Hello! Consti here blogging from my secrete underground bunker where my plans to take over and replace society with Judeo Christian values has been put on hold so I can offer you this teachable moment.
Now what is a teachable moment you might ask? A teachable moment is an unplanned opportunity that arises in the classroom where a teacher has an ideal chance to offer insight to his or her students. “A teachable moment is not something that you can plan for; rather, it is a fleeting opportunity that must be sensed and seized by the teacher.” Since the subject has come up recently I’d like to introduce you to my pal Saul. But I will let him say it in his own words; “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”.
Outlining his strategy in organizing Alinsky writes: “There’s another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevsky 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 change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution. To bring on this reformation requires that the organizer work inside the system, among not only the middle class but the 40 per cent of American families ‘“ more than seventy million people ‘“ whose income range from $5,000 to $10,000 a year [in 1971]. They cannot be dismissed by labeling them blue collar or hard hat. They will not continue to be relatively passive and slightly challenging. If we fail to communicate with them, if we don’t encourage them to form alliances with us, they will move to the right. Maybe they will anyway, but let’s not let it happen by default.”
The link above will take you to the Wikipedia page where some of the rules are outlined. It is required reading for this teachable moment.
Let’s take another look at one of his rules; “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” If you take a good look at the big picture of politics you will see over the last two decades how this has played out. Along with the MSM and thousand of internet blogs as a willing accomplices. It’s no secret that there is a left leaning bias in the media today. There have been numerous studies/articles pointing out the bias in not only coverage but in tone. One good and humorous example is the following article snippet which is also required reading for this teachable moment.
Now remember class; “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” This will allow you to deflate, defeat, and appear to outwit, marginalize, or basically put on defense any opposition to your cause. Whatever those causes may be.
Another rule is; ‘The judgment of the ethics of means is dependent upon the political position of those sitting in judgment.’ Let me just give you a taste of those sitting in the political position of judgment at the moment. This also is required reading class so take note.
Now class, your take home assignment is to write a 200 word essay on how you as an individual can apply Alinsky s rules to help make radical change happen in the government today. Using the links I provided you please reference any rules you find personally appealing. I want it typed; single sided, with annotations listed at the bottom. Must include three references to the articles I provided, and on my desk beginning of class tomorrow. Extra credit if you can name another politician that has reference Alinsky’s rules not listed in this lesson,
If you want to use this as a teaching aid, please send $5 to a poor Afghani child.
Consti
The 2012 Presidential Election is fast approaching
The GOP race is now a field of 4 with only Romney, Gingrich, Paul, & Santorum still standing. Who will be the next candidate to exit the race & who will emerge as the eminent GOP nominee?
Follow us on Twitter & join our 2012 election FaceBook page for updates & new blog articles.
Contact us if you are passionate about politics & want to blog with us.
{ 16 comments… read them below or add one }
And you don’t seem to think anything Obama is doing is bad so all you do is repeat the mantra of Bush, Cheney, Armey. Your opinion is just as biased as you try to make mine out to be. Pigeon hole me into a label all you like. I don’t mind since it doesn’t affect me in the slightest. Again I have not limited my criticism to JUST Obama. As it so happens it’s a one party nation and he’s in charge. So deal with it. As a side note Obama’s approval ratings have dropped the fastest of any president in their first year for the last 50 years. So as you can see I am not alone in my criticism of his policies.
Again, a whole article on the Third party that clearly made my point on how I felt about the Republicans. Again, you fail to take that into account.
“pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
Thank you though for your opinion. While I may not agree with it I will defend your right to have it with my life. If things don’t correct we (you and I) won’t have that right any more.
Laura,
Sounds fair. My time is tight at the moment, but I’d love to read something you feel as important as Lewis. Article forthcoming.
Consti,
This goes to show that you are not interested in the truth and looking at all things from all sides. You are only interested in your narrow agenda, which appears to be finding, and making up where necessary, stuff to attack Obama and the Dems with. If you think nothing that the K Street Gang did matters today, then you need to look at who’s behind the scenes in the Republican party and the conservatives and you’ll find men like Gingrich, DeLay, Boehner, Armey and the like. They are not dead and gone, they are very much alove and kicking. They are rehabbing their images, especially Gingrich and DeLay so they can step back in when things settle down. I wish you would take the blinders off and truly be the crusader you believe yourself to be. Instead of using a spotlight, use a FLOODLIGHT!
And again, please read what I write before issuing a response. You are off about my bashing the Bush Administration as the point of my comment and it was not addressed to you. I am only answering what you wrote in an attempt to help you be what it is you are trying and want to be. I suggest you read a book by a fellow conservative of yours, John Dean, that he began as in partnership with Barry goldwater before he died called “Conservatives Without Compassion.” Even conservatives are alarmed by what’s gone on- and unlike many of the people you seem to like to read and to quote, Dean sites just about everything and has facts… J, I got the book you mentioned from the library yesterday before I read your post. How about a trade- I’ll read yours if you read the Dean book.
BDS – Bush Derangement Syndrome. Nasty, incurable disease. Got news for you, OBAMA is in charge now. It’s all his baby at this point. The rise in unemployment can’t be blamed on Bush. The talk of stimulus for news papers isn’t Bush. And for the record the left has been using Alinsky’s rules since the 70′s!! Bush only had 8 years! No the mighty ONE is in charge now, and it’s time the rest of the country realizes it. You can only blame Bush and the Republicans’ for so much since they no longer in power. And if I really wanted to I could go back further and point out the same thing about the Dem’s in the 80′s. I thought Obama was all about looking to the future, not dwelling on the past. Sure hasn’t turned out that way with everyone obsessing about Bush. It’s amazing since they can’t beat on Bush any more they turn to FOX news and the other talking heads that don’t hold power. They need a boogie man now that Bush is gone. Their sights are on Beck, Limbaugh, and FOX. Silence the dissenters using Sauls rules. It’s about time the American public come to see this.
J,
Saul Alinsky was a chump compared to the tactics employed in the last 20 years by the Republicans, particularly in the House. They went straight for Machiavelli. You and Consti need to read up on Gingrich, DeLay, Jack Abramoff, Rick Santorum, how they got to power and used it and then how they started and ran the “K Street Project” , along with Grover Norquist. They were not only open about it, they BRAGGED about it. Read about DeLay and his “little black book.” Talking trash about someone to gain power pales in comparison to what these men did. And moderate Republicans were so afraid of losing these men’s support and not getting reelected that they sat by and said and did nothing. The Democrats said nothing because they thought that the American people would think they were whining and are not interested in “process,” and they are not completely wrong in that, until the Republicans turned the public eye that way. The press remanined quiet because it was well known that they would get frozen out, as the Bush White House threatened and had done, to those who ran stories they didn’t like.
All this is easily and readily available, but sinsce the major participants are out of the limelight and working behind the scenes, people aren’t paying attention to it. And the systems they created are stil in place, but with different players acting in cooperation with these men.
You are looking where they WANT you to look. Smoke and mirrors, ny friend, smoke and mirrors. There’s a forest, and world, beyond those trees, a wonderful world or at least one with the potential to be wonderful. But only if you care to look…
Laura,
First as an intellectual admirer (though thoroughly confused), I d expect more than the three lame attempts to bolster an already weak argument.
I find a glimmer of genius in what Consti may have happenstance at; you and most in the leftist eat the rich populace need not study Alinsky, in seems inherent your nature to divide, obscure and follow his basic plot lines for reversal of power. Verrry Intresting.
You ‘might € want to take my sincere advise and read the ‘ScrewTape Letters, CS LEWIS. Uncle ScrewTape within the short story is Alinsky de-masked, and you my dear, fit the nephew nicely, only with good intentions.
For you and only you Laura, I ll buy the book and pay you $100.00 to read and comment on it. It s short on pages, but not such quick read. If you like, I KNOW it would at the very least result in a brilliant article. Sadly my great fear is you indoctrination will cause you to relate ScrewTape to Reagan rather than Alinsky.
Just drop me a personal note. It may not be good fare for a young reader.
Great observation Consti. Don t let Luara s apparent silliness fool ya, she s a thinker, worth the effort, keep her in the middle of the ring, she may notice her corner isn t working for her.
Boring yet you take the time to respond. I said name me one that has MENTIONED Saul Alinsky. The tactics are basic, but the extent to which they are imployed is the key. Additionally one rule does not a follower make. Buddhists believe in being good to all, so does that mean they are christian? And whitewater? Please Laura! That’s not using Alinsky’s tactics that’s just trying to find out the truth through obfuscation. As always you are welcome to your opinion. I may not gree with what you say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it. Now if you will excuse me the underground bunker needs cleaning.
Boring….
The GOP and RNC- Hillary Rodham Clinton, Whitewater
The Bush Administration- Valerie Plame
J Byron,
Thank you for you kind words. Please do not hesitate to post your writings on my account. I would hate to see that happen. I am sure there will be more teachable moments comming.
Oh, and Laura, I too own his fine book. Had it for years. I am glad to see you read. However, attacking my article because my source is Wikipedia and not the actual book is infantile. What you expect me to type this out by hand? And what if one of my other readers are not able to get or buy the book. No if I hadn’t given them the required reading you would have found a way to discredit what I was saying another way.
‘pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. €
Which is all you have tried to do to me and others you don’t agree with. Without ever reading the book you already apply his principles.
Nice!
Laura,
As always you are welcome to your opinion, and I will let J speak for himself. I am not suprised you refuse to comment directly to me, yet still manage to. And for the record I didn’t mention Hillary refusal of the job since it was already in the required reading. Although you fail to mention when First Lady she mentioned her admiration for Alinsky. As for Republicans they thought they were above these tacktics, thats why they are getting their testicles handed them. YOU FIND ME one Republican that mentioned my pal Saul and you get the extra credit. Problem is you can’t.
J,
Besides the fact that I am not answering anything Consti has to say, I am actually taking the time to READ Mr. Alinsky’s book. Anyone can tell you, you don’t rely on Wiki as a source for anything. From what I have read so far, Consti is attacking the myopic cliff notes and neocon talking points yet again. Quotes with no context.
I notice that he has not brought up any Republicans or conservatives that have used the very same tactics. But he can’t, that would be balanced. And a job offer made to someone does not mean that they are a supporter. Did Ms. Rodham take the job? Um, no, she didn’t. But wait a minute, that fact doesn’t support the skewed view being presented, so that was left out, wasn’t it? Funny, that… So Obama worked as a community organizer alongside Alinsky’s people. I’m a Catholic and don’t suppor everything they believe and all their tactics. But it’s easier to go for the stereoypes, not that we haven’t seen that before…
Half facts, quotes with no context, steroetypes and broad generalizations…yeah, that’s a Consti piece all right. Now you see why I’m not even taking the time to comment to the man. Why?
If this isn’t the best, it is the certainly the most important article I read on this page.
The intrinsic “Ivy” backroom elements can be seen very much like the French Leninist Movement circa 1890-1910.
I am not at all surprised with the lack of cogent responses to this point from a certain spectrum of political coffee room devotees.
I can feel the presence of all those 60′s-90′s beatnik poem rooms where everybody snaps and say’s “yeah man”, as a Alinsky devotee comments poetic of “the plight”. Our own President probably somewhere back in one of those smokey rooms, on some Ivy League hollowed, separate, special with other future leaders finally shaved and in charge.
I have an article I’ve been dying to print, but I would like to see this one stay front and center for as long as possible. While the Aninskys really can’t mount a response, they can still think?
Sometimes, like here, thought pieces are just facts.
If this isn’t the best, it is the certainly the most important article I read on this page.
The intrinsic “Ivy” backroom elements can be seen very much like the French Leninist Movement circa 1890-1910.
I am not at all surprised with the lack of cogent responses to this point from a certain spectrum of political coffee room devotees.
I can feel the presence of all those 60′s-90′s beatnik poem rooms where everybody snaps and say’s “yeah man”, as a Alinsky devotee comments poetic of “the plight”. Our own President probably somewhere back in one of those smokey rooms, on some Ivy League hollowed, separate, special with other future leaders finally shaved and in charge.
I have an article I’ve been dying to print, but I would like to see this one stay front and center for as long as possible. While the Aninskys really can’t mount a response, they can still think?
Sometimes, like here, thought pieces are just facts.