Saul Aliinsky

[Gerald Lively]

Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) was an American community organizer and writer. He is generally considered to be the founder of modern community organizing, and has been compared to Thomas Paine as being "one of the great American leaders of the nonsocialist left." He is often noted for his book Rules for Radicals.

In the course of nearly four decades of political organizing, Alinsky received much criticism, but also gained praise from many public figures. His organizing skills were focused on improving the living conditions of poor communities across North America. In the 1950s, he began turning his attention to improving conditions of the African-American ghettos, beginning with Chicago's and later traveling to other ghettos in California, Michigan, New York City, and a dozen other "trouble spots".

His ideas were later adapted by some U.S. college students and other young organizers in the late 1960s and formed part of their strategies for organizing on campus and beyond. Time magazine once wrote that "American democracy is being altered by Alinsky's ideas," and conservative author William F. Buckley said he was "very close to being an organizational genius."

His early efforts to "turn scattered, voiceless discontent into a united protest aroused the admiration of Illinois governor Adlai Stevenson, who said Alinsky's aims 'most faithfully reflect our ideals of brotherhood, tolerance, charity and dignity of the individual.'"

In Rules for Radicals (his final work, published in 1971 one year before his death), he addressed the 1960s generation of radicals, outlining his views on organizing for mass power. In the opening paragraph of the book Alinsky writes, "What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away." Alinsky did not join political parties.

In Rules for Radicals Alinsky wrote, "[t]he job of the organizer is to maneuver and bait the establishment so that it will publicly attack him as a 'dangerous enemy.'" According to Alinsky, "the hysterical instant reaction of the establishment [will] not only validate [the organizer's] credentials of competency but also ensure automatic popular invitation."

After organizing FIGHT (an acronym for Freedom, Independence [subsequently Integration], God, Honor, Today) in Rochester, New York, Alinsky once threatened to stage a "fart in" to disrupt the sensibilities of the city's establishment at a Rochester Philharmonic concert. FIGHT members were to consume large quantities of baked beans after which, according to author Nicholas von Hoffman, "FIGHT's increasingly gaseous music-loving members would hie themselves to the concert hall where they would sit expelling gaseous vapors with such noisy velocity as to compete with the woodwinds." “You’ve gotta love this guy)

Alinsky described his plans in 1972 to begin to organize the white middle class across America, and the necessity of that project. He believed that what President Richard Nixon and Vice-President Spiro Agnew called "The Silent Majority" was living in frustration and despair, worried about their future, and ripe for a turn to radical social change, to become politically-active citizens. He feared the middle class could be driven to a right-wing viewpoint, "making them ripe for the plucking by some guy on horseback promising a return to the vanished verities of yesterday." His stated motive: "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back."[

Biographer Sanford Horwit has claimed that U.S. President Barack Obama was influenced by Alinsky and followed in his footsteps as a Chicago-based community organizer. Horwitt furthermore has asserted that Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign was influenced by Alinsky's teachings.

Adam Brandon, a spokesman for the conservative non-profit organization FreedomWorks, which is one of several groups involved in organizing Tea Party protests, says the group gives Alinsky's Rules for Radicals to its top leadership members. A shortened guide called Rules for Patriots is distributed to its entire network. In a January 2012 story that appeared in The Wall Street Journal, citing the organization's tactic of sending activists to town-hall meetings, Brandon explained, "his tactics when it comes to grass-roots organizing are incredibly effective." Former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey also gives copies of Alinsky's book Rules for Radicals to Tea Party leaders

[Rerun]

Those crazy enough to think they can change the world usually do.

Apple AD Campaign -----

[Hemodoc]

Folks need to understand the Hegelian dialectic and how the left has used this failed philosophy especially as Carl Marx applied it to his writings and philosophy from which communism and marxism is derived.  Alinsky is nothing but a rehashed marxist following its precepts quite closely. Where Marx was more a theoretical writer, Alynsky placed the theories into action in a much different way than Lennin or Mao in China did.

Read the book, read the comments by Alinsky and you find that the goal is pure POWER. They don't even define their ends, POWER is the goal pure and simple just like all dictators.

Here are a couple of good reviews I already posted on another thread:

http://www.rense.com/general80/fon.htm

http://www.redstate.com/delawarewindjammer/2012/01/13/obama-hillary-clinton-saul-alinsky-and-rules-for-radicals/

Here is an excellent review of Alinsky's influence on Obama:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/articles/rules%20for%20revolution%20(2).pdf

All you need to know about this book is contained in its dedication page.

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/hillary-clintons-idol-saul-alinsky-and-satan

If you are going to read the book, a proper knowledge of Lucifer, Marxism and Hegelian dialectics is prerequisite reading.

