Alinsky methods examined: A weekly discussion. Rule No. 1

11-19-08 | Locutus of Borg

[prismsinc]

Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.

Freepers, aside from the fact that we need to expel RINOs from our side, we need to deal with their tactics as well. Here's Alinsky's first rule. This is totally Machiavellian in its foundation. How do we combat it? Does conservative humility ultimately work or fail in the long run against this rule? Do we have to adopt this method to combat the left? Is this an issue of human nature, or simply generational? All constructive (and critically constructive) comments appreciated.

[HighlyOpinionated]

I haven’t finished THE FEDERALIST, but I am certain there are talking points that will refute any and all of Mr Alinsky’s Rules.

I encourage others to read THE FEDERALIST to gain insight into the defense of our Constitution by the Founding Fathers, Madison, Hamilton, and Jay.

[Loud Mime]

It's the winner of the contest that decides what the rules were.

We brought a cream pie to a gun fight. If we want to win back our nation, we cannot do it with cream pies.

[prismsinc]

Is it downloadable? Where do we get a copy?

[Hacklehead]

Conservatives should face that fact that the revolutionaries have won and that we are now COUNTER REVOLUTIONARIES. The country we loved is GONE and the US is now run by a bunch of old F’in hippies who hated everything we believed in and worked hard to destroy it. They succeeded. It’s time for us to work as hard as they did to DESTROY EVERYTHING THEY LOVE AND BELIEVE IN. If alinskys methods help us to it, great.

[Loud Mime]

Pardon the vanity, but we have a good thread running on this almost every week. You're invited!

[HighlyOpinionated]

CORRECTION:

THE FEDERALIST PAPERS

Madison, Hamilton and Jay have written an authoritive analysis of the young USofA’s Constitution and an enduring classic of political philosphy.

[prismsinc]

I suggest to all of you to google “the 48 laws of power”. It will further explain this rule. These rules also coincide with a method known as “The Delphi Technique”, which goes into group dynamics, something the Oba-mites seem to have perfected.

[prismsinc]

Thank you HO, your input is appreciated!

[prismsinc]

LM thank you. sorry for the mix-up

[don-o]

bumpping

[kalee]

bookmark for later reading

[Loud Mime]

Here's one of the more relevant Federalist Papers.

Also, don't miss Washington's Farewell Address, especially the part where he discusses the spirit of the party. It's about half-way through the address.

[prismsinc]

I understand your POV, but if you further analyze each of these rules you’ll find that they need to be tailored to our fundamentals. That’s why I began this discussion. They ONLY believe in power over others, because in their minds there is nothing else.

[Crimson Elephant]

I find it interesting that the democrats are already talking like Rove did just 4 years ago, that the other side is now a “permanent minority”. That is a sign, in Wall Street parlance, of a “top” in my opinion. I didn’t expect to see that sign this quickly though.

Getting down to your core beliefs and fighting from that base of support is key, but one also needs a big catalyst to put the party in power on the defensive.

IMO what the GOP has to do is get a tighter, more conservative base of power much like the Dems in 2002, then use the old Perot language on Reform, the National Debt and the Budget. The economic mess is to the GOP what the Iraq War and Katrina was to the Dems....a rallying point. The battle over Gay Marriage is an important sideshow, but one that will help the case along, not make it.

A clear, concise conservative message on the debt will work. It will take a bit of time, but by 2010, the Dems will have had 4 years in power. They can only blame Bush for so long.

By Fall of 2010 the GOP front line/PR message should resemble (in message not fully) Perot in 1992. If energy prices go back up, which I suspect, then the Drilling for Oil/climate change debacle construct should be folded in.

Now the Dems have to please both their base AND the middle who don’t want to go too far left. The issues of retaking power, doing something WITH the power, and KEEPING power are 3 different things.

The Democrats have made a living off creating problems and/or making them worse, then blaming the other side for the problems they created and using that to retain power. This must be turned against them. We MUST make Pelosi, Reid and Obama own this bailout bonanza and the National Debt.

That is the Sun in this political universe. If we let the Libs hang that on Bush while they actually run us into the ground it will be total and utter defeat. Like it or not, the War on Terror is dead as a political issue unless there is another “big moment”.

All the other issues everyone is fearful of are going to flow from the stream of the economy.

The next 5 years will be all Bailout, Economy, Debt, Budget (unless we get a massive new terror attack...then all bets are off). Even the social issues fall away when people are worried about their jobs and thinking Great Depression.

[Hacklehead]

“Is it downloadable? Where do we get a copy?”

I don’t know if this is all of them, but its a good start.

RULE 1: “Power 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. (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: “Never go outside the expertise of your 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, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” 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, send 30,000 letters. You 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? They want to create anger and fear.)

RULE 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. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that 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 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.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, 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 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. (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.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re 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.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

[Right Wing Assault]

Thank you! I hadn’t heard of the “Delphi Technique”! Now that I read about it, I realize we have had this played on us for ages. It’s the typical lefty game plan! It’s Pelosi, Algore, Kerry, the Clintons, obama. It’s a typical lefty-run hearing. It’s a lefty press conference. It’s a debate with a lefty in it.

What it is and how to bust it:
http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/1998/nov98/focus.html

[prismsinc]

I was referring to the THE FEDERALIST, not Alinsky’s rules. This is a discussion ONLY on the first rule.

[Right Wing Assault]

And “the 48 laws of power” are the playbook for obama.

http://www2.tech.purdue.edu/cgt/courses/cgt411/covey/48_laws_of_power.htm

It’s amazing.

[fortunate sun]

The Achille’s Heel of conservatism is it’s intellectual component, while liberalism is emotion-based. Conservatism isn’t talking point or sound bite friendly. Where liberalism is a sprint, Conservatism is a marathon and most often in the political arena where the attention span can only be measured in seconds, Conservatives lose.
There is, however, a different level of politics, bypasses the mind of the Conservative and the heart of the liberal and onto a totally uncharted battlefield of politics; Visceralism. The politics of the gut. Kick in the stomach politics. So basic, even children understand it.
A perfect example of it occurred on the campaign trail when Obama replied to “Joe the Plumber” and Joe’s reply, “It sounds like socialism to me.” It took Obama and his campaign totally off guard.
Some pundits would tell you, Joe’s response was Conservatism distilled to it’s most basic and I say, not by a long shot. The public’s reaction was instantaneous and pure. People understand accomplishment and reward. People understand true fairness.
That is the battlefield to occupy. Visceralism is what allowed President Reagan to reach over the heads of the press. Visceralism is what brought tens of thousands to see Governor Palin.
By framing political arguments in a “gut check” statement, we win in the arena of ideas. This is how to bring back those who want an equal playing field and not some affirmative action mess.
Thanks,
soapbox returned