Alinskying the Alinskyians By James Reed

     Here has been another sacrifice for the team, spending this cold Melbourne Sunday reading Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, (1971), rather than drinking rum.
This book was popular among radicals of the left in the 1970s and beyond, and was influential on President Obama and Hillary Clinton. It is the bible of cultural Marxism.

     Alinsky said in his personal acknowledgements: “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinsky, but this passage was not in my version of the book. It gives the flavour of what this guy is on about, and that he meant, business, big business.

     Here, in a nice bite-size piece, are Alinsky’s rules:
1.    “It is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood.
2.    “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.
3.    “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty.
4.    “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.
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.
6.    “A good tactic is one your 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.
7.    “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news.
8.    “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.
9.    “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.
10.    “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.” It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.
11.    “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.
12.    “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem.
13.    “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.”

     The book expands on each of these rules, giving examples from the time period.

     What should be our response to this? I have heard our side say that we are too noble to “fight dialectics with dialectics,” and things like that. Ok, let’s just lose, end of article.
    Alternatively, we can take a breath, put on our thinking caps and see if we can come up with our own, “war of the flea” strategies:
https://www.amazon.com/War-Flea-Classic-Guerrilla-Warfare/dp/1574885553
or something which great military geniuses like Sun Tzu would approve of:
https://www.amazon.com/Art-War-Sun-Tzu/dp/1599869772/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1501409251&sr=1-1&keywords=the+art+of+war.

     Surely it is not unreasonable to regard us as now being in the position that the Left once was in. So what is wrong in using their own tactics against them in a form of moral judo? For example, make the Left obey their own set of rules as far as possible. Pushing negatives long enough can be a winning strategy, and so on.  I think most of us, certainly the Alt Right, are already putting most of this into operation. Soon we will have, The New Rules for Anti-Radicals.