[Gerald Lively]

HemoDoc;

Sorry, I don’t do links.  Say it here or don’t say it.  By the way, It is “Karl” not “Carl”.  Carl Marx was the guy down at the carwash.

Alinsky was not a Communist.  He was a Marxist.  That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t read it.  Instead we should digest this book (1971) and many other books that have ideas different from our own such as plane old socialism. 

Other Comments:

1.    There is no such thing as “Lucifer” if you are referring to the Devil. Nor is there a Hell.
2.    You attribute the Alinsky philosophy to the Left, yet you ignore the distribution of this book to the Tea Party by the Tea Party and the praise it received from Wm. F. Buckley.  Why?
3.    I used Wikipedia to portray Alinsky, a considered neutral website.  I resent your referrals to right-wing websites. 
4.    There is nothing inherently wrong with seeking power.
5.    It is true that Hillary Clinton wrote a thesis on Alinsky, this only goes to prove that she is not closed minded.
6.    Mao said power comes from the barrel of a gun.  Not exactly Marxist.

Closed minded people, those who reject ideas and are termed anti-intellectuals in contemporary America, are really anti-American.  The notion of not reading something because someone said not to read it, was rejected by me way back in Catholic grammar school when the Nuns said the H. G. Wells “History of the World” (two volumes) was banned.  Such rejection tend to cause me to find that book and read it. Such bans mean someone is hiding something.  Even if you reject Marxism, I recommend you read it anyway.  There just might be a good idea in there somewhere.

The fellow down at the carwash may be an avowed Marxist but he still does an excellent job washing my car, he still takes my money and he is free to speak his mind.

gerald

[Hemodoc]

HemoDoc;

Sorry, I don’t do links.  Say it here or don’t say it.  By the way, It is “Karl” not “Carl”.  Carl Marx was the guy down at the carwash.

Alinsky was not a Communist.  He was a Marxist.  That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t read it.  Instead we should digest this book (1971) and many other books that have ideas different from our own such as plane old socialism. 

Other Comments:

1.    There is no such thing as “Lucifer” if you are referring to the Devil. Nor is there a Hell.
2.    You attribute the Alinsky philosophy to the Left, yet you ignore the distribution of this book to the Tea Party by the Tea Party and the praise it received from Wm. F. Buckley.  Why?
3.    I used Wikipedia to portray Alinsky, a considered neutral website.  I resent your referrals to right-wing websites. 
4.    There is nothing inherently wrong with seeking power.
5.    It is true that Hillary Clinton wrote a thesis on Alinsky, this only goes to prove that she is not closed minded.
6.    Mao said power comes from the barrel of a gun.  Not exactly Marxist.

Closed minded people, those who reject ideas and are termed anti-intellectuals in contemporary America, are really anti-American.  The notion of not reading something because someone said not to read it, was rejected by me way back in Catholic grammar school when the Nuns said the H. G. Wells “History of the World” (two volumes) was banned.  Such rejection tend to cause me to find that book and read it. Such bans mean someone is hiding something.  Even if you reject Marxism, I recommend you read it anyway.  There just might be a good idea in there somewhere.

The fellow down at the carwash may be an avowed Marxist but he still does an excellent job washing my car, he still takes my money and he is free to speak his mind.

gerald

Actually Gerald, I didn't place the links for you but for those that might be deceived by your claims that this garbage is American. Give me a break.

In any case, yes, Hillary wrote a 50 page senior paper on Alinsky and even interviewed him in person. I read about half the other night and had enough of it as well.

I thought it was Groucho's brother.

Let me go down your list:

1.    There is no such thing as “Lucifer” if you are referring to the Devil. Nor is there a Hell.

Gerald, I guess we get to find that out when this life is over. I don't have any doubt the Lucifer is real, but you are passing by the tribute to Lucifer in Alinsky's book. I am afraid you are actually in a minority of people that don't believe in the devil. Most that do believe in the devil consider him their enemy. However, there are a lot of folks that believe he is their ally. It is my prayer that you would avoid finding out the hard way that heaven and hell are real. Much better to do that this side of eternity my friend, but it looks like you have already made up your mind.

2.    You attribute the Alinsky philosophy to the Left, yet you ignore the distribution of this book to the Tea Party by the Tea Party and the praise it received from Wm. F. Buckley.  Why?

I already answered that issue. Boy, do you read?  In any case, knowing your enemy is important. If you think Alinsky is the play book for the Tea Party, shucks you are just quite ignorant of the Tea Party. No we already have a book, it is called the Bible.

3.    I used Wikipedia to portray Alinsky, a considered neutral website.  I resent your referrals to right-wing websites. 

Sorry, I will use what ever source I want whether you like it or not. 

4.    There is nothing inherently wrong with seeking power.

Oh really, to what end is this power used?  I would point out that the constitution sought limited powers and counter balancing spheres of influence to balances man's sinful nature lusting for power. Since you don't hold much love for the constitution from your prior statements, that is not a surprising belief.

5.    It is true that Hillary Clinton wrote a thesis on Alinsky, this only goes to prove that she is not closed minded.

Oh really, you mean leftist thinking is open minded?

6.    Mao said power comes from the barrel of a gun.  Not exactly Marxist.

Really, I guess this author wasted his time going over the history of marxism in China.

http://www.springer.com/philosophy/book/978-1-4020-3805-1

Like I said, I read the entire book two days ago and found absolutely nothing new under the sun. Just a different form of Marxism.  How has that worked for the peasants of Russia, China and Cuba? Geeze Louise, is that what folks want right here in America. Don't forget that dictatorship part before getting to Utopia.

Anyone way, my closed minded leftist friend, who ever said don't read the garbage. Read it and throw it away or better yet get together with all of your Tea Party friends and Trolls and burn the suckers and roast some marsh mellows. Marxism in all its different variations in Russia, China, Viet Nam, Cuba and all the other third world nations it has settled is a failed philosophy that only benefits the dictators that it gives power to. Anlinsky's version is no different. Just rehashed marxism and anti-Christian evil. No more, no less.

Like I said, read it to know how the enemy thinks. In any case, the only way to fight a guerilla war is with guerilla warfare tactics yourself. However, you are omitting one thing that shall be the downfall of Marxism. That is called the Word of God that has endured for 2000 years and shall endure forever. Soon, the Lord shall crush these false religions of Lucifer and send them to the dust bin of history.

I would hope and pray that you do find the falsehoods and failed experiments of Marxism before you to stand before the Lord, but we all have free will. I have no doubt that we shall all stand before Him and give account.

So, I have read all of these issues, Alinsky, Marx and quite a few other failed philosophies in my life. I have achieved a very high "INTELECTUAL" level and I plain and simply reject your models of human governance if nothing more than from a historical perspective. Close mindedness as you are trying to falsely imply against me once again would mean that I wouldn't read any Marxist propaganda at all. Sorry, you are wrong once again and you must be getting a complex from being wrong so often.

In any case, it appears that you are trying to read people's minds once again. I wouldn't give up the day job my friend.

No, I have read this garbage which I outright reject on many levels, once again not the least of which is historical accounts of Marxism in this world. Have you taken the time to add up how many people that Lenin and Marx killed between them imposing their form of Marxism on their populations. No, Marxism is all about power, nothing more. it is the antithesis of freedom.

[Hemodoc]

Mass killings under Communist regimes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Part of the series on
Communism

Mass killings occurred under some Communist regimes during the twentieth century with an estimated death toll numbering between 85 and 100 million.[1] Scholarship focuses on the causes of mass killings in single societies, though some claims of common causes for mass killings have been made. Some higher estimates of mass killings include not only mass murders or executions that took place during the elimination of political opponents, civil wars, terror campaigns, and land reforms, but also lives lost due to war, famine, disease, and exhaustion in labor camps. There are scholars who believe that government policies and mistakes in management contributed to these calamities, and, based on that conclusion combine all these deaths under the categories "mass killings", democide, politicide, "classicide", or loosely defined genocide. According to these scholars, the total death toll of the mass killings defined in this way amounts to many tens of millions; however, the validity of this approach is questioned by other scholars. As of 2011, academic consensus has not been achieved on causes of large scale killings by states, including by states governed by communists. In particular, the number of comparative studies suggesting causes is limited. The highest death tolls that have been documented in communist states occurred in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin, in the People's Republic of China under Mao Zedong, and in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. The estimates of the number of non-combatants killed by these three regimes alone range from a low of 21 million to a high of 70 million.[dubious – discuss][2] There have also been killings on a smaller scale in North Korea, Vietnam, and some Eastern European and African countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes

[Hemodoc]

Gerald,

Here is an interview with Buckley and Alinsky. Doesn't look like he is very flattering to Alinsky what so ever. Get your facts right Gerald, You are spreading false propaganda.

http://www.trevorloudon.com/2011/05/bill-buckley-interviews-saul-alinsky/

You can purchase a DVD of the entire interview or download the entire transcript for free:

http://hoohila.stanford.edu/firingline/programView2.php?programID=99

[Hemodoc]

Gerald,

FreedomWorks is not in any sense a grass roots political movement. Take a look at their board of directors. It is a bunch of fat cat politicians and businessman. I couldn't identify with any of these folks at all. If they want to hand out Alinsky, so what. That is NOT the book of the Tea Party folks. Once again, this AIN"T the Tea Party. This is a bunch of insiders doing what I know not what.

http://www.freedomworks.org/about/board-of-directors

The Tea Party is a shared set of beliefs among the people of America who are sickened by what we see happening to this nation. We have always been here. Using the name Tea Party is acceptable enough, but we existed before anyone heard of the "Tea Party." Folks from a lot of separate and sometimes disparate organizations all claim the "Tea Party" affiliation, but once again, there is no Tea Party whatsoever in a real sense. Instead, it is a shared set of beliefs. Once again, I never heard of this political organization until today. I would categorically state that they are free to do what they wish to do, but they do not speak for me or anyone else in the so called Tea Party.

If the GOP does not embrace the Tea Party sentiments, they will no longer be in power for without the 2010 uprising of support for conservative candidates, we would still have a Democratic House. Thankfully God allowed the GOP to control the house since 2010 elections took effect. Unfortunately, Obama took to regulations through agencies to continue his agenda against this nation.

Four more years of Obama will leave unspeakable ruin for this nation.

[Hemodoc]

Dear Gerald, the most absolute failure of Alinsk's principles is the class warfare that he foments among Americans. The HAVE-NOTs in America have had the only country in the face of the earth where the poor by hard work, intelligence, luck and knowing how to build a better mouse trap have been able to rise from the ashes of poverty to be able to be the leader of the free world. The history of all of our Presidents speaks of this. Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Nixon, Carter, Truman, Ike, for instance were all men who came from very humble beginnings.

Alinsky throws this away for the failed precepts of Marxism. History has much to say about what the HAVE-NOTS who gained power through Marxism have done with that power. Here we have the most dangerous regimes in world history with millions of people killed in the HAVE-NOTS lust for power.

No, America is a place where the poor man from a broken home with divorced parents and a beer drinking brother can become president. Clinton rose to power based on his intelligence and the power of his lust filled wife seeking that power but who lacked the personality and charisma to accomplish those goals herself. Instead, she pushed Bill to take her to those lofty heights of power. She was always the driving force behind Bill.

Abraham Lincoln came from the poorest of families living in a log cabin. No, Alinsky fails to take into account that America is not a land of oppression, not even for those that have suffered oppression in this nation. The civil rights battles of the 50's and 60's resulted in many opportunities for the black and hispanic communities. All that awaits them for success is to work and build upon intelligence and working within the system  to rise to the top. Who can say that there is not anything a black man can't achieve today now that we have a black president and not only that, look at all of the woman and minorities who have taken the next most powerful positions in this nation such as the speaker of the house, secretary of state, etc.

Alinksy is held out as the answer to poverty when instead all he does is enslave the very people that will bring his dictators to power. Read his works carefully and every step that we must pass through to get to Utopia. Yup, before Utopia is a dictatorship of the proletariat. The people that support Obama are almost uniformly ignorant of his philosophy of community organization as means to usurp power. POWER is the goal. POWER is the end. Remember, we must have a dictator first, before we can have Utopia under these alleged rules for radicals.

Yes, dangerous but also so weak and miserable when you analyze where he wants us to come from and where he wants us to go. His system will lead to the complete loss of freedom. The complete loss of universal rights. POWER is the end game and the all encompassing game and they care little how they gain the power as long as power is gained. This is Alinsky. This is Obama.

[Hemodoc]

Here is an excellent review in video of Alinsky and how he has influenced Obama, Acorn and other organizations.

http://wn.com/Coral_Ridge__Saul_Alinsky

Be sure to look at all of the videos. Very well done for those that would rather get their information in video format.

How many folks want personal attacks, ridicule, polemic arguments leading to civil strife, racial discord and ending in a dictatorship of the proletariat? Alinsky shall fail since he attacks Christianity outright. If you do look over the Buckley/Alinsky interview, you will see Alinsky focus on Billy Graham throughout the entire interview. It is a direct attack on Christianity. He dedicated his book to Lucifer. This is a spiritual battle.

You have seen the vulgar attack of a black man against a black woman who wants to work within the system to help her people. You have seen the attacks continue on her facebook page. Learn what the Alinsky method is so that you won't become brainwashed by false allegations. The Bible has survived attacks against it for 2000 years. This little man with "radical" ideas will not even be a blip in the annals of history. He is only a rehashed marxist.  His approach is only a manifestation of the most evil and vile faults of people. It is a shameful philosophy to venerate.

Porverbs 14:34  Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.

[Hemodoc]

Great video on Obama's early community organizing days by Sean Hannity of Fox news. Very well done work from 2008 looking at his associations with other radical leaders who shaped his career in Chicago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBfdPLWuHb8

[galvo]

Nice going, Gerald!

It is always amusing to bait the ratbags of the right.

[Gerald Lively]

HemoDoc;

To call you verbose is a gross understatement.  Much of what you posted is irrelevant.

To begin:

There is no empirical evidence that there is a Lucifer, a God as you describe, or that any of your frequent biblical quotes mean anything other than the words of some writer.  You can decided to believe that material, but you may not use it as evidence or reference to some fact.  Tain’t so. In America we have freedom of religion as well as freedom from religion.  When talking with me, keep your religion to yourself or you will be talking to yourself.

No, you haven’t explained why the Tea Party uses Alinsky. 

As I stated, Wikipedia is neutral in opinions.  All of your right-wing sources are obviously slanted.  Try dealing in facts.

There is nothing inherently wrong with seeking power.  You mistake accountability for power.  Right now you are attempting to gain power over me without accountability.

Rejecting Hillary Clinton’s work out of hand by questioning the Left-wing is ridiculous.

Marxism!  You seem to be suffering from the illusion that people are all Marx, or all Left (Liberal), or all Right-wing such as you present yourself.  That just isn’t true.  People of your stripe wish to rid America of Medicare and Social Security (Congress – Ryan/Boehner) because they claim this is socialism.  Yet, that same Congress has unusual benefits after they retire from a single term. Not only is that greed, it is a conflict of interest, and it is the same socialism as Medicare and Social Security.  I can recall a newly elected Tea Party member of the House asking if his health insurance was active.  The Tea Party is a fraud.  As for Marxism, no one in this discussion ever claimed it was the way to go.  Mao knew that power came from the barrel of a gun – yes, not exactly Marxism.

Neither Alinsky or Marx are failed philosophers.  We are discussing these people because their ideas are still active.

Your reliance on Marx for sake of argument is incorrect.  Yes, Marx wrote his theory.  But it was Leon Trotsky who tried to keep Marxism pure from the corruption of Stalin.  Trotsky found himself exiled to Mexico where he was eventually assassinated. 

The entire question offered you has been expanded by you.  Stay on point; this is about Alinsky.

Lastly, lose the name-calling.  I haven’t called you anything but you are at the least, volatile with your language.

Your shotgun method of posting dilutes your message.  You aren’t very good at this, are you?

gerald

[monrein]

Oh my, reading this thread is wearing me out but providing a fair bit of amusement at the same time.  Without wanting to participate in this thread I find myself compelled to wonder why anyone would think that things are either black or white (NO racist overtones implied) rather than infinite shades of grey?   All Tea Party members don't think alike any more than do Occupy movement members or Democrats or Republicans or Christians or Muslims or Canadians (a fond shout out to my home) or Americans (lots of relatives and friends there) and so on and so on.   It is entirely possible, is it not, that each "group" just like each "person" might have a valid idea or two at the same time as being either slightly or a lot wacky?  Even a single individual, let's take me for example, changes their ideas about things over time or as a result of being exposed to other ideas or ways of thinking, assuming of course that I keep reading or listening to other ideas even "radical" ones from any quarter.

So much I could say, but much has already been said and I'm hoping to get a few things done today.

[cariad]

Those crazy enough to think they can change the world usually do.

Apple AD Campaign -----

Cute!

[cariad]

HemoDoc;

Sorry, I don’t do links.  Say it here or don’t say it.  By the way, It is “Karl” not “Carl”.  Carl Marx was the guy down at the carwash

I agree about the links. I have stated that before: if you cannot read and summarize what you want to say to others, don't expect me to do your work for you.

Alinsky was not a Communist.  He was a Marxist.

False! Complete fiction in a further effort to scare people in this country. Didn't we go through this with Joe McCarthy? Talk about dangerous.

Saul Alinsky had no political affiliation. Gerald, please, if you want to do right by this person and give him a fair reading, listen to what he, the one true authority on his own beliefs, said about himself:

When asked if he was a communist, he replied; "Not at any time. I've never joined any organization—not even the ones I've organized myself. I prize my own independence too much. And philosophically, I could never accept any rigid dogma or ideology, whether it's Christianity or Marxism…The greatest crimes in history have been perpetrated by such religious and political and racial fanatics, from the persecutions of the Inquisition on down to Communist purges and Nazi genocide."

source: http://open.salon.com/blog/myles_spicer/2012/01/31/saul_alinsky_is_now_in_the_presidential_race
(While I agree with people who refuse to follow links, this is actually a short and very intelligent discussion of Alinsky's sudden appearance in the presidential race. I have bookmarked this writer's page and intend to follow his work.)

