A few of our stories and columns are now in front of the paywall. We at The Chief remain committed to independent reporting on labor and civil service. It's been our mission since 1897. You can have a hand in ensuring that our reporting remains relevant in the decades to come. Consider supporting The Chief, which you can do for as little as $3.20 a month.
To the editor:
“Rules for Radicals,” a 1971 book by Saul Alinsky, serves as a comprehensive guide to empowering the underprivileged, commonly referred to as the “Have Nots.” It outlines his three-step process for achieving social change.
The seven social sins were first published by Mahatma Gandhi on Oct. 22, 1925, in his weekly newspaper, Young India. Gandhi wrote, “An unjust law is itself a species of violence.”
However, he did not believe that violence against unjust laws or actions of the state justifies violence.
Alinsky’s three-step process epitomizes the seventh social sin: politics without principle.
Step one: Initiate a crisis.
Alinsky argued that individuals in complex societies only act when they feel compelled. The organizer’s main job is to create a crisis and foment discontent, which then motivates people to take action.
Step two: Blame the target and personalize it.
Alinsky instructed organizers to “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” By isolating a single individual or group and portraying them as the embodiment of evil, the organizer simplifies the conflict and directs public outrage towards a specific target, maximizing its potential impact.
Step three: Force the “solution.”
When a crisis paralyzes the target and public pressure reaches its peak, the organizer presents the solution as the sole path forward: accept it or face the consequences. In this scenario, law enforcement is perceived as the antagonist, while lawbreakers are portrayed as the protagonists.
In Minneapolis, Alinsky’s three-step process is in full swing.
Robert Sica
6 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Admin
When a law enforcement agency is doing the lawbreaking, such as ICE, then it is reality, not perception, that they are the antagonists. You don't have to be a radical to know that when criminals are enforcing the law, we are endangered. You can watch movies such as "The War Wagon," "Chisum," "Rio Lobo" and "McQ" