Rules for Radicals - Wikipedia
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals is a 1971 book by community activist and writer Saul D. Alinsky about how to successfully run a movement for change. It was the last book written by Alinsky, and it was published shortly before his death in 1972.
The Rules[edit]
- "Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
- "Never go outside the expertise of your people."
- "Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
- "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
- "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."
- "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
- "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
- "Keep the pressure on."
- "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."
- "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
- "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."
- "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
- "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
408 visitors
Like perhaps weaponizing departments of the government to attack your enemies?
Not too sure if radicals just aren't 'experts' at every topic. Well, at least according to them.
Words like unpatriotic, unreasonable, fascist, racist, xenophobic, homophobic, and the like are all meant solely to support this rule. I see it daily.
It appears to me that some are still employing these tired old 'rules'.
The Tea Party kept them alive long enough for the Gaetz Gang to employ them.
BTW, the 'rules' you listed have been edited. Not cool!
Movin' on, how dare Alinsky provide a road map to fight the readers of 'The Prince' ...
I didn't edit the 'rules'--look at the link.
The Tea Party was destroyed by Obama's IRS prior to the 2012 election.
As was ACORN.
No, ACORN went over the line and destroyed itself:
Voter registration fraud, 1998
A series of voter registration fraud accusations hit ACORN. In 1998, an Arkansas employee is arrested for falsifying voter registration forms. Shortly thereafter, Philadelphia authorities spot hundreds of registration papers they suspect were filled out by the same person.
The founder's brother gets in trouble, 1999
Dale Rathke, the brother of founder Wade Rathke, embezzles almost $1 million from ACORN and its affiliates over two years. The family finds out and agrees to put the money back, but doesn't tell ACORN's board or the police. Dale Rathke remains on ACORN's payroll until word gets out and he resigns in June 2008.
Fraud charges persist, 2004
ACORN -- which now stands for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now -- claimed it registered more than 1 million new voters nationwide in 2004, a presidential election year. But authorities in Minnesota, Ohio, Florida, and other states suspect that some ACORN workers filed phony papers .
Conservative outrage builds as fraud charges mount, 2008
During the 2008 presidential campaign, ACORN collected more than 1.3 million voter registrations in 21 states. About 400,000 are rejected as incomplete, duplicated or fraudulent.
Criminal charges, 2009
The state of Nevada files criminal charges against ACORN, saying its leaders illegally paid workers to register voters .
The video sting, September 2009
ACORN's troubles spin out of control after independent filmmaker James O'Keefe and conservative activist Hannah Giles pose as a pimp and a prostitute and secretly videotape workers in several ACORN offices giving them advice on dodging taxes and establishing a brothel with underage girls. Congress strips ACORN of millions in federal funding .
The fall of ACORN: A timeline | The Week
I think he was trying to equate some entity not getting federal funding with some federal agencies, through the power they possess, harassing and intimidating entities.
I will say this about those two, they're both famous for editing.
Editing blank airtime.
A mistake that we won't let him forget.
Sounds like the Freedom Caucus to me.
The Freedom Caucus wouldn't have much power if the voters had voted on the basis of their suffering.
Of course it does.
Saul may or may not have made this rule, too:
Always accuse your opponent of what you yourself are doing.
That's obviously Trump's first rule.
Oh, slick move getting Trump here already.
Does the very mention of his name shame you? My apologies ... /s
Others' obsessions don't matter to me.
In that case don't comment on them. Sheesh!
Don't feel the need to share.
"It appears to me that some are still employing these tired old 'rules'."
And it does not seem to be working very well.
Demonizing seems to be wearing thin because more people are being affected now by the policies these radicals endorse. If you demonize the opposition, but fail to provide what you promise, it is kind of hard to keep blaming the opposition for your failures if you are the ones in charge.