And not once in Rules for Radicals has Alinsky contradicted himself yet. I am therefore skipping any Marxism vs. Christianity discussion on the grounds that it is totally irrelevant to critique of Saul Alinsky and is of zero interest to me. If anyone wants to calmly discuss Alinsky's work, then I would be more than happy to join you as my time allows.

[Rerun]

Sorry, Gerald, I don't do books.  Put it here or don't put it.

             

[Rerun]

Hemodoc, those in the dark will stay there.  Until they ask for the "light" they will not see.  Bless you for trying.

        for you.

[Gerald Lively]

Alinsky was a Secular Jew and Alinsky himself said he was not a Communist, Marxist or  . . . . . .    My error.  I misspoke.

As you pointed out, “The greatest crimes in history have been perpetrated by such religious and political . . . fanatics, . . . “ 

Is this not the point I have been making?

gerald

[monrein]

And to further quote from that Myles Spicer piece:

"While on the left, names like Cesar Chavez, Jesse Jackson and Ralph Nader subscribed to Alinsky’s teachings, the conservative non-profit organization FreedomWorks, which is one of several groups involved in organizing Tea Party protests, says the group gives Alinsky's Rules for Radicals to its top leadership members. Former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey also gives copies of Alinsky's book Rules for Radicals to Tea Party leaders  In the wake of the devastating Detroit riots of the summer of 1967, Michigan Gov. George Romney — a Republican — met  Saul Alinsky to discuss the grievances of the urban black poor.  "I think you ought to listen to Alinsky," Romney told his white allies.  Respected conservative writer William F. Buckley Jr. called him "very close to being an organizational genius."
 
In the end, Gingrich has done a positive service resurrecting Alinsky’s name and deeds. Today we are faced with the same abyss of the “haves” and “have nots” that Alinsky dedicated his life to ameliorating. As summed up by my own personal political hero, Adlai Stevenson, he said of Alinsky's aims, they “most faithfully reflect our ideals of brotherhood, tolerance, charity and dignity of the individual." "

Wow, that last bit, from Adlai Stevenson sounds positively Christian.
 

[cariad]

I am at my kids' swim lesson so will keep this short:
Gerald, in rereading what I wrote it sounds like I was saying you were trying to scare people, which I know is also completely untrue, so I sincerely apologize for that. Thank you for clarifying and for opening up a thread to rationally discuss this great American's work.

Monrein, thank you for posting in the so very clear and reasonable way that you do. Yes, none other than Mitt Romney's father turned to Alinsky for help in a crisis. Makes me suspect that Newt's real target in dredging this all up was not Barack Obama but Mr. Romney himself.

[Hemodoc]

HemoDoc;

To call you verbose is a gross understatement.  Much of what you posted is irrelevant.

To begin:

There is no empirical evidence that there is a Lucifer, a God as you describe, or that any of your frequent biblical quotes mean anything other than the words of some writer.  You can decided to believe that material, but you may not use it as evidence or reference to some fact.  Tain’t so. In America we have freedom of religion as well as freedom from religion.  When talking with me, keep your religion to yourself or you will be talking to yourself.


Gerald, there you go again trying to make me conform to your view of the world. Once again, you don't have to talk to me if you don't want to. It's a free country.

No, you haven’t explained why the Tea Party uses Alinsky. 

Once again, you don't understand what the ordinary "Tea Party" person is. We are not an organization although there are a whole bunch of think tank type organizations that identify with the Tea Party. If they want to use the Alinsky method then I would have to aks how close are these folks to the DEMS? The Tea Party at its heart is those that have a deep and abiding love of this nation, the constitution and are angered by what they see happening.

How the left could use the "Tea Party" to its advantage is exactly the manner it has been used to polarize an existing sentiment among people in America, put a name to it and then "FREEZE IT," isolate and polarize it in the media. You are blatantly brainwashed into wanting to find racism in the Tea Party to the point that many today associate Tea Party and racism in the same sentence.

If these groups use Alinsky as you are alleging, then I would find that most likelyl a red flag operation trying to discredit the "Tea Party."

As I stated, Wikipedia is neutral in opinions.  All of your right-wing sources are obviously slanted.  Try dealing in facts.

Gerald, you crack me up!!

There is nothing inherently wrong with seeking power.  You mistake accountability for power.  Right now you are attempting to gain power over me without accountability.

Gerald, the founding fathers differed in your opinion and that is why we have checks and balances written into the constitution. Power corrups, absolute power corrups absolutely.

Rejecting Hillary Clinton’s work out of hand by questioning the Left-wing is ridiculous.

