Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.

[BTS]

Rules for Radicals



In 1971, Saul Alinsky wrote an entertaining classic on grassroots organizing titled Rules for Radicals. Those who prefer cooperative tactics describe the book as out-of-date.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. 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 you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.

Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people.

The result is confusion, fear, and retreat.

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

Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.

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.

Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.

Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues.

Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.

Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself. When Alinsky leaked word that large numbers of poor people were going to tie up the washrooms of O’Hare Airport, Chicago city authorities quickly agreed to act on a longstanding commitment to a ghetto organization. They imagined the mayhem as thousands of passengers poured off airplanes to discover every washroom occupied. Then they imagined the international embarrassment and the damage to the city’s reputation.

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?

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.

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.

[Ahso!]

Looks like the conservative play-book. You've studied this material intensely, BTS, or have you just taken this from someone else again?

Incidentally, what does BTS stand for, is it Brave Truth Seeker or something like that? Perhaps Butch Turns Sour? I'm curious.

[AussiePam]

Any good politician, of any colour, and his/her organisation knows these rules and uses them. It's what politics is about. The out group destabilising the in group till they become the in group. Then the new out group doing likewise.

After, TruthBringer and Hoppy - BTS is a voice of sweet reason, loving kindness and moderation.

[BTS]

AussiePam;1282529 wrote: Any good politician, of any colour, and his/her organisation knows these rules and uses them. It's what politics is about. The out group destabilising the in group till they become the in group. Then the new out group doing likewise.



After, TruthBringer and Hoppy - BTS is a voice of sweet reason, loving kindness and moderation.


AWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

GEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Tanx Pam...........

I don't deserve the praise but golly gee will woller in it till the next attack..........



Again TANX



PS: Troy Dunn is one of me heroes...... What an Aussie........

Troy Dunn : Professional Bull Rider

[AussiePam]

Don't thank me, BTS just because I think what you say is a bit less totally appalling than the other two. It's still sickening.

[hoppy]

AussiePam;1282529 wrote: Any good politician, of any colour, and his/her organisation knows these rules and uses them. It's what politics is about. The out group destabilising the in group till they become the in group. Then the new out group doing likewise.

After, TruthBringer and Hoppy - BTS is a voice of sweet reason, loving kindness and moderation.


I'm in 2nd place? Guess I'll have to try harder. Too bad BTS. But hey, you're in the top 3.

[G#Gill]

I'm with you there, Pam.

[spot]

It's only the skim on the top of American society that count as Haves, most American citizens are both poor and stressed out just at avoiding bankruptcy from one year to the next. It's no way to live. It's no way to run a civilized society either.

[Ahso!]

spot;1282726 wrote: It's only the skim on the top of American society that count as Haves, most American citizens are both poor and stressed out just at avoiding bankruptcy from one year to the next. It's no way to live. It's no way to run a civilized society either.i would say the haves are pretty stressed as well and I think the evidence of that is the hoarding of money they engage in.

But I'm curious, how does the U.K differ from the U.S. in regards to what you said above?

[Clodhopper]

But I'm curious, how does the U.K differ from the U.S. in regards to what you said above?


In short: The Welfare State. We have a safety net. (Just about...)

[spot]

Ahso!;1282741 wrote: But I'm curious, how does the U.K differ from the U.S. in regards to what you said above?


Like Clod said. Under 800 people sleeping rough on the streets on any given night across the whole of England and Wales, for example, compared to hundreds of thousands in the US. It's called socialism.

The idea that some of America's minority of Haves are stressed about money is just grotesque, though I agree you're probably right.

[gmc]

Ahso!;1282741 wrote: i would say the haves are pretty stressed as well and I think the evidence of that is the hoarding of money they engage in.

But I'm curious, how does the U.K differ from the U.S. in regards to what you said above?


I would add that the notion the better off should pay more in taxes and people on lower incomes lay less is not one that freaks out the average voter.

That someone on a low income pays a higher percentage of their income in tax than someone earning a big salary is generally seen as unfair and something that should be addressed.

Indirect taxation such as that on petrol also hits lower income families the most, that that is unfair is also not really disputed.

[Ahso!]

Americans are overtaxed. The problem we have is the media redirecting our attention from the real reason for it. The minute a republican gets going on about the poor not pulling their share the media jumps on board and basically sets out to prove the case for the accuser because the republicans have cornered the media by branding it "liberal" and in America liberals are seen as pussies, which we are not.

Our outrageously high taxes are due to our military expenditures, its that simple, but the real pussies (the conservatives) are too afraid to reduce our dependence on our military (the bogeyman syndrome I call it). But I must say that the way our corporate honchos go around bullying their way, they better have some protection behind them.

I think America is changing though, but it will take a lot of time to actually see and feel the difference. Not a whole lot of change will be seen in our lifetime, IMO.