Blame Saul Alinsky For Our Current Political Circus

Readability

Blame Saul Alinsky For Our Current Political Circus

I don’t believe there is a more apt label for our cur­rent polit­i­cal cli­mate than call­ing it a cir­cus. There is no bet­ter exam­ple of this cir­cus than the entire con­fir­ma­tion process for Judge Kavanaugh. This cir­cus began with the protests that erupted even before Pres­i­dent Trump announced the name of his nom­i­nee, con­tin­ued with the con­stant inter­rup­tions by the Democ­rats dur­ing the hear­ings, and cli­maxed with the not too sur­pris­ing last sec­ond accu­sa­tions of sex­ual misconduct.

None of this sur­prised me, and I’m sure not too many read­ers of this won­der­ful web­site were sur­prised either. We’ve seen it so many times before. The entire fra­cas has a scripted feel to it because it was scripted. The script was pub­lished back in 1971 by Saul Alin­sky. It was titled Rules for Rad­i­cals. This book is more than a script for a large per­cent­age of the polit­i­cal left; it is their play­book and bible. Col­leges and uni­ver­si­ties use it to indoc­tri­nate their stu­dents. The more rad­i­cal lib­eral Demo­c­rat politi­cians, such as Pres­i­dent Obama and Hillary Clin­ton, have embraced this book.

Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Rad­i­cals has often been por­trayed as being a pos­i­tive work. Is it really? Check out this quote from the page Pro­logue xvm

Remem­ber we are talk­ing about rev­o­lu­tion, not rev­e­la­tion; you can miss the tar­get by shoot­ing too high as well as too low. First, there are no rules for rev­o­lu­tion any more than there are rules for love or rules for hap­pi­ness, but there are rules for rad­i­cals who want to change their world; there are cer­tain cen­tral con­cepts of action in human pol­i­tics that oper­ate regard­less of the scene or the time. To know these is basic to a prag­matic attack on the sys­tem. These rules make the dif­fer­ence between being a real­is­tic rad­i­cal and being a rhetor­i­cal one who uses the tired old words and slogans

The rev­o­lu­tion he was talk­ing about is one where our found­ing prin­ci­ples and free mar­ket econ­omy are replaced by a social­ist sys­tem. This quote from page Pro­logue xix out­lines the begin­ning moves in this revolution.

Dos­to­evski said that tak­ing a new step is what peo­ple fear most. Any rev­o­lu­tion­ary change must be pre­ceded by a pas­sive, affir­ma­tive, non-​challenging atti­tude toward change among the mass of our peo­ple. They must feel so frus­trated, so defeated, so lost, so future­less in the pre­vail­ing sys­tem that they are will­ing to let go of the past and chance the future. This accep­tance is the ref­or­ma­tion essen­tial to any revolution.

The polit­i­cal process in Wash­ing­ton DC has bro­ken down. Many Demo­c­rat mem­bers of the United States Con­gress have delib­er­ately attempted to bring this about because they’re fol­low­ing Rules for Rad­i­cals.

Doesn’t this next quote, from page Pro­logue xxii, describe the tac­tics the polit­i­cal left has used against the polit­i­cal right for a very long time? Doesn’t this quote describe the shenani­gans used by the Democ­rats dur­ing the con­fir­ma­tion hear­ings? Isn’t all of the polit­i­cal chaos cre­at­ing feel­ings of dis­il­lu­sion­ment and hope­less­ness among the people?

Men don’t like to step abruptly out of the secu­rity of famil­iar expe­ri­ence; they need a bridge to cross from their own expe­ri­ence to a new way. A rev­o­lu­tion­ary orga­nizer must shake up the pre­vail­ing pat­terns of their lives — agi­tate, cre­ate dis­en­chant­ment and dis­con­tent with the cur­rent val­ues, to pro­duce, if not a pas­sion for change, at least a pas­sive, affir­ma­tive, non-​challenging climate.

A ref­or­ma­tion means that masses of our peo­ple have reached the point of dis­il­lu­sion­ment with past ways and val­ues. They don’t know what will work but they do know that the pre­vail­ing sys­tem is self-​defeating, frus­trat­ing, and hope­less. They won’t act for change but won’t strongly oppose those who do. The time is then ripe for revolution.

Bad polit­i­cal behav­ior is not a phe­nom­e­non exclu­sive to the polit­i­cal left; how­ever it is much more preva­lent on that side of the spec­trum. Rules for Rad­i­cals is pri­mar­ily respon­si­ble for that. Most on the polit­i­cal left have been indoc­tri­nated by that book, either by read­ing it them­selves or by receiv­ing the infor­ma­tion sec­ond or third hand. Those on the polit­i­cal right more often embrace the Ten Com­mand­ments and Judeo Chris­t­ian teach­ings on morality.

This quote from the Chap­ter of Ends and Means is the jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for many on the polit­i­cal left to engage in tac­tics such as riot­ing after los­ing an elec­tion, block­ing high­ways, harass­ing peo­ple at restau­rants, storm­ing meet­ings, silenc­ing those they do not agree with, enrolling the dead to vote, and attempt­ing to derail a Supreme Court con­fir­ma­tion by drop­ping unfounded sex­ual mis­con­duct allegations.

