Saul Alinsky


Custom Search

"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."





Rules for Radicals

 In 1971, Saul Alinsky wrote a text on grassroots organizing titled "Rules for Radicals" (Prologue).  Those who prefer cooperative tactics describe the book as out-of-date.  Nevertheless, it provides some of the best advice on confrontational tactics.  Alinsky begins this way:

What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be -- there's that word, "change."  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.

His "rules" derive from many successful campaigns where he helped poor people fighting power and privilege

For Alinsky, organizing is the process of highlighting what is wrong and convincing people they can actually do something about it.  The two are linked.  If people feel they don’t have the power to change a bad situation, they stop thinking about it.

According to Alinsky, the organizer -- especially a paid organizer from outside -- must first overcome suspicion and establish credibility.  Next the organizer must begin the task of agitating: rubbing resentments, fanning hostilities, and searching out controversy.  This is necessary to get people to participate.  An organizer has to attack apathy and disturb the prevailing patterns of complacent community life where people have simply come to accept a bad situation.  Alinsky would say, "The first step in community organization is community disorganization."

Through a process combining hope and resentment, the organizer tries to create a "mass army" that brings in as many recruits as possible from local organizations, churches, services groups, labor unions, corner gangs, and individuals.

Alinsky provides a collection of rules to guide the process.  But he emphasizes these rules must be translated into real-life tactics that are fluid and responsive to the situation at hand.

RULE 1: "Power is not only what I have, but what the enemy thinks I have."  Power is derived from two main sources -- money and people.   "Have-Nots" must build power from flesh and blood.

(These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply.  Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

RULE 2: "I never go outside the expertise of 'my people'."  It results in confusion, fear and retreat.  Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.
(Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don't address the "real" issues.  This is why.  They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

RULE 3: "Whenever possible, I go outside the expertise of the enemy."  I look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty.

(This happens all the time.  Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

RULE 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."  If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, I send 30,000 letters.  I can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

(This is a serious rule.  The besieged entity's very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."  There is no defense.  It's irrational.  It's infuriating.  It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

(Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh?  He wants to create anger and fear.)

RULE 6: "A good tactic is one 'my people' enjoy."  They'll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more.  They're doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.

(Radical activists, in this sense, are no different than any other human being.  We all avoid "un-fun" activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

RULE 7: "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."  Don't let it become old news.
(Even radical activists get bored.  So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up."  I keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance.  As the opposition masters one approach, I hit them from the flank with something new.

(Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

RULE 9: "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."  Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.
(Perception is reality.  Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists' minds.  The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions.  The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

RULE 10: "If I push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive."  Violence from the other side can win the public to my side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.

(Unions used this tactic.  Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management's wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

RULE 11: "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."  I never let the enemy score points because I'd be caught without a solution to the problem.

(Old saw: If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.  Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power.  So, they have to have a compromise solution.)

RULE 12: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."  I cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy.  I go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

(This is cruel, but very effective.  Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting.  "The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength."

Additional reading
Alinsky's Dedication In Rules For Radicals

The Beginning
Obama answered a help-wanted ad for a position as a community organizer for the Developing Communities Project (DCP) of the Calumet Community Religious Conference (CCRC) in Chicago.   Obama was 24 years old, unmarried, and according to his memoir, searching for a genuine African-American community.

Both the CCRC and the DCP were built on the Alinsky model of community agitation, wherein paid organizers learned how to "rub raw the sores of discontent," in Alinsky's words.

One of Obama's early mentors in the Alinsky method was Mike Kruglik, who had this to say to an interviewer of The New Republic, about Obama:

"He was a natural, the undisputed master of agitation, who could engage a room full of recruiting targets in a rapid-fire Socratic dialogue, nudging them to admit that they were not living up to their own standards. As with the panhandler, he could be aggressive and confrontational. With probing, sometimes personal questions, he would pinpoint the source of pain in their lives, tearing down their egos just enough before dangling a carrot of hope that they could make things better."

The agitator's job, according to Alinsky, is first to bring folks to the "realization" that they are indeed miserable, that their misery is the fault of unresponsive governments or greedy corporations, then help them to bond together to demand what they deserve, and to make such an almighty stink that the dastardly  governments and corporations will see imminent "self-interest" in granting whatever it is that will cause the harassment to cease.

In these methods, euphemistically labeled "community organizing," Obama had a four-year education, which he often says was the best education he ever got anywhere.
Rubbing Raw The Sores Of Discontent
In order to stop the "bitter" bleeding caused by Obama's "bitter, bibles and guns," remark, Obama responded to the Pennsylvania gaff with the following



I found this video very illuminating, as it demonstrates Obama employing the Alinsky agitation technique of "rubbing raw the sores of discontent." (Alinsky's words)

Watch as Obama sets up a list of grievances, gets everyone angry  and then leads the choir in an emotional response to Washington's failures -- "they (Americans) can't count on Washington" -- and ends strong -- he's the answer to everything he says is wrong with America.

The entire exercise was to change the discussion.  Obama never addressed his condescending remarks.  Instead, he got his audience mad at Washington -- he changed the subject.

Note the difference between what Obama said in his unguarded moment at San Francisco's "Billionair's Row," and the cleaned-up version he tried to sell tonight.

At the Getty Mansion (see picture below -- 4/6/2008):

"So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

With "the folks" in Indiana:

"So people end up voting on issues like guns and are they going to have the right to bear arms. They vote on issues like gay marriage. They take refuge in their faith and their community, and their family, and the things they can count on."

Praise From Alinsky's Son
All the elements were present: the individual stories told by real people of their situations and hardships, the packed-to-the rafters crowd, the crowd's chanting of key phrases and names, the action on the spot of texting and phoning to show instant support and commitment to jump into the political battle, the rallying selections of music, the setting of the agenda by the power people.  The Democratic National Convention had all the elements of the perfectly organized event, Saul Alinsky style.

Barack Obama's training in Chicago by the great community organizers is showing its effectiveness.  It is an amazingly powerful format, and the method of my late father always works to get the message out and get the supporters on board.  When executed meticulously and thoughtfully, it is a powerful strategy for initiating change and making it really happen. Obama learned his lesson well.

I am proud to see that my father's model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008.  It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday.

Altgeld Gardens

Obama goes to work at a Chicago housing project, Altgeld Gardens, where he refines his skills.

Here, Obama worked as an ethnic activist, helping the impoverished black community wring more money and services from the government.  That government money was wrecking the morals of the housing-project residents seems obvious from his book, but Obama never comes out and says it.  Numerous white moderates assume that a man of Obama’s superlative intelligence must be kidding when he espouses his cast-iron liberalism on race-related policies, but they don’t understand the emotional imperative of racial loyalty to him.

His mentor during this period was the veteran local agitator, Hazel Johnson, who who disputes the version of events at Altgeld Gardens that Obama wrote of in his book and tells audiences at his political gatherings.

While working as a community organizer, Obama was repeatedly asked to join Christian congregations but begged off.

"I remained a reluctant skeptic, doubtful of my own motives ..." he wrote.

Gregory Galluzzo
Using donations for the poor to help power-seeking politicians attain their ends is pure Alinskyism.  One of Obama’s Chicago mentors, Gregory Galluzzo -- a former Jesuit priest, now married and Executive Director of the Gamaliel community organizing network -- was interviewed by a writer to whom he showed the training manual he uses with new organizers.

"Galluzzo told me that many new trainees have an aversion to Alinsky’s gritty approach because they come to organizing as idealists rather than realists.  But Galluzzo’s manual instructs them to get over these hang-ups.  'We are not virtuous by not wanting power,' it says.  'We are really cowards for not wanting power,' because 'power is good' and 'powerlessness is evil.'"
The World As It Might Be
'We don't care about the world as it is, we imagine the world as it might be.  We want to write a new chapter,'" Obama told the crowd.  "That is the moment that we are in right now."
One Of Our Heroes From The Past

   MSNBC's Chris 'Tingles' Matthews Cites "One Of Our Heroes From The Past," Saul Alinsky  (01:25)
Alinsky's Star Pupil Uses "Rules" As A Manual For Social Surgery
Paul Sperry says Obama is fond of using ridicule to frustrate critics.  He recently mocked Republicans for predicting "Armageddon" if health care reform passed.  After signing the bill, he cracked that he looked around to "see if there were any asteroids falling," only to discover a nice day with "birds chirping."

Obama has also used the tactic to dismiss charges that he's pushing a "socialist" agenda, arguing that critics will next accuse him of "being a secret communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten."

But the former community organizer also knows that ridiculing the opposition is an effective tactic taught by the father of community organizing, Saul D. Alinsky -- a socialist [communist?] agitator from Chicago whose influence on Obama is deeper than commonly known.

In fact, the tactic is ripped right from the pages of "Rules for Radicals" (Vintage Books, New York, 1971), a how-to manual Alinsky wrote for coat-and-tie revolutionaries.

"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon," reads Rule No. 5. "It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule.  Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."

It's just one of 13 rules Alinsky coached his acolytes to follow to "take power away from the Haves."  The Haves, represented foremost by corporate America, are "the enemy."  They must be identified, singled out and targeted for attack -- and the more personal the better, Alinsky advised, putting a special bull's-eye on banks.

His 13th rule -- "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it" -- is not lost on Obama, who has targeted "fat cat" bankers, "predatory" lenders, "greedy" insurers and industrial "polluters" as enemies of the people.

"Obama learned his lesson well," said David Alinsky, son of the late socialist [communist?].  "I am proud to see that my father's model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing."

Obama first learned Alinsky's rules in the 1980s, when Alinskyite radicals with the Chicago-based, Alinsky group, Gamaliel Foundation recruited, hired, trained and paid him as a community organizer in South Side Chicago.

They also helped him get into Harvard Law School to "learn power's currency in all its intricacy and detail," as Obama put it in his memoir.  A Gamaliel board member even wrote a letter of recommendation for him.

Obama took a break from his Harvard studies to travel to Los Angeles for eight days of intense training at Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation, a station of the cross for acolytes.  In turn, he trained other community organizers in Alinsky agitation tactics.  In 1988, he even wrote a chapter for the book "After Alinsky: Community Organizing in Illinois," in which he lamented organizers' "lack of power" in implementing change.

Continue reading page 2 here . . .
What Would Alinsky Do?
David Limbaugh asks us to remember the popular motto "What would Jesus do?" which was invoked by many Christians as a moral guidepost for daily living?  Barack Obama more likely adheres to "What would Saul Alinsky do?" as most recently evidenced by his apparent defiance of a federal court order on his moratorium on offshore drilling.

Politico reports that the drilling companies who secured the court order blocking the moratorium say the administration indeed is going to defy the court order.  I'm quite sure that Alinsky would applaud this move: If at first you don't succeed through proper legal channels, proceed anyway, because nothing is more important than the radical ends you seek, including the means that must be trampled in the process.

Of course, shrewd Alinskyites like Obama will always have a plausible excuse for their deceitful tactics.  In this case, they are alleging newly discovered facts.  Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said he intends to reimpose the drilling moratorium based on information that wasn't "fully developed" in May, when the six-month moratorium was imposed.  Quite convenient.

The administration is also sending mixed signals, probably to introduce sufficient confusion to cover its disobedience.  The government's brief filed with the court insisted, "Of course, until a further order of this Court or the Court of Appeals granting relief from this Court's Preliminary Injunction Order, Defendants will comply with the Court's Order."  But attorneys for the drilling companies warn that "Secretary Salazar's comments have the obvious effect of chilling the resumption of (outer continental shelf) activities, which is precisely the wrong this Court sought to redress through its Preliminary Injunction Order."

The companies' point, notes Politico, is that Salazar's public announcement that the administration will reinstitute the moratorium will have the same practical effect as actually doing it because companies are not about to prepare rigs for drilling when they might be shut down in a few days.  The administration predictably pooh-poohs the companies' concerns and says these new "facts" present an entirely different scenario.  How convenient.  Whenever you can't advance the football, just move the goal posts your way.

Can't you just hear an irate Alinsky-schooled Obama behind closed doors learning of the court order audaciously purporting to limit his plenary executive authority?  "Just find the damn loophole -- or say you did -- and I don't want to see you again in this office until it's done."

Defying court orders is just one of many ways Obama abuses his authority.

When Congress failed with its initial efforts to impose cap-and-tax legislation designed to suppress traditional energy production and consumption in the United States for the ostensible purpose of reducing global temperature an imperceptible amount over the next century, Obama's Environmental Protection Agency just issued ultra vires regulations to accomplish similar results.  It didn't matter that every literate and intellectually honest person had to concede that the EPA had no statutory (or any other) authority to issue such sweeping regulations.  What mattered were the administration's radical environmental goals.

When Obama wanted to secure for his favored unions a stake in his new General Motors far exceeding their actual ownership interest and rob secured creditors of their preferred-creditor status and the value of their investment, he used the power of his office to strong-arm a restructuring of the company to accomplish his aims.  When Democratic Party donor and super-lawyer Tom Lauria opposed this plan on behalf of his client, the White House, according to Lauria, threatened to destroy his client's reputation.  One unnamed source described the White House as the most shocking "end justifies the means" group he had ever encountered.  Another attributed Obama's negotiating tactics to a "madman theory of the presidency," saying Obama wants to be feared as someone who is willing to do anything to get his way.  In return for standing up for their legal rights as secured creditors and not bending to Obama's horrendously unfair demand, er, offer, Obama maligned the recalcitrant creditors as "a small group of speculators."

When inspector general Gerald Walpin blew the whistle on the corruption of an Obama friend and supporter, Obama fired Walpin and sought to discredit him as a senile misfit -- a charge wholly unsupported by the facts.

And I won't begin to recite the many ways (e.g., reconciliation) Obama sought to circumvent the legislative process en route to ObamaCare.

Alinsky is surely beaming from the other side.
Obama Following The Alinsky Textbook
John Howting says In his Chicago days, Obama spent a great deal of time working with Marxist, Saul Alinsky-disciples Mike Kruglik, Gregory Galluzzo and Gerald Kellman.  It should come as no surprise then, that he employs many of the tactics found in Alinsky's Rules for Radicals in his handling of the BP oil spill.

Here are a few examples:

"Rule 3:  Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent.  Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat."

Obama has spent little time focusing on the specifics of what caused the disaster.  Such specifics include the ineptitude of the government inspectors.  And he never acknowledged that his administration gave the faulty rig a safety award.  Instead, Obama has misdirected attention by talking about such things as "green reform."

"Rule 5:  Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.  It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."

On the occasion of Michael Bromich's appointment as head of the Mineral Management Service, Obama said, "For a decade or more, the cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency (Mineral Management Service) was allowed to go unchecked.  That allowed drilling permits to be issued in exchange not for safety plans, but assurances of safety from oil companies.  That cannot and will not happen anymore."

"Rule 9:  The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself."

"We will keep a boot on the throat of BP," said Robert Gibbs during a press conference in May.

"Rule 10:  The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.  Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, "Okay, what would you do?"

This rule of Alinsky’s was paraphrased by the Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, "never let a good crisis go to waste."   Obama has used the oil spill crisis as an excuse to spew green rhetoric and promote his cap-and-trade bill.

"Rule 11:  Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it.  Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame."

Alinsky’s most useful tactic involves creating a good versus evil scenario.  It is not about fixing the problem, it is about blaming someone -- in this case BP and their Chief Executive officer Tony Hayward.  On June 12, Obama told British Prime Minister Cameron that BP would have to put $20 billion into an account to pay for "environmental and economic damages" caused from their spill.  Less than a week later, Texas Rep. Joe Barton, of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, blasted Obama for forcing a private business to be the victim of a "$20 billion shakedown."  Barton went on to say, "There is no question that BP is liable for the damages, but we have a due process system."  Barton raises a good point but "due process" certainly would not have stopped Saul Alinsky and it will probably not stop Obama.
Saul Alinsky Debates Young Canadian Radicals
Trevor Loudon has some more from Saul Alinsky.  This documentary short captures a lively confrontation between the American community organizer and writer Saul Alinsky, and members of the Company of Young Canadians.  Among other topics, the parties argue and disagree about the means and costs of securing "social change".
The company of Young Canadians was a Canadian version of the U.S. Peace Corps, which existed from 1966 to 1977.

After serious rioting in Montreal in October 1969 Oct 11, city officials pointed the finger at the Company of Young Canadians. In a scathing address, the administration accused the group of sheltering Quebec separatist extremists, masterminding violent demonstrations and plotting to make bombs.

The accusations leveled against the CYC were made by Lucien Saulnier, the chairman of Montreal's Executive Committee, and were supported by Montreal mayor Jean Drapeau and the chief of police.

Saulnier appealed to Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau to withhold the group's multi-million dollar budget and establish a Royal Commission to investigate his claims. Though the leftist Trudeau, failed to launch a federal inquiry, the allegations and others that followed lead to the eventual de-funding and termination of the agency.

Surprising that Saul Alinsky, a man who inspired both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, should be associated with such radicals, no?
Quotes And Excerpts From Rules For Radicals

"Obama learned his lesson well.  I am proud to see that my father's model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008.  It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday." -- Letter from L. DAVID ALINSKY, son of Neo-Marxist Saul Alinsky


Obama helped fund 'Alinsky Academy': "The Woods Fund, a nonprofit on which Obama served as paid director from 1999 to December 2002, provided startup funding and later capital to the Midwest Academy.... Obama sat on the Woods Fund board alongside William Ayers, founder of the Weather Underground domestic terrorist organization.... 'Midwest describes itself as 'one of the nation's oldest and best-known schools for community organizations, citizen organizations and individuals committed to progressive social change.'... Midwest teaches Alinsky tactics of community organizing."


Hillary, Obama and the Cult of Alinsky: "True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism, Alinsky taught.  They cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the system from within.  Alinsky viewed revolution as a slow, patient process.  The trick was to penetrate existing institutions such as churches, unions and political parties....  Many leftists view Hillary as a sell-out because she claims to hold moderate views on some issues.  However, Hillary is simply following Alinsky’s counsel to do and say whatever it takes to gain power.

"Obama is also an Alinskyite.... Obama spent years teaching workshops on the Alinsky method.  In 1985 he began a four-year stint as a community organizer in Chicago, working for an Alinskyite group called the Developing Communities Project....  Camouflage is key to Alinsky-style organizing.  While trying to build coalitions of black churches in Chicago, Obama caught flak for not attending church himself.  He became an instant churchgoer."  (By Richard Poe, 11-27-07)


Document here . . .

Of Course Obama Is OK With Occupy Wall Street -- It’s Just More Alinsky

AlinskyDefeater's blog says Rules for Radicals, p. 113, says:

"The first step in community organization is community disorganization."

It’s no wonder that Barack Obama and other politicos on the Left have embraced the Occupy Wall Street movement.  They do it, not in spite of the excesses, but because of the excesses.   In true Alinsky fashion Obama finds affinity with a group of anti-capitalists who defecate on police vehicles.  Obama is a product of his Alinsky training, and of the 1960′s counter-revolution.

It is second nature for Obama to sanction the types of political dissent with which he is familiar.  When he saw a peaceful demonstrations by the TEA Party, that sought smaller Government and less debt, he was confounded.  At first he tried to ignore it, and when that became impossible he famously referred to the TEA Party as:

"Folks waving Tea Bags around"

Occupy Wall Street is right in Obama’s wheelhouse.  After all, the objective of Alinsky in his quasi-Marxist approach, was to inspire "revolution not revelation" (Rules for Radicals, p. xviii).

Alinsky went on to say:

The significant changes in history have been made be revolutions.  There are people who say that it is not revolution, but evolution, that brings about change -- but evolution is simply the term used by nonparticipants to denote a particular sequence of revolutions as they synthesized into a specific major social change (Rules for Radicals, pp. 3-4).

The class warfare we see today is nothing new, and the fact that Barack Obama embraces it, and preaches it should come as no surprise to anyone who has taken even a cursory look at Obama’s past as a Community Organizer.  Again, it is probably best encapsulated in the words of the man who fathered Community Organization when he says regarding class distinctions.

The setting for the drama of change has never varied.  Mankind has been and is divided into three parts: the Haves, the Have-Nots, and the Have-a-Little, Want Mores (Rules for Radicals, p. 18).

While those of us who have been paying attention know that Barack Obama studied and taught Alinsky methods, and became a Community Organizer in the Alinsky mold, many are still in denial.  Perhaps none are so in denial about Obama and Alinsky as the Left.

This "Yahoo Answers" response probably sums up the way too many still feel about Obama and the Alinsky model.  The best chosen answer to that Yahoo question not only demonstrates an ignorance of Obama, Alinsky, and what it means to be a Community Organizer, but it also drips with the type of snarkiness that seemingly only comes from the thoroughly uninformed.   In part, the answer to the question, "Does Obama use the Saul Alinsky tactic Rules for Radicals keep your enemies close?" says:

No, but right wingers appear to be more familiar with the Alinsky rules, considering the fact that they mention them so often.  You are using a form of projection in order to try to criticize President Obama.  Is that one of the Alinsky rules?

The author of  "the best answer" goes on to say:

You’ve simply made up some theory identifying alleged "enemies" and then you’ve accused President Obama of dealing with these alleged enemies a certain way.  It is all nonsense conceived in your own fevered imagination.

To the Left, everything and everyone can be separated into groups with neat little identities.  They divide us by race, socioeconomic status, sex, sexuality, and on and on.  And yet, it is the Left who screams about racism, sexism, and so on.  Conservatives would prefer to just think of us all as Americans, and although we are all created equal it is insane to believe that we should all remain equal regardless of how hard we work.

This is the ignorance we are dealing with, but at least those of you who do your homework know what’s really going on.

Barack's Love Song To Alinsky
Breitbart says that in The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama claims that he worried after 9/11 that his name, so similar to that of Osama bin Laden, might harm his political career.

But Obama was not always so worried about misspellings and radical resemblances. He may even have cultivated them as he cast himself as Chicago’s radical champion.

In 1998, a small Chicago theater company staged a play titled The Love Song of Saul Alinsky, dedicated to the life and politics of the radical community organizer whose methods Obama had practiced and taught on Chicago’s South Side.

Obama was not only in the audience, but also took the stage after one performance, participating in a panel discussion that was advertised in the poster for the play.

Recently, veteran Chicago journalist Michael Miner mocked emerging conservative curiosity about the play, along with enduring suspicions about the links between Alinsky and Obama. Writing in the Chicago Reader, Miner described the poster:

Let's take a look at this poster.

It's red—and that right there, like the darkening water that swirls down Janet Leigh's drain [in Psycho’s famous shower scene], is plenty suggestive. It touts a play called The Love Song of Saul Alinsky, Alinsky being the notorious community organizer from Chicago who wrote books with titles like Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals. On it, fists are raised—meaning insurrection is in the air.

And down at the very bottom, crawling across the poster in small print, it mentions the panel discussions that will follow the Sunday performances. The panelists are that era's usual "progressive" suspects: Leon Despres, Monsignor Jack Egan, Studs Terkel . . .

And state senator Barack Obama.

Miner obscured the truth. His article only reveals only a small portion of the poster.

Here’s the whole poster -- And here’s the press release.

So, what’s in the play? It truly is a love song to Alinsky. In the first few minutes of the play, Alinsky plays Moses -- yes, the Biblical Moses -- talking to God. The play glorifies Alinsky stealing food from restaurants and organizing others to do the same, explaining, "I saw it as a practical use of social ecology: you had members of the intellectual community, the hope of the future, eating regularly for six months, staying alive till they could make their contributions to society."

In an introspective moment, Alinsky rips America: "My country … ‘tis of whatthehell / And justice up a tree … How much can you sell / What’s in it for me." He grins about manipulating the Christian community to back his programs. He talks in glowing terms about engaging in Chicago politics with former Mayor Kelly. He rips the McCarthy committee, mocking, "Everyone was there, when you think back -- Cotton Mather, Hester Prynn, Anne Hutchinson, Tom Paine, Tom Jefferson … Brandeis, Holmes … Gene Debs and the socialists … Huey Long … Imperial Wizards of all stripes … Father Coughlin and his money machine … Daffy Duck, Elmer Fudd … and a kicking chorus of sterilized reactionaries singing O Come, All Ye Faithful …"

And Alinsky talks about being the first occupier -- shutting down the O’Hare Airport by occupying all the toilet stalls, using chewing gum to "tie up the city, stop all traffic, and the shopping, in the Loop, and let everyone at City Hall know attention must be paid, and maybe we should talk about it." As Alinsky says, "Students of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your juicy fruit."

The play finishes with Alinsky announcing he’d rather go to Hell than Heaven. Why? "More comfortable there. You see, all my life I’ve been with the Have-Nots: here you’re a Have-Not if you’re short of money, there you’re a Have-Not if you’re short of virtue. I’d be asking more questions, organizing them. They’re my kind of people -- Hell would be Heaven for me."

That’s The Love Song of Saul Alinsky. It’s radical leftist stuff, and it revels in its radical leftism.

And that’s Barack Obama, our president, on the poster.

This is who Barack Obama was. This was before Barack Obama ran for Congress in 2000—challenging former Black Panther Bobby L. Rush from the left in a daring but unsuccessful bid.

This was also the period just before Barack Obama served with Bill Ayers, from 1999 through 2002 on the board of the Woods Foundation. They gave capital to support the Midwest Academy, a leftist training institute steeped in the doctrines of -- you guessed it! -- Saul Alinsky, and whose alumni now dominate the Obama administration and its top political allies inside and out of Congress.

Stanley Kurtz, author of Radical-in-Chief

, described the Midwest Academy as a "crypto-socialist organization." Yet almost no one has heard of Midwest Academy, because the media does not want you to know that the president is a radical's radical whose presidency itself is a love song to a socialist "community organizer."

The reason Newt Gingrich surged in the Republican primary contest in January is that he was attempting to do the press's job by finding out who the current occupant of the White House actually is. Millions also want to know, but the mainstream media is clearly not planning to vet the President anytime soon. Quite the opposite.

For example, Miner tries to turn Obama’s appearance on the Alinsky panel into a plus for the president:

Obama was on the panel that talked about Alinsky the last Sunday of the play's run at the Blue Rider Theatre in Pilsen. Neither Pam Dickler, who directed the Terrapin Theatre production, nor Gary Houston, who played Alinsky, can remember a word Obama said. But he impressed them. "You never would have known he was a politician," says Dickler. "He never said anything at all about himself. He came alone, watched the play, and during the panel discussion was entirely on point and brilliant. That evening I called my father, who's a political junkie, and told him to watch out for this man, he's going places." Houston was just as taken by Obama—though he remembers him arriving in a group.

But is it a good thing to impress the sort of people who show up to laud The Love Song of Saul Alinsky? Here are the other members of the Obama panel:

Leon Despres: Despres knew Saul Alinsky for nearly 50 years, and together they established the modern concept of "community organizing." Despres worked with secret Communist and Soviet spy Lee Pressman to support strikers at Republic Steel in Chicago in 1937; the strike ended in tragedy when 14 rioting strikers were killed and many wounded in a hail of police bullets. Despres worked with another Communist Party front, the Chicago Civil Liberties Committee, but eventually left because of the "Stalinism" of its leaders.

Also in 1937, Despres and his wife delivered a suitcase of "clothing" to Leon Trotsky, then hiding out from Stalin’s assassins in Mexico City. Despres and his wife not only met with the exiled Russian Communist, but Despres’s wife sat for a portrait with Trotsky pal and Marxist muralist Diego Rivera while Leon took Rivera’s wife Frida Kahlo to the movies.

Quentin Young: From 1970 until at least 1992, Quentin Young was active in the Communist Party front organization, the Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights -- a group dedicated to outlawing government surveillance of radical organizations. He was also a member of the Young Communist League. Young, a confidante and physician to Barack Obama, is credited with having heavily influenced the President’s views on healthcare policy.

Timuel Black: An icon of the Chicago left, Black was originally denied officer training because military intelligence claimed he had secretly joined the Communist Party. Black also worked closely with the Socialist Party in the 1950s, becoming president of the local chapter of the Negro American Labor Council, a organization founded by Socialist Party leader A. Phillip Randolph.

In the early ‘60s Black was a leader of the Hyde Park Community Peace Center, where he worked alongside former radical Trotskyist Sydney Lens and the aforementioned Communist Dr. Quentin Young. Black served as a contributing editor to the Hyde Park/Kenwood Voices, a newspaper run by Communist Party member David S. Canter. By 1970, Timuel Black was serving on the advisory council of the Communist Party controlled Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights.

Timuel Black says he has been friends with domestic terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, "going back to 1968, since long before I knew Barack." In April 2002, Black, Dohrn and Democratic Socialists of America member Richard Rorty spoke together on a panel entitled "Intellectuals: Who Needs Them?" The panel was the first of two in a public gathering jointly sponsored by The Center for Public Intellectuals and the University of Illinois, Chicago. Bill Ayers and Barack Obama spoke together on in the second panel at that gathering. Communist academic Harold Rogers chaired Timuel Black’s unsuccessful campaign for Illinois State Representative.

Studs Terkel: A sponsor of the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace in 1949, which was arranged by a Communist Party USA front organization known as the National Council of the Arts, Sciences, and Professions.

Roberta Lynch: A leading member of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and a leader of the radical Marxist New American Movement (NAM).

Are we expected to believe that "Baraka Obama" was a countervailing voice of reason on a panel of radicals?

The reason that Obama's Alinskyite past, and his many appearances in political photography and video from the 1990s, are conspicuously missing from the national dialogue is that State Senator Barack Obama's reinvention as a reasonable and moderate Democratic politician could not withstand scrutiny of his political life.

Because the mainstream media did not explore his roots, the American public remains largely ignorant of the degree to which Obama’s work with ACORN and his love of Alinsky were symbolic of his true political will.

Saul Alinsky On Professional Agitators

Comments . . .

©  Copyright  Beckwith  2009
All right reserved