Well, try preemptively explaining it to an autistic child...  "Luxury" is not a word I'd use in such circumstances.

[MooseMom]

Oh my Goodness!  I have read this entire thread and find myself agreeing with Hemodoc!  Shock, Huh? I didnt know that my views were racist cause I agree or disagree with Osama.

Ive never been to a physiciatris, maybe I should go see one!  Care to join me Hemodoc, Sluff or any other who do not like Osama.  I know he is OUR PRESIDENT and so was all the others!  But I guess we need a pysciatris (?).  Oh my God, I can't spell either, now I know I need a shrink!

Seriously, I do believe Osama is devoted to his family which is a Good thing!

lmunchkin
 

You know I love ya, but what would a psychiatrist say about you accidentally calling President Obama "Osama"?   

[lmunchkin]

Oh my Goodness!  I have read this entire thread and find myself agreeing with Hemodoc!  Shock, Huh? I didnt know that my views were racist cause I agree or disagree with Osama.

Ive never been to a physiciatris, maybe I should go see one!  Care to join me Hemodoc, Sluff or any other who do not like Osama.  I know he is OUR PRESIDENT and so was all the others!  But I guess we need a pysciatris (?).  Oh my God, I can't spell either, now I know I need a shrink!

Seriously, I do believe Osama is devoted to his family which is a Good thing!

lmunchkin
 

You know I love ya, but what would a psychiatrist say about you accidentally calling President Obama "Osama"?   

Oh my!  I did, didnt I?  Better schedule me sooner rather than later!    You know I love you too, Moosey. Always have and always will! 

lmunchkin
 

[cariad]

Oh, please. Your constitutional rights? To what? Accuse everyone else of spouting propaganda, then repeat propaganda and run away from it when challenged? Yeah, OK, I suppose the Constitution gives you that right.

You told me to think about something and I am saying, OK, what is it exactly that you are referring to? I am not asking you to read Abbie Hoffman’s book, nor even Saul Alinsky’s. They come from two incredibly different philosophies by the way, and if you think they have anything in common then once again you really and truly do not know what you are talking about. I am calling your bluff, Peter. If you know so much about Saul Alinsky and are not just repeating what the far right has been saying in an effort to demonize Obama, then tell me how Alinsky is so dangerous to America and how Obama should be reviled for following his teachings?

[cariad]

Oh no no no...I certainly do not advocate ignoring racism or any -ism of any sort.  I guess my question is more nuanced, and perhaps I am not stating it clearly.  I have to go back to my own experience in the UK.  Like I said, before I moved there, I was unaware of the many stereotypes held dear by different groups.  By the time I left, I was pretty well versed in these sentiments, and I can't say that this knowledge has enriched my life.  So it's not a matter of ignoring racism, rather, its a matter or questioning when you want to introduce these vile concepts to yet another generation.  I dunno...I'm just thinking out loud.  After the "his skin is black and mine is pink" episode, I dreaded the possibility that I might ever have to explain to my sweet, innocent boy that throughout history, people of one color enslaved those of another and that we are all still living with the consequences of that.  It's like having to explain murder or rape for the first time to your child.  I just that that is a body of information that I don't want to have to hand to one more generation, you know?

Well, I hope this doesn't sound like I'm being short with you, but it's a luxury of white people to 'dread the possibility' of having to explain racism. If you're black in this country, other races in other countries and cultures, you do not describe it as a possibility but an inevitability. So you explain it to them preemptively to try to help them cope with it when, not if, the time comes that they must face it for themselves.

Well, try preemptively explaining it to an autistic child...  "Luxury" is not a word I'd use in such circumstances.

But that's my point, that the black parents of a black, autistic child would not get a choice, they would have to devise a strategy to prepare their child. Explaining racism to any child is not exactly something one looks forward to, and I understand that it would be harder with an autistic child, but you have the 'luxury', such as it is, of deciding that your child really doesn't need to concern himself with this at the moment. I am not using the word luxury in an effort to be dismissive of your challenges with an autistic child, I promise.

I am curious if you have addressed any of this with your son, or if he has had questions about racism? As always, if you don't feel like answering, please don't give it a second thought.

[Gerald Lively]

I didn’t realize that a private citizen who writes his thoughts in a book should be condemned.  Does this Alinsky guy have rights?  And I did not know that defecating in the street was a political statement.  Who I vote for will never be determined by citizen efforts to relieve constipation.

Some one here has a twisted outlook on life.

[MooseMom]

I am curious if you have addressed any of this with your son, or if he has had questions about racism? As always, if you don't feel like answering, please don't give it a second thought.