Nope, I was once one of those left wing folks that took great pleasure in bashing Christians and the right wing folks. I had a very interesting experience shortly after I became a born again Christian. During my training, I supervised a devout born again Christian when he was an intern. I didn't believe at that time that praying at the bedside had any place in medicine. I wrote terrible evaluation for this man, reported him to my superiors and created a lot of trouble for this man simply expressing his Christianity with patients often who wanted that spiritual support.

About two years later, he rotated through my Military base and we ended up assigned to work in the same unit for 8 days. I commented to me wife that I hadn't seen the man and she said, you dummy, you don't remember what you did to him do you? In fact, since becoming born again Christian just a little while before this, I had forgotten my past.

In any case, when I told this man who obviously didn't want to see me, talk to me or have anything to do with me I knew it would be a very interesting week. He through me an MRE and said, what have you been up to in the last couple of years in polite conversation since we were to work side by side for 8 days of training. His jawed dropped when I said, not much since I became a born again Christian.

He never stated that he had prayed for me, but I believe he did as the Bible commands us for those that persecute us. The two of us spent the most amazing 8 days of fellowship in the Lord. I have never lost sight that this man was able to pray for me and forgive me for the evil I had done against him, all which came to naught before him. He had done very well in his own training.

Long story to simply say, I pray for you Gerald and I forgive you for all of your personal attacks against me. I do in fact understand the left wing very well since it was not that long ago that I suffered from that delusion myself.

Marxism!  You seem to be suffering from the illusion that people are all Marx, or all Left (Liberal), or all Right-wing such as you present yourself.  That just isn’t true. 

I said it was "rehashed Marxism." Chris Matthews uses the term Neo-Marxism which is probably more accurate:

http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/12/msnbcs_chris_ma_1.php

People of your stripe wish to rid America of Medicare and Social Security (Congress – Ryan/Boehner) because they claim this is socialism. 

Gerald, you are bordering on being a fool in the sense you never learn. You asked me several days ago a list of questions including do I want to get rid of Medicare. My answer to you then is NO, my answer to you today is NO.


Yet, that same Congress has unusual benefits after they retire from a single term. Not only is that greed, it is a conflict of interest, and it is the same socialism as Medicare and Social Security. 

I have spoken out against this hypocrisy myself. I agree absolutely. You are trying to read minds again, scary how often you are wrong.

I can recall a newly elected Tea Party member of the House asking if his health insurance was active.

Source please!!

The Tea Party is a fraud. 

The so called Tea Party as an organization may indeed by a fraud perpetrated against people like me of conservative and Christian faith. Since studying this whole Alinsky issue in great detail that last couple of weeks, Rule # 13 strikes me as an opportunity to apply that to the Christian conservatives. Without a target, the Alinsky model fails. In such, the groups you are talking about using the Alinsky methods would actually discredit this movement. The accusations of racism, the negative connotations of the "Tea Party" in the media, in the late night talk shows I believe brings to light that indeed, the entire Tea Party movement may be nothing more than the application of Rule # 13 to conservative, right wing Christians who have had a profound influence in politics in the last 3 decades.

Now by giving all of us the name of Tea Party and bringing about false flag operations by insiders like Dick Armey and his group, yes, absolutely the so called Tea Party movement in the end analysis may be nothing more than application on a grand scale of rule #13:

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

However, what you fail to see and understand, folks like me who have never once been to a so called Tea Party meeting, never participated in Tea Party activities, never joined any of these conservative "Tea Party" groups are what makes up the rank and file of the so called "Tea Party."  We are a group of people joined together not by membership but joint beliefs in this nation. Much to your error, the people that would identify as Tea Party folks are not all GOP. There is a large number who are independents and even a few who are Democrats. What is the glue that we have in common, a deep and abiding love of the constitution, this country and most of us have strong Christian beliefs.

We have always been here. You may be absolutely right that the Tea Party is a fraud, but the fraud would be against us to FREEZE us and polarize us as you are trying but failing to do because of the truth.

I have no doubt that you also fail to see the power behind our common beliefs which is Jesus Christ of Nazareth. You deny the existence of God, the devil are anything spiritual as noted in your many comments. The entire debacle we are in at this point being on the verge of losing our constitutional rights and having Marxism as the foundation of politics in America I see as our failure in tolerating the loss of morality in this nation over the last 100 years.  We have only one remedy for this solution and it has nothing whatsoever to do with politics.

II Chronicles 7:12     ¶ And the LORD appeared to Solomon by night, and said unto him, I have heard thy prayer, and have chosen this place to myself for an house of sacrifice.
13     If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people;
14     If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.


As for Marxism, no one in this discussion ever claimed it was the way to go.  Mao knew that power came from the barrel of a gun – yes, not exactly Marxism.

