Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: marron

Most of what I know about Alinsky is through Dinesh D’Souza’s films.

What I find funny about radicals is that when they finally have the upper-hand, are winning, and enacting their crazy programs, they continue to wage war on their dwindling opponents as if they are still some colossal force.

Once they’ve fully established their abusive autocracy, you can be sure that there will be plenty of bogus, powerless “enemies” that they will capture, parade before the people, and ultimately liquadate. It won’t be to maintain “order” but to maintain a state of paralyzingly fear among the populace.


11 posted on 08/07/2016 11:50:32 AM PDT by BradyLS (DO NOT FEED THE BEARS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: BradyLS
How can anyone claim to champion change from “the bottom up” when the very organizing of the masses that radicals seek creates a hierarchy which inevitably spawns an inequality of power?
14 posted on 08/07/2016 12:09:50 PM PDT by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: BradyLS
I usually post my experience of learning about Alinsky on these type of threads, so I apologize if you have read it before.

In the year leading up to the 2008 election, I had been trying to figure out a way to obtain a copy of “Rules for Radicals” because it is the bible followed by Obama and his associates. I had been trying to get it without paying for it, and the copies at the library were backordered for months. To my surprise, one finally came in after about a six month delay.

When I was about a third of the way through “Rules for Radicals”, I concluded that reading it tells volumes about the people who profess to following it as a bible, especially the ones pushing the legislation we have seen in the last eight years, and from 1960's on, generally as the leftist radicals mainstreamed and entered politics.

The book explains a lot about those people (including Obama and Clinton) and none of it is good.

I was going to dictate the entire thing and make an audiobook out of it to give to my close associates, who, like me, don’t want a single red cent to go to anyone associated with writing, printing or distributing that hideous work. Unfortunately (or fortunately) I couldn’t stomach hearing myself read it in a way that would make it easier on the ears to listen to (To put the inflection in the right places means you have to read it as if you believe it, and I gave up after one chapter.)

It is probably one of the most amoral, twisted works I have ever read. Given that Alinsky wrote a dedication to Lucifer, I shouldn’t be surprised. The dedication was taken out of later editions so as not to offend the clergy he was attempting to recruit, but the version I read had it. Apparently, it was a copy from the 1980's, and they figured it was safe to put it back in.

From what I can see, reading that book enables one to understand what makes Obama (and his devoted followers) tick.

The very FIRST paragraph exposes very clearly what they are all about:
"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."

It is unrestricted class warfare, pure and simple. And it is the bible of Obama, Clinton, and their like-minded followers.

17 posted on 08/07/2016 12:18:21 PM PDT by rlmorel (Orwell described Liberals when he wrote of those who "repudiate morality while laying claim to it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson