Another major difference in “The Alinsky Way” versus “The American Way” is this:
Alinsky believes in using our rules of morality and law against us. In his opinion, it is impossible for those who make law to actually abide by the rules and regulations we create. (in his mind, these are simply created by “The Haves” to keep the “Have-Nots” down. No Marxism there...)
According to “The Alinsky Way”, it makes the assumption that because humans are fallible by nature, that it IS our nature to BE corrupt and our failure is what defines us and can be used against us.
The key difference is that “The American Way” knows that we are not perfect, and provides a legal and moral framework and structure for us to attempt to follow, knowing that society will be better if we attempt to follow it rather than surrendering to being corrupt.
It is why liberals seem to take such glee in pointing out hypocrisy, and why it only applies in their minds to conservatives. It is their crime of ALL crimes. It is this way in their minds because if you have no standards to be held to, you cannot be accused of hypocrisy if you deviate from those standards.
It is precisely why moral relativism seems to be a basic precept of liberalism.
If you think about it, the laws made by the powerful over the past century or so have the effect of protecting the ruling class at the expense of others.
Ted Kennedy champions socialism, because the Kennedy clan have made their pile, and they don’t want others to do the same. Ted expects others to pay lots of taxes, but he has hid his wealth in family “foundations” which are not subject to much tax but which are their personal playpens.