Craig R. Kelso

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Thoughts on Rules for Radicals

I have just completed reading Rules for Radicals: A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals by Saul Alinsky and Barak Obama's Rules for Revolution: The Alinsky Model by David Horowitz. Horowitz wrote his book to refute Alinsky's methods and illustrates how President Obama's history and present leadership reflect the use of these methods.

Alinsky was an atheist and believed that there is a constant struggle between the " Haves" and the "Have-Nots;" that the Have-Nots should constantly seek to take power from the Haves in order to create an ideal society; a heaven on earth. He believed that any means were acceptable to achieve this end.

Horowitz debunked Alinsky's methods and philosophy. Progressives/Socialists/Communists, etc. continually hold on to an erroneous belief that a heaven on earth/utopia is a possibility, or, at least, that is the ruse that they perpetuate in order to sustain support from the Have-Nots. Progressives, etc. They constantly compare the U.S.A. to this unattainable ideal instead of other nations and societies in this world.

A conservative friend of mine used to say, "Democracy sucks, but it sucks less than anything else out there," and "Capitalism sucks, but it sucks less than anything else out there." This does not imply that we have achieved the epitome of societies; we do need to continually ferret out real injustices and make corrections.

Some thoughts:
  • Alinsky believed that there is a constant revolution/counterrevolution cycle that continues throughout history. Current events in Egypt seem to verify this idea.
  • President Obama was elected using Alinsky tactics, and continues to employ those tactics during his presidency.
  • Change should be directed to necessary/verifiable needs and injustices.
  • Horowitz stated, "In the real world of American democracy, social and economic divisions are between the Cans and Can-Nots, the Dos and the Do-Nots, and the Wills and the Will-Nots."