Saul Allinsky's Rules for Radicals

[Papageorgio]

Alinsky was interested in getting housing for the poor. He thought that every American in this extremely wealthy nation should have, as a bear minimum, a warm place to sleep.

Good on you folks to make this man "evil".

It's pretty telling.



You folks have zero interest in helping Americans with need.

horseshit: who do you think supports church charities, goodwill, salvation army, and other local charities? hint---not liberals.

Alinsky was a marxist. He wanted to redistribute the wealth by stealing from some and giving to others. He wanted a nation that was dominated by an oppressive government that dictated every aspect of human life.

Obama is putting his ideas into practice.

I don't doubt that obama THINKS he is doing the right thing, but he is not. His liberal socialist indoctrination blocks all other forms of thought.

He didn't steal anything.

And everyone, including myself, supports those organizations.

Its not enough. That's apparent by the number of poor people out there.

And the STEALING goes on by huge corporations who are like VAMPIRES feeding on the wealth of this nation.

True, Al Gore gave a $100 to charity one year while he was VP. Pretty generous guy.

He'd rather take from one person and give it to another,

Also time to end subsidies for business. Make it on your own or close.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Define Marxism before you write things like "Do we have examples of Obama using these Marxist tactics". Rove is a master of some of them. Is he Marxist?

You need to define your terms.

 

[Sallow]

Alinsky was interested in getting housing for the poor. He thought that every American in this extremely wealthy nation should have, as a bear minimum, a warm place to sleep.

Good on you folks to make this man "evil".

It's pretty telling.

In the course of nearly four decades of political organizing, Alinsky received much criticism, but also gained praise from many public figures. His organizing skills were focused on improving the living conditions of poor communities across North America. In the 1950s, he began turning his attention to improving conditions in the African-American ghettos, beginning with Chicago's and later traveling to other ghettos in California, Michigan, New York City, and a dozen other "trouble spots".
Saul Alinsky - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You folks have zero interest in helping Americans with need.

So how have the poor been fairing of late? In fact, what of the middle class?

The thing that you must understand is that if you want true Marxism, you must destroy the middle class. This seems to be what has happened over the decades so I would think that people like Alinsky would be happy.

I'm sure Alinsky thinks he is right about what he believes and is not trying to promote evil. I'm simply questioning his judgment. More to the point, I'm questioning the notion of collectivism as being good. Last I checked Alinsky was trying to fight for power in order to usher in a collectivist state. In fact, pretty much all left wingers I know are like this. The notion that states can individually decide policy apart from the federal government is intolerable to them. In the mind of a collectivist, one size fits all because they not only know everything, they are they alone have cornered the market on morality. In other words, anyone who is not a left winged collectivist hates the poor.

But then you look at Marxist countries and look at the mass poverty where no one has any economic power, it leaves you scratching your head as to why people continue down the same road.

In the mind of a collectivist, it did not work in the past because "WE" were not in charge.

In other words, keep doing the same thing over and over again and hope for a different result.

View attachment 29289

Go back to the Constitution.

It's a collective document, advocating for a collective government to administer a collective state.

It starts "We the People" for pete's sake.

Libertarians, by the way, have never started a country.

But I'd love to see them try.

 

[Redfish]

This is an old meme.

Disproven completely.

You do know major corporate entities have been enjoying record (As in more than in all the history of capitalism) profits right?

That's a pretty poor fucking job as a Marxist don't you think?

corporate profits are up because many corporations are sitting on cash rather than investing it in expansion and new ventures due to the unknowns of the constantly changing obama economy and obamacare.

Thats fine with me, my portfolio has grown, I am doing very well financially. So, contrary to your claims, obama is helping those with money at the expense of the poor.

Corporate profits are up because of DIRECT ACTION taking by the administration to float the markets and keep the economic situation on an even keel.

You obviously do NOT know what you are talking about.

allowing the fed to pump worthless cash into the system is a temporary fix, I am profiting from it, but eventually we will all have to pay the piper.

If my timing is good, I will get out of the market before that happens, if my timing is bad, I will lose. Its a gamble.

 

[RKMBrown]

“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."

Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, Dedications

 

[Redfish]

Alinsky was interested in getting housing for the poor. He thought that every American in this extremely wealthy nation should have, as a bear minimum, a warm place to sleep.

Good on you folks to make this man "evil".

It's pretty telling.



You folks have zero interest in helping Americans with need.

So how have the poor been fairing of late? In fact, what of the middle class?

The thing that you must understand is that if you want true Marxism, you must destroy the middle class. This seems to be what has happened over the decades so I would think that people like Alinsky would be happy.

I'm sure Alinsky thinks he is right about what he believes and is not trying to promote evil. I'm simply questioning his judgment. More to the point, I'm questioning the notion of collectivism as being good. Last I checked Alinsky was trying to fight for power in order to usher in a collectivist state. In fact, pretty much all left wingers I know are like this. The notion that states can individually decide policy apart from the federal government is intolerable to them. In the mind of a collectivist, one size fits all because they not only know everything, they are they alone have cornered the market on morality. In other words, anyone who is not a left winged collectivist hates the poor.

But then you look at Marxist countries and look at the mass poverty where no one has any economic power, it leaves you scratching your head as to why people continue down the same road.

In the mind of a collectivist, it did not work in the past because "WE" were not in charge.

In other words, keep doing the same thing over and over again and hope for a different result.

View attachment 29289

Go back to the Constitution.

It's a collective document, advocating for a collective government to administer a collective state.

It starts "We the People" for pete's sake.

Libertarians, by the way, have never started a country.

But I'd love to see them try.

A union of independent states is not a collective. you really look stupid when you misuse terms.

 

[Votto]

This is an old meme.

Disproven completely.

You do know major corporate entities have been enjoying record (As in more than in all the history of capitalism) profits right?

That's a pretty poor fucking job as a Marxist don't you think?

corporate profits are up because many corporations are sitting on cash rather than investing it in expansion and new ventures due to the unknowns of the constantly changing obama economy and obamacare.

Thats fine with me, my portfolio has grown, I am doing very well financially. So, contrary to your claims, obama is helping those with money at the expense of the poor.

Corporate profits are up because of DIRECT ACTION taking by the administration to float the markets and keep the economic situation on an even keel.

You obviously do NOT know what you are talking about.

Who said that the corporate state is an enemy of the collectivist state?

In fact, how would the federal government get revenue if it were not for the corporations?

I suppose they could take them over in name, but why? Looking at the insurance industry and banking industry, it is pretty obvious that the federal government can simply tell them what to do without owning them in name.

This has several advantages. It prevents them from violating rule #2, which is trying to be an expert in a field in which you have no expertise. Just allow the corporations to run themselves, albeit under your thumb. Then if they go belly up or do something bad, point your finger at them as being the problem, not the government.

It's like the Fed. They are a "private" business as well, but the federal government would collapse tomorrow without them and tells them what to do. In the end, if the Fed destroys the nation all they have to do is shrug their shoulders and say, "It's not a government owned entity."

Collectivist like Hitler understood this when he said, "Why nationalize industry when you can nationalize the people?"

By themselves, corporations are nothing but government creations that are mini governments by themselves.

 

[KNB]

It is truly frightening to think that you Conservatives actually believe the shit that you spew on this site.

"Obama's a Marxist!" Obviously you Conservatives haven't been paying attention.

Since 2009, 95% of the financial gains in the economic "recovery" went to the richest 1% of the population. Does this sound like Communism to you? Socialism? Collectivism? Where do you Republicans see Communism in 95% of our nation's earnings going to 1% of the population?

"Obama's a Muslim!" Except that he's not, and he's routinely killed thousands of Muslims regardless of them being terrorists or children or even American.

"Obama's gonna take 'er guuuuns!" Except that he's not, and every single time some mouth-breather screams that nonsense, gun sales go up.

"Obama's the anti-Christ!" You Conservatives don't know what the anti-Christ is, because you don't have any idea who Christ was. "Feed the poor, stop violence, stop hating each other". That's the message of Jesus Christ and Progressives, regardless of the drivel that you hear from Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Jesus Christ was a Progressive revolutionary, so the anti-Christ would most likely be politically and socially Conservative. Obama is certainly not Progressive, but you'll all still sit around on a messageboard in some sick Republican circle-jerk, feeding each other's hatred of the "Coonmander-in-Chief" or whatever stupid childish name that you give to him today.

Why don't any of you hate Obama for the actual things that he's done and stop harping about Benghazi? Benghazi is not an issue. 4 Americans died. Had those 4 Americans not died, none of you would care about them at all. So stop feigning outrage over something that you really don't care about. You just want another excuse to hate Obama aside from him being black. Hate him for the unconstitutional NSA surveillance, hate him for killing Americans without charges or trial or evidence, hate him for carrying over all of Bush's miserable policies, hate him for not closing Guantanamo, hate him for not crippling the banks that were funding terrorism against our soldiers.

 

[RKMBrown]

It is truly frightening to think that you Conservatives actually believe the shit that you spew on this site.

"Obama's a Marxist!" Obviously you Conservatives haven't been paying attention.

Since 2009, 95% of the financial gains in the economic "recovery" went to the richest 1% of the population. Does this sound like Communism to you? Socialism? Collectivism? Where do you Republicans see Communism in 95% of our nation's earnings going to 1% of the population?

"Obama's a Muslim!" Except that he's not, and he's routinely killed thousands of Muslims regardless of them being terrorists or children or even American.

"Obama's gonna take 'er guuuuns!" Except that he's not, and every single time some mouth-breather screams that nonsense, gun sales go up.

"Obama's the anti-Christ!" You Conservatives don't know what the anti-Christ is, because you don't have any idea who Christ was. "Feed the poor, stop violence, stop hating each other". That's the message of Jesus Christ and Progressives, regardless of the drivel that you hear from Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Jesus Christ was a Progressive revolutionary, so the anti-Christ would most likely be politically and socially Conservative. Obama is certainly not Progressive, but you'll all still sit around on a messageboard in some sick Republican circle-jerk, feeding each other's hatred of the "Coonmander-in-Chief" or whatever stupid childish name that you give to him today.

Why don't any of you hate Obama for the actual things that he's done and stop harping about Benghazi? Benghazi is not an issue. 4 Americans died. Had those 4 Americans not died, none of you would care about them at all. So stop feigning outrage over something that you really don't care about. You just want another excuse to hate Obama aside from him being black. Hate him for the unconstitutional NSA surveillance, hate him for killing Americans without charges or trial or evidence, hate him for carrying over all of Bush's miserable policies, hate him for not closing Guantanamo, hate him for not crippling the banks that were funding terrorism against our soldiers.

Wow just wow. Why don't you get up off your knees girlie boy and stop sucking that marxist dogma.

Uhmm.. hello, ... McFly... hello!! What makes you think communism is supposed to be good for the people or that the top 1% in communist states don't get all the money? ROFL... socialist progressives are so damn stupid.

 

[Iceweasel]

"Obama's gonna take 'er guuuuns!" Except that he's not, and every single time some mouth-breather screams that nonsense, gun sales go up.

Obama has made his views known but doesn't persue it for the same reasons most liberals don't. Political suicide.

"Obama's the anti-Christ!" You Conservatives don't know what the anti-Christ is, because you don't have any idea who Christ was. "Feed the poor, stop violence, stop hating each other". That's the message of Jesus Christ and Progressives, regardless of the drivel that you hear from Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Where in the Bible did Jesus preach confiscation and redistribution?

Jesus Christ was a Progressive revolutionary, so the anti-Christ would most likely be politically and socially Conservative. Obama is certainly not Progressive, but you'll all still sit around on a messageboard in some sick Republican circle-jerk, feeding each other's hatred of the "Coonmander-in-Chief" or whatever stupid childish name that you give to him today.

Obama isn't a progressive? Define progressive.

Why don't any of you hate Obama for the actual things that he's done and stop harping about Benghazi? Benghazi is not an issue. 4 Americans died. Had those 4 Americans not died, none of you would care about them at all. So stop feigning outrage over something that you really don't care about.

You are oblivious to what the issue is, apart from the fact that your indifference to those left hanging isn't shared by all.

 

[Sallow]

corporate profits are up because many corporations are sitting on cash rather than investing it in expansion and new ventures due to the unknowns of the constantly changing obama economy and obamacare.

Thats fine with me, my portfolio has grown, I am doing very well financially. So, contrary to your claims, obama is helping those with money at the expense of the poor.

Corporate profits are up because of DIRECT ACTION taking by the administration to float the markets and keep the economic situation on an even keel.

You obviously do NOT know what you are talking about.

allowing the fed to pump worthless cash into the system is a temporary fix, I am profiting from it, but eventually we will all have to pay the piper.

If my timing is good, I will get out of the market before that happens, if my timing is bad, I will lose. Its a gamble.

You're incredible.

You've been proven wrong..then you spew some bullshit.

Good day.

 

[Sallow]

So how have the poor been fairing of late? In fact, what of the middle class?

The thing that you must understand is that if you want true Marxism, you must destroy the middle class. This seems to be what has happened over the decades so I would think that people like Alinsky would be happy.

I'm sure Alinsky thinks he is right about what he believes and is not trying to promote evil. I'm simply questioning his judgment. More to the point, I'm questioning the notion of collectivism as being good. Last I checked Alinsky was trying to fight for power in order to usher in a collectivist state. In fact, pretty much all left wingers I know are like this. The notion that states can individually decide policy apart from the federal government is intolerable to them. In the mind of a collectivist, one size fits all because they not only know everything, they are they alone have cornered the market on morality. In other words, anyone who is not a left winged collectivist hates the poor.

But then you look at Marxist countries and look at the mass poverty where no one has any economic power, it leaves you scratching your head as to why people continue down the same road.

In the mind of a collectivist, it did not work in the past because "WE" were not in charge.

In other words, keep doing the same thing over and over again and hope for a different result.

View attachment 29289

Go back to the Constitution.

It's a collective document, advocating for a collective government to administer a collective state.

It starts "We the People" for pete's sake.

Libertarians, by the way, have never started a country.

But I'd love to see them try.

A union of independent states is not a collective. you really look stupid when you misuse terms.

Well..yeah..it absolutely is.

The very notion of forming a STATE is collective.

Look up the word.

We should all be speaking English.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_mDTLphIVY]Pulp Fiction - English Motherfucker Do You Speak It - YouTube[/ame]

 

[KNB]

Wow just wow. Why don't you get up off your knees girlie boy and stop sucking that marxist dogma.

Uhmm.. hello, ... McFly... hello!! What makes you think communism is supposed to be good for the people or that the top 1% in communist states don't get all the money? ROFL... socialist progressives are so damn stupid.

Okay, so you're saying that Progressives elected Obama specifically to change Bush's policies, but Obama is a Marxist Progressive Communist who carried over all of Bush's policies, so...... Bush was also a Marxist? Reagan was a Marxist, too, by that standard.

What point are you trying to make?

Obama gave all of the money to rich people like Socialist Russia, but Bush giving all of the money to rich people is just good, sound, free-market Capitalism, right?

 

[Zander]

Obama is a crony capitalist. He took the job for the pension.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JakeStarkey]

It is truly frightening to think that you Conservatives actually believe the shit that you spew on this site.

"Obama's a Marxist!" Obviously you Conservatives haven't been paying attention.

Since 2009, 95% of the financial gains in the economic "recovery" went to the richest 1% of the population. Does this sound like Communism to you? Socialism? Collectivism? Where do you Republicans see Communism in 95% of our nation's earnings going to 1% of the population?

"Obama's a Muslim!" Except that he's not, and he's routinely killed thousands of Muslims regardless of them being terrorists or children or even American.

"Obama's gonna take 'er guuuuns!" Except that he's not, and every single time some mouth-breather screams that nonsense, gun sales go up.

"Obama's the anti-Christ!" You Conservatives don't know what the anti-Christ is, because you don't have any idea who Christ was. "Feed the poor, stop violence, stop hating each other". That's the message of Jesus Christ and Progressives, regardless of the drivel that you hear from Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Jesus Christ was a Progressive revolutionary, so the anti-Christ would most likely be politically and socially Conservative. Obama is certainly not Progressive, but you'll all still sit around on a messageboard in some sick Republican circle-jerk, feeding each other's hatred of the "Coonmander-in-Chief" or whatever stupid childish name that you give to him today.

Why don't any of you hate Obama for the actual things that he's done and stop harping about Benghazi? Benghazi is not an issue. 4 Americans died. Had those 4 Americans not died, none of you would care about them at all. So stop feigning outrage over something that you really don't care about. You just want another excuse to hate Obama aside from him being black. Hate him for the unconstitutional NSA surveillance, hate him for killing Americans without charges or trial or evidence, hate him for carrying over all of Bush's miserable policies, hate him for not closing Guantanamo, hate him for not crippling the banks that were funding terrorism against our soldiers.

Wow just wow. Why don't you get up off your knees girlie boy and stop sucking that marxist dogma.

Uhmm.. hello, ... McFly... hello!! What makes you think communism is supposed to be good for the people or that the top 1% in communist states don't get all the money? ROFL... socialist progressives are so damn stupid.

You have no idea what Marxism is, son.

Answer the question: 95% to 1%. Sounds libertarian to me.

 

[Votto]

It is truly frightening to think that you Conservatives actually believe the shit that you spew on this site.

"Obama's a Marxist!" Obviously you Conservatives haven't been paying attention.

Since 2009, 95% of the financial gains in the economic "recovery" went to the richest 1% of the population. Does this sound like Communism to you? Socialism? Collectivism? Where do you Republicans see Communism in 95% of our nation's earnings going to 1% of the population?

"Obama's a Muslim!" Except that he's not, and he's routinely killed thousands of Muslims regardless of them being terrorists or children or even American.

"Obama's gonna take 'er guuuuns!" Except that he's not, and every single time some mouth-breather screams that nonsense, gun sales go up.

"Obama's the anti-Christ!" You Conservatives don't know what the anti-Christ is, because you don't have any idea who Christ was. "Feed the poor, stop violence, stop hating each other". That's the message of Jesus Christ and Progressives, regardless of the drivel that you hear from Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Jesus Christ was a Progressive revolutionary, so the anti-Christ would most likely be politically and socially Conservative. Obama is certainly not Progressive, but you'll all still sit around on a messageboard in some sick Republican circle-jerk, feeding each other's hatred of the "Coonmander-in-Chief" or whatever stupid childish name that you give to him today.

Why don't any of you hate Obama for the actual things that he's done and stop harping about Benghazi? Benghazi is not an issue. 4 Americans died. Had those 4 Americans not died, none of you would care about them at all. So stop feigning outrage over something that you really don't care about. You just want another excuse to hate Obama aside from him being black. Hate him for the unconstitutional NSA surveillance, hate him for killing Americans without charges or trial or evidence, hate him for carrying over all of Bush's miserable policies, hate him for not closing Guantanamo, hate him for not crippling the banks that were funding terrorism against our soldiers.

I'm sorry, did I say that Obama was a Marxist?

No I did not. Obama simply recognizes the appeal of Marxism and he is a collectivist. Marxism is but one flavor of collectivism. Others prefer fascism, communism, or socialism. But Marxism is what is why Obama demagogues about income inequality, on the one hand, and also presides over income inequality, on the other hand. Keep in mind that Hitler did the same to the top 4%. He railed against income inequality and heavily taxed them. He did not do it so much to bring in revenue, as he did for mass appeal.

Obamacare was the largest tax increase on the middle class in US history, and to top it off, corporations are setting your tax rates. Apparently he can destroy the middle class all in the name of income inequality and helping the poor, but is making more people poor really helping the poor?

But leftists only see government getting bigger and bigger, so they are happy.

After all, if you want true income equality then wiping out the middle class will be mandatory. But to think that Obama and company will lower their incomes to yours is delusionary. The closest thing to income equality that can be reached is to be ruled by a bunch of rich oligarchs. We have seen examples, like in the former USSR. So if that is what collectivists want then so be it. As for most, I would say they would rather not suffer like those in the former USSR, and yes, I said former USSR. The system is built for failure.

 

[Votto]

Obama is a crony capitalist. He took the job for the pension.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Obama is a collectivist. Obama probably sees aspects of Marxism that he feels that he can improve upon, all in the name of increasing the size and scope of government.

For the collectivist, they have a dogmatic fundamentalist belief in the largeness of government. It has reached such religious fervor that Obama refers to it as our "collective salvation". I think the consensus among collectivists is that what is needed is a one world order to help end division and wars abroad. Collectivists like Hitler also dreamed of this, which varies from the globalists of today in different ways.

 

[tinydancer]

Politicians from all persuasions use those tactics.

Rove was amazing at designing counter campaigns attacking the Dems' strongest points successfully.

With all due respect Jake, Rove never had to use Alinsky because he set out his own charter of rules.

I'll give Rove credit where credit is due. It was his insane awesome ability to read a district and how to play it that made for so many R victories.

Seriously, not Alinsky. Rove played his own game.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Politicians from all persuasions use those tactics.

Rove was amazing at designing counter campaigns attacking the Dems' strongest points successfully.

With all due respect Jake, Rove never had to use Alinsky because he set out his own charter of rules.

I'll give Rove credit where credit is due. It was his insane awesome ability to read a district and how to play it that made for so many R victories.

Seriously, not Alinsky. Rove played his own game.

Seriously, Rove went right at the Democrats' strengths, which is straight from Alinksy.

I think Rove learned much from Alinsky.

You are right in that Rove developed his own charter of moves in the Texas and national elections.

 

[tinydancer]

Politicians from all persuasions use those tactics.

Rove was amazing at designing counter campaigns attacking the Dems' strongest points successfully.

With all due respect Jake, Rove never had to use Alinsky because he set out his own charter of rules.

I'll give Rove credit where credit is due. It was his insane awesome ability to read a district and how to play it that made for so many R victories.

Seriously, not Alinsky. Rove played his own game.

Seriously, Rove went right at the Democrats' strengths, which is straight from Alinksy.

I think Rove learned much from Alinsky.

You are right in that Rove developed his own charter of moves in the Texas and national elections.

Here is the difference. And why I understand the "Rove" and why only on him and a few others am I not calling Alinsky who by the way I thought brilliant. Deadly serious and a most important enemy. I have always admired my enemies because I thought them worthy on the political stage.

You have to remember what I have been thru up here Jake in politics. Scorched earth is a kind term. No prisoners.

Rove worked what I find to be so close to the handlers of Mulroney sometimes I wonder if they worked together. Or at least knew each other and were working it. Years later I have pulled the "go into a district and don't come out unless you know your candidate is going to win". This last election of yours though was a joke.

Romney never went on any conservative talk show. He never was made to appeal to the base. It's beyond bizarre. How do you think you will take the Presidency without any conservatives voting for you?

Obviously no one cared in the hierarchy of the R's. Sad but true. And why they should all get out of the way now. now The R's gave us all 4 more freaking years.