You are the only person in the world I have ever heard in my entire life to deny the Marxist origins of Maoism which does go beyond and add other philosophies to his version, but it is a form of Marxism. His own form.  Sure, he did agree with power at the end of a gun, but have you seen ANY marxist regimen in the last 100 years that did not enforce their power through military means.  How many people have died in the last 100 years in marxist regimes? You should have that answer, I already posted it. Don't you deal in facts Gerald?

Neither Alinsky or Marx are failed philosophers.  We are discussing these people because their ideas are still active.

Oh, they are absolutely failed since they are in complete rebelliion against God who created this earth. He isn't the least bothered by them.

PSALM 2

WHY do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2     The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
3     Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4     He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
5     Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
6     Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7     I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8     Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9     Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
10     Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
11     Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12     Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.


Your reliance on Marx for sake of argument is incorrect.  Yes, Marx wrote his theory.  But it was Leon Trotsky who tried to keep Marxism pure from the corruption of Stalin.  Trotsky found himself exiled to Mexico where he was eventually assassinated. 

The entire question offered you has been expanded by you.  Stay on point; this is about Alinsky.

My dear friend Gerald, I have studied Marxism extensively during my life starting with and entire college course. I read the entire Alinsky book and no matter how much distance he wishes to claim he is from Marxism, I found nothing in the book but rehashed marxist diatribes. Once again, I agree with Chris Matthews that NEO-MARXIST is the correct term.

Lastly, lose the name-calling.  I haven’t called you anything but you are at the least, volatile with your language.

Your shotgun method of posting dilutes your message.  You aren’t very good at this, are you?

gerald

What is the matter Gerald, you can't keep up with the facts?

[Gerald Lively]

This debate reminds me of my university studies in Organizational Behavior.  Alinsky’s work seems to clarify what went before him: Abraham Maslow, Viktor Frankl and Timothy Leary. 

This school of thought has its roots far back in history: Plato, Aristotle, and Machiavelli, Adam Smith and Max Weber.  The list of people who have contributed to this school of thought is long.  Alinsky seems to have gathered these various ideas and wrote a kind of unified approach to Community Organizations. He included Systems theory, the works of Frederick Taylor, Institutional Theory plus several studies on Human Motivation.

“Organizational behavior is a growing field. Organizational studies departments generally form part of business schools, although many universities also have industrial psychology and industrial economics programs.

The field is highly influential in the business world with practitioners such as Peter Drucker and Peter Senge, who turned the academic research into business practices. Organizational behavior is becoming more important in the global economy as people with diverse backgrounds and cultural values must work together effectively and efficiently. It is also under increasing criticism as a field for its ethnocentric and pro-capitalist assumptions.”
 
Hmmmm!

gerald

[Gerald Lively]

Well now!

HemoDoc, you cover much ground that is not a part of this thread.  I would very much like to compare my military experiences to yours but all of mine was classified and it remains so today.  Besides, this has nothing to do with Alinsky.  Judging by your description of military experiences, you were a light-weight.

The Tea Party exists as an “ad-hoc” organization of convenience, per your description. You should recall that the Tea Party held a convention, has money in the bank, and paid for speakers that ranged from Sarah Palin to Andrew Breitbart.  They are an organization.

A few points:
1.   There is no empirical evidence of a Lucifer.  You are ducking this comment.
2.   The Tea Party is using Alinsky just like anyone else who uses Alinsky – even though people like you condemn the book.
3.   If you do not think Wikipedia is neutral, show me where the bias exists.
4.   You still confuse power with accountability in our government.  Perhaps you do not understand the abstract concept of accountability.
5.   I don’t give a damn if you are a born-again atheist or any other belief rooted in mythology.  It has no place in this discussion.
6.   The Tea Party’s influence is fading as people realize the radicalism involved.  You take the ridiculous stance by denying the existence of the Tea Party when the organization is criticized, then you deny that so- and so does not stand for the Tea Party when they do something uncomfortable to you.  You cannot have it both ways.
7.   Mao started out as a Marxist but that did not give him any sort of power.  He took advantage of the 12 tribal districts in old China and pitted one against another, winning as he went.  He used the “common enemy” idea – the Japanese.  He meant what he said, “Power comes from the barrel of a gun.”   
8.   You studied Marx?  You wasted your time.  Who cares what Chris Matthews says?

Once again, keep your religion to yourself.

gerald

[Hemodoc]

THE GRAVE INFLUENCE OF SAUL ALINKSY

This is very much a spiritual battle and that is why Alinsky in the end shall lose and already has lost. I would note that Alinksy has already repudiated everything he taught and today in hell wishes he could come back and undo all that he has started. He isn't following organization theory to improve production and maximize capitolism, for from it my friend. He follows the Cloward Piven Strategy instead.

Cloward Piven Strategy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiaLnQvy7_w