Actually, no, I have not had to address this just yet.  Disability knows no boundaries, so he went to school with children of all colors and cultures.  His headmistress was black as were many of the teachers.  His best friend happens to be black.  He has never mentioned any episode where he has witnessed racism.  I have found that it is best for me to take my cues from him.  He just doesn't see social nuance (I could say here that he "doesn't see race" a la Stephen Colbert, but I don't want to make light of this issue), so I am really not sure that he would recognize racism if he saw it.  If he sees or hears something that he doesn't understand, he's on the phone to me in a heartbeat.  Since he has not mentioned this issue, I am probably right in assuming that he hasn't yet come across it.  When he does, I'm sure I'll hear about it.

Interestingly, though, he has said a few things in the past that I consider homophobic, saying quite matter of factly that homosexuality "is not good."  He's not ever said anything derogatory about gay people per se, only that he thinks homosexuality is "not good."  Since he does not live with me, I'm not sure where he got this opinion, but I am pretty sure that it is an opinion presented by his mates, and he is going through a period where he want to "look mainstream", so I think it's a matter of him wanting to fit in.  Then again, it is an opinion that is shared by many people, and while I don't like it, he is entitled to his opinion.  However, I got all over him for that!  I told him that my two oldest friends from high school are gay, and he was very surprised and interested.  He asked a lot of questions, and I just told him that these two friends are ordinary people who live ordinary lives.  I also told him that frankly, his opinion on the matter was unimportant to anyone who is gay.  I also think his grandfather might have influenced him, and I am not best pleased about that.  I'd like to think that I taught him to treat all people with respect and to keep his opinions to himself.  He has the right to his opinions but doesn't have the right to be offensive.  Again, not easy to get this across to an autistic young man, but I don't think his emotional landscape is as impaired as I long ago suspected.  He is definitely a work in progress!  Life is not easy for him.

[Hemodoc]

Oh, please. Your constitutional rights? To what? Accuse everyone else of spouting propaganda, then repeat propaganda and run away from it when challenged? Yeah, OK, I suppose the Constitution gives you that right.

You told me to think about something and I am saying, OK, what is it exactly that you are referring to? I am not asking you to read Abbie Hoffman’s book, nor even Saul Alinsky’s. They come from two incredibly different philosophies by the way, and if you think they have anything in common then once again you really and truly do not know what you are talking about. I am calling your bluff, Peter. If you know so much about Saul Alinsky and are not just repeating what the far right has been saying in an effort to demonize Obama, then tell me how Alinsky is so dangerous to America and how Obama should be reviled for following his teachings?

Oh my Cariad. Bluff. You believe what you wish. I hope you enjoy reading this stuff. Sorry, not interested.  Have a good night folks. I have said my say. Believe as you wish.

Take care.

[Hemodoc]

I didn’t realize that a private citizen who writes his thoughts in a book should be condemned.  Does this Alinsky guy have rights?  And I did not know that defecating in the street was a political statement.  Who I vote for will never be determined by citizen efforts to relieve constipation.

Some one here has a twisted outlook on life.

I think that sucker is dead my friend and he has learned of the real power in this world. I hope he spent a bit of time getting to know the Lord Jesus personally, since we shall all stand before Him. I would not want to present to Jesus my entire life work on how to destabilize and manipulate populations to achieve your ends. I don't think that will play well with God at all. But, we do have free will to do what you wish here on earth if that is what you are possessed to do. Go for it. I am not your judge, nor am I your enemy. If folks choose to live a different life that I choose, my only duty is to inform, that is all. I think I have done that. Folks can make up their own mind what they want to do with that information. File it or use it. Your choice as well my friend.

What ever radical book it was I was reading didn't seem like anything but anarchy back in my college days. Sorry, I haven't spent my life learning how to destroy things. So, because I honor right and justice and righteousness you say I have a twisted outlook on life? Hmmmm, yeah that makes a lot of sense my friend. In any case, I am glad I threw that other book in the trash, it was garbage then, it is garbage now.

Have a good night.

[Hemodoc]

Oh well, here chew on this for a bit. Gerald appears to know and understand these rules for radicals quite well. Talk about a twisted view on life:

"Tactics are those conscious deliberate acts by which human beings live with each other and deal with the world around them. ... Here our concern is with the tactic of taking; how the Have-Nots can take power away from the Haves." p.126

Always remember the first rule of power tactics (pps.127-134):

1. "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have."

2. "Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear and retreat.... [and] the collapse of communication.

3. "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."

5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."

6. "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."

7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time...."

8. "Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose."

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. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign."

11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside... every positive has its negative."

