A must read. -Ed.
Immediately after the Democratic National Convention in Colorado, theBoston Globe published a letter from L. David Alinsky. He boasted abouthow Barack Obama had made extremely effective use of his training inthe methods of David’s late father, the famous Chicago radical, Saul D.Alinsky (right>).
David Alinsky gloated: “I am proud to see that my father’s modelfor organizing is being applied successfully beyond local communityorganizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a finetribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday.”
What was Saul Alinsky’s model that Barack Obama used sosuccessfully to defeat the Clinton machine plus the Republican Party ina dramatic one-two punch never before seen in politics? What is knowntoday as “the Alinsky ideology and Alinsky concepts of massorganization for power” are fully set forth in Alinsky’s 1971 book,”Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals.”
Alinsky’s worldview was that mankind is divided into three parts:”the Haves, the Have-Nots and the Have-a-Little, Want Mores.” Hispurpose was to teach the Have-Nots how to take power and money awayfrom the Haves by creating mass organizations to seize power, and hefrankly admitted that “this means revolution.”
He wanted a radical change of America’s social and economicstructure, and he planned to achieve that through creating publicdiscontent and moral confusion. Alinsky developed strategies to achievepower through mass organization, and organizing was his word forrevolution.
He wanted to move the United States from capitalism tosocialism, where the means of production would be owned by all thepeople (i.e., the government). A believer in economic determinism, heviewed unemployment, disease, crime and bigotry as byproducts ofcapitalism.
“Change” was Alinsky’s favorite word, used on page afterpage. “I will argue,” he wrote, “that man’s hopes lie in the acceptanceof the great law of change.”
Alinsky used what he called “general concepts of change” tomove us toward “a science of revolution.” What he called “change” meantmassive change in our socio-economic structure, and what he called”organizing” meant pursuing confrontational political tactics.
Alinsky taught the Have-Nots to “hate the establishment ofthe Haves” because they have “power, money, food, security and luxury.”He claimed that “justice, morality, law and order are mere words usedby the Haves to justify and secure their status quo.”
Alinsky didn’t ignore traditional moral standards or dismissthem as unnecessary. He was more devious — he taught his followersthat “moral rationalization is indispensable at all times of actionwhether to justify the selection or the use of ends or means.”
To achieve his goals, he sought local community organizerswho projected confidence and vision as well as change. Barack Obama fitthe profile.
Alinsky didn’t want just talkers, he wanted radicals who wereprepared to take bold action to organize the discontented, precipitatecrises, grab power and thereby transform society. He taught hisorganizers how to infiltrate existing institutions such as churches,unions and political parties, gain influence in them and then introducechange.
The qualities Alinsky looked for in a good organizer were ego(“reaching for the highest level for which man can reach — to create,to be a ‘great creator,’ to play God”), curiosity (raising “questionsthat agitate, that break through the accepted pattern”), irreverence(“nothing is sacred”; “detests dogma, defies any finite definition ofmorality”), a sense of humor (“the most potent weapons known to mankindare satire and ridicule”) and an organized personality with confidencein presenting the right reason for his actions only “as a moralrationalization after the right end has been achieved.”
The organizer must “rub raw the resentments of the people ofthe community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to thepoint of overt expression. … An organizer must stir updissatisfaction and discontent.”
Alinsky trained his community organizers to adopt a”middle-class identity” and familiarity with their “values andproblems.” After achieving “the priceless value of his middle-classexperience,” he will “begin to dissect and examine that way of life ashe never has before.”
Alinsky’s trainees are instructed to return to the suburbanscene of the middle class with its variety of organizations, from PTAsto League of Women Voters, consumer groups, churches and clubs. Alinskyboasted: “With rare exceptions, our activists and radicals are productsof and rebels against our middle-class society. … Our rebels havecontemptuously rejected the values and way of life of the middleclass.”
Put “Rules for Radicals” on your must-read list if you want to understand much of contemporary politics.