Life and how you live it is the story of means and ends. The end\s what you want, and the means is how you get it. When­ever we think about social change, the ques­tion of means and ends arises. The man of action views the issue of means and ends in prag­matic and strate­gic terms. He has no other prob­lem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the pos­si­bil­i­ties of var­i­ous choices of action. He asks of ends only whether they are achiev­able and worth the cost; of means, only whether they will work. To say that cor­rupt means cor­rupt the ends is to believe in the immac­u­late con­cep­tion of ends and prin­ci­ples. The real arena is cor­rupt and bloody. Life is a cor­rupt­ing process from the time a child learns

The prac­ti­cal rev­o­lu­tion­ary will under­stand Goethe’s “con­science is the virtue of observers and not of agents of action”; in action, one does not always enjoy the lux­ury of a deci­sion that is con­sis­tent both with one’s indi­vid­ual con­science and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for the lat­ter. Action is for mass sal­va­tion and not for the individual’s per­sonal sal­va­tion. He who sac­ri­fices the mass good for his per­sonal con­science has a pecu­liar con­cep­tion of “per­sonal sal­va­tion”; he doesn’t care enough for peo­ple to be “cor­rupted” for them.

I don’t believe there is a more apt label for our current political climate than calling it a circus.  There is no better example of this circus than the entire confirmation process for Judge Kavanaugh.  This circus began with the protests that erupted even before President Trump announced the name of his nominee, continued with the constant interruptions by the Democrats during the hearings, and climaxed with the not too surprising last second accusations of sexual misconduct.

None of this surprised me, and I’m sure not too many readers of this wonderful website were surprised either. We’ve seen it so many times before.  The entire fracas has a scripted feel to it because it was scripted.   The script was published back in 1971 by Saul Alinsky.  It was titled Rules for Radicals.  This book is more than a script for a large percentage of the political left; it is their playbook and bible.  Colleges and universities use it to indoctrinate their students.  The more radical liberal Democrat politicians, such as President Obama and Hillary Clinton, have embraced this book.

Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals has often been portrayed as being a positive work. Is it really? Check out this quote from the page Prologue xvm

Remember we are talking about revolution, not revelation; you can miss the target by shooting too high as well as too low. First, there are no rules for revolution any more than there are rules for love or rules for happiness, but there are rules for radicals who want to change their world; there are certain central concepts of action in human politics that operate regardless of the scene or the time. To know these is basic to a pragmatic attack on the system. These rules make the difference between being a realistic radical and being a rhetorical one who uses the tired old words and slogans

The revolution he was talking about is one where our founding principles and free market economy are replaced by a socialist system.  This quote from page Prologue xix outlines the beginning moves in this revolution.

Dostoevski said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.

The political process in Washington DC has broken down.  Many Democrat members of the United States Congress have deliberately attempted to bring this about because they’re following Rules for Radicals.

Doesn’t this next quote, from page Prologue xxii, describe the tactics the political left has used against the political right for a very long time?  Doesn’t this quote describe the shenanigans used by the Democrats during the confirmation hearings?  Isn’t all of the political chaos creating feelings of disillusionment and hopelessness among the people?

Men don’t like to step abruptly out of the security of familiar experience; they need a bridge to cross from their own experience to a new way. A revolutionary organizer must shake up the prevailing patterns of their lives — agitate, create disenchantment and discontent with the current values, to produce, if not a passion for change, at least a passive, affirmative, non-challenging climate.

A reformation means that masses of our people have reached the point of disillusionment with past ways and values. They don’t know what will work but they do know that the prevailing system is self-defeating, frustrating, and hopeless. They won’t act for change but won’t strongly oppose those who do. The time is then ripe for revolution.

Bad political behavior is not a phenomenon exclusive to the political left; however it is much more prevalent on that side of the spectrum.   Rules for Radicals is primarily responsible for that.  Most on the political left have been indoctrinated by that book, either by reading it themselves or by receiving the information second or third hand.  Those on the political right more often embrace the Ten Commandments and Judeo Christian teachings on morality.

This quote from the Chapter of Ends and Means is the justification for many on the political left to engage in tactics such as rioting after losing an election, blocking highways, harassing people at restaurants, storming meetings, silencing those they do not agree with, enrolling the dead to vote, and attempting to derail a Supreme Court confirmation by dropping unfounded sexual misconduct allegations.

Life and how you live it is the story of means and ends. The end\s what you want, and the means is how you get it. Whenever we think about social change, the question of means and ends arises. The man of action views the issue of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms. He has no other problem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the possibilities of various choices of action. He asks of ends only whether they are achievable and worth the cost; of means, only whether they will work. To say that corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles. The real arena is corrupt and bloody. Life is a corrupting process from the time a child learns

The practical revolutionary will understand Goethe’s “conscience is the virtue of observers and not of agents of action”; in action, one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for the latter. Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual’s personal salvation. He who sacrifices the mass good for his personal conscience has a peculiar conception of “personal salvation”; he doesn’t care enough for people to be “corrupted” for them.