12. "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."

13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and 'frozen.'...
     "...any target can always say, 'Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?' When your 'freeze the target,' you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments.... Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the 'others' come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target...'
     "One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other." (pps.127-134)

http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm

[Hemodoc]

Here is the Godly antidote to those that wish to follow an admitted radical and stir up feelings of insecurity,mock that which is right and good, make it personal to invoke anger, and the polemic arguments that make up the entire political discourse any longer. I actually feel quite sorry for folks so deluded into that type of philosophy. What a way to live life. I choose  the better way:

PSALM 1 

BLESSED is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2     But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3     And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
4     The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
5     Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
6     For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
 

Blessed are they that put their trust in Him. I feel sorry for folks that get all bent out of shape on these earthly political philosophies that shall dry up and blow away into the dust bin of history. There is only one that will stand in the end. Better to honor Him now, than later.  You folks have your books, I enjoy mine much more. Your choice is yours to make and to live with, choose your sides, I know mine already.  If scorn is all you can offer in argument, that is vacuous and void. Nothing at all to be worried about even if you folks win the election. So be it. Have your moment in history. Either way, I know where I stand with the Lord and whatever the circumstance, whoever is in charge of this nation, it really doesn't matter. Perhaps some day, the love of God will replace your indignation and scorn. That is my hope.

Good night.

Definition of SCORN

1
: open dislike and disrespect or derision often mixed with indignation
2
: an expression of contempt or derision
3
: an object of extreme disdain, contempt, or derision : something contemptible

[cariad]

Oh, please. Your constitutional rights? To what? Accuse everyone else of spouting propaganda, then repeat propaganda and run away from it when challenged? Yeah, OK, I suppose the Constitution gives you that right.

You told me to think about something and I am saying, OK, what is it exactly that you are referring to? I am not asking you to read Abbie Hoffman’s book, nor even Saul Alinsky’s. They come from two incredibly different philosophies by the way, and if you think they have anything in common then once again you really and truly do not know what you are talking about. I am calling your bluff, Peter. If you know so much about Saul Alinsky and are not just repeating what the far right has been saying in an effort to demonize Obama, then tell me how Alinsky is so dangerous to America and how Obama should be reviled for following his teachings?

Oh my Cariad. Bluff. You believe what you wish. I hope you enjoy reading this stuff. Sorry, not interested.  Have a good night folks. I have said my say. Believe as you wish.

Take care.

Oh my, indeed, Hemodoc. Yes, I said bluff and I meant it. If I may channel Saul Alinsky for a moment and adapt his teachings to this thread: don't start a conversation that you are ill-prepared to engage in and see through. Don't condemn the President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Forces and expect no one to investigate your claims.

You have had your say, huh? This is not the first time that you've made a statement such as this only to immediately follow on with further posts and much more to say. Great, because my fervent hope is that there are people aside from me who were unfamiliar with Saul Alinsky's writings before Newt brought it up and would like to hear more about this mystery man. I am happy to provide that service as time allows, and it is in large part thanks to you for opening the subject up.

[cariad]

Oh well, here chew on this for a bit. Gerald appears to know and understand these rules for radicals quite well. Talk about a twisted view on life:

"Tactics are those conscious deliberate acts by which human beings live with each other and deal with the world around them. ... Here our concern is with the tactic of taking; how the Have-Nots can take power away from the Haves." p.126

Always remember the first rule of power tactics (pps.127-134):

1. "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have."

2. "Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear and retreat.... [and] the collapse of communication.

3. "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."

5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."

6. "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."

7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time...."

8. "Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose."

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. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign."

11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside... every positive has its negative."

12. "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."

13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and 'frozen.'...
     "...any target can always say, 'Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?' When your 'freeze the target,' you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments.... Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the 'others' come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target...'
     "One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other." (pps.127-134)

http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm

Well, this proves one thing for certain - you know how to cut and paste. I suppose it will have to do as a start.

I could not get your link to work, so perhaps something went awry there. I notice the word communism in the link. So that's what this is about! Saul Alinsky was not a communist. That is plain ignorance. Chris Matthews argued on MSNBC that Gingrich chose to pick on Saul Alinsky because it sounds like 'trotsky' and I thought "Oh, that couldn't be. That's too anti-intellectual even for the current state of this country." How wrong I was. Alinsky does address the reasons why revolutionary activity is mistaken for communism in Rules for Radicals. Essentially because in his day the only handbooks available for people who wanted to learn about how to organize for change were about communism. Alinsky was not a communist, nor is Barack Obama. To imply or assert this is to deliberately spread misinformation (which, Saul Alinsky might argue, would be acceptable and rational under certain circumstances. I don't think we are in those circumstances, the stakes are far too low).

I will come back to this when I reach that section of the book, I am now only close to halfway through. Keep in mind, most of the book comes before this section quoted, and in the book he carefully outlines his philosophy, his definitions, and the historical examples that he sees as relevant. So, it is not really fair to look at these rules out of context, but even out of their context, I am missing the terrifying danger that I was supposed to find in them.

For anyone with interest, a recent Christian Science Monitor article about Saul Alinsky, complete with lavish praise from people coming from every corner of American politics. The man is quite admired to this day, and rightfully so.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2012/0128/Who-is-Saul-Alinsky-and-why-is-Newt-Gingrich-so-obsessed-with-him

[Hemodoc]

Oh, please. Your constitutional rights? To what? Accuse everyone else of spouting propaganda, then repeat propaganda and run away from it when challenged? Yeah, OK, I suppose the Constitution gives you that right.

You told me to think about something and I am saying, OK, what is it exactly that you are referring to? I am not asking you to read Abbie Hoffman’s book, nor even Saul Alinsky’s. They come from two incredibly different philosophies by the way, and if you think they have anything in common then once again you really and truly do not know what you are talking about. I am calling your bluff, Peter. If you know so much about Saul Alinsky and are not just repeating what the far right has been saying in an effort to demonize Obama, then tell me how Alinsky is so dangerous to America and how Obama should be reviled for following his teachings?

Oh my Cariad. Bluff. You believe what you wish. I hope you enjoy reading this stuff. Sorry, not interested.  Have a good night folks. I have said my say. Believe as you wish.

Take care.

Oh my, indeed, Hemodoc. Yes, I said bluff and I meant it. If I may channel Saul Alinsky for a moment and adapt his teachings to this thread: don't start a conversation that you are ill-prepared to engage in and see through. Don't condemn the President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Forces and expect no one to investigate your claims.

You have had your say, huh? This is not the first time that you've made a statement such as this only to immediately follow on with further posts and much more to say. Great, because my fervent hope is that there are people aside from me who were unfamiliar with Saul Alinsky's writings before Newt brought it up and would like to hear more about this mystery man. I am happy to provide that service as time allows, and it is in large part thanks to you for opening the subject up.

Dear Cariad, I think you are beginning to bordrer on delusional and insane. I learned most about Saul Alinski during the 2008 election cycle. Please, don't think your little tyrade is anything but a delusion.

Here is your favorite Fox commentator, Glenn Beck Talking about this creep in 2010.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBQtSr85RuM

Believe what you want my friend.

Have a good day.

Peter

[cariad]

I think that sucker is dead my friend and he has learned of the real power in this world. I hope he spent a bit of time getting to know the Lord Jesus personally, since we shall all stand before Him. I would not want to present to Jesus my entire life work on how to destabilize and manipulate populations to achieve your ends. I don't think that will play well with God at all. But, we do have free will to do what you wish here on earth if that is what you are possessed to do. Go for it. I am not your judge, nor am I your enemy. If folks choose to live a different life that I choose, my only duty is to inform, that is all. I think I have done that. Folks can make up their own mind what they want to do with that information. File it or use it. Your choice as well my friend.

I think stating 'that sucker is dead' is a smug and truly off-putting way to drive home that you are not in agreement with Mr. Alinsky. It appears that you are gloating about his death, which makes little sense, especially on a forum where death resides close to many of us.

That aside, since you mentioned Alinksy and religion, he does invoke Judeo-Christian teachings in Rules for Radicals. He did say the following in a Playboy article, the excerpt coming from Wikipedia:

    ALINSKY: ... if there is an afterlife, and I have anything to say about it, I will unreservedly choose to go to hell.
    PLAYBOY: Why?
    ALINSKY: Hell would be heaven for me. All my life I've been with the have-nots. Over here, if you're a have-not, you're short of dough. If you're a have-not in hell, you're short of virtue. Once I get into hell, I'll start organizing the have-nots over there.
    PLAYBOY: Why them?
    ALINSKY: They're my kind of people.

So, no need to worry about his salvation. Sounds like the optimism that he wrote about in Rules for Radicals will prevail whatever the circumstance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinsky

[cariad]

Dear Cariad, I think you are beginning to bordrer on delusional and insane. I learned most about Saul Alinski during the 2008 election cycle. Please, don't think your little tyrade is anything but a delusion.

Devolving into personal attacks again? How hypocritical. I am engaging in discussion that you started, and I find your comments on my mental state offensive and unbecoming of anyone, especially a physician.