Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
No. The first Alinsky step is not to improve a grassroots organization, but to "disorganize" existing organizations.
|
I could draw endless parallels, but it's easier to say that most substantial change requires some disruption to break a set pattern of behavior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
No. If your mission is to RAISE taxes you might want to "rub resentments to fan flames and create a mass army of people" that wouldn't get their taxes raised and would benefit from the higher taxes of others. If your mission is to lower taxes, it wouldn't require such nefarious means (but you would be attacked by the Alinskyites who had used those means). Actually, such tactics are necessary when the truth does not suffice. And the truth is not sufficient when your ends are destructive to the current social order (unless that social order is so oppressive that the necessity of its destruction is self evident.)
|
And the "truth" around lowering taxes is usually expressed in a manner intended to rub resentments. Economic arguments aren't sexy so instead we have the Welfare Queen, inner city people cranking out babies to get deductions, soaking the rich etc...
The idea that negative images are more powerful is as old as the news. Everybody does it, and it has nothing to do with Communism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
No. They are not combining "hope and resentment" but demanding a truthful adherence to our Constitution as it was intended.
|
That's your romantic view of what the Tea Party means to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
They are not trying to "bait an opponent into reacting." They are trying to rally proponents and supporters of the Constitution to vote for those who promise to govern constitutionally.
|
You're not serious are you?
Listen to any one of Sarah Palin's tweets, watch 5 seconds of Glenn Beck, just about anything Mark Williams says, Sharron Engle's invoking the Second Amendment or the lovely signs that seem to pop up at Tea Party rallies again and again (I know, that media conspiracy)...
Sure they're trying to rally supporters to vote for candidates who support their issues...BY PROVOKING THEM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
As Scott has said, the Tea Party is trying to maintain what is left of the constitutional order that we have inherited. It is this very constitutional order supported by a free market that the Alyinskyites wish to destroy wilth inflammatory, divisive tactics full of hope and change. Alinsky's rules for radicals is not appropriate nor necessary for what the Tea Party wishes to do. The truth is their means, so there is no need to justify their "means to an end."
|
Ahhh that nefarious divisive tactic of "hope"
The Tea Party is an attempt to market change to a people set in their ways. Many of those seen as the leadership consistently use divisive and inflammatory rhetoric to provoke those they wish to influence. It is a means to an end.
That's not to say that the Tea Party platform, or what one can assume the platform is, doesn't have many positive aspects, or that using visceral messages to drive home a point can't be done in a constructive manner.
The point being, that grassroots change, towards whatever "end" is desired tends to look the same. A great book on organizational change (called Switch) actually covers many of the same tactics as Alinsky.
So is it the tactic that's at issue or the end state? When I read in Switch about disrupting patterns of behavior I didn't find myself longing for borscht.
A valid question could be raised as to why recommend Alynsky when there are less controversial grass roots books on the subject? This as well is covered in the link noting that Alynsky is looked at as the origin of the subject.
Looking toward a radical voice to challenge ideas and perhaps derive innovative solutions may seem novel or overly intellectual, but if the end state desired is positive I'm not sure why there's any issue. I'm personally a big fan of irreverent and unique solutions to issues.
But to be honest, it's all a moot argument anyway as we all know the NEA is just a communist front trying to indoctrinate our children into a lifetime of servitude toward the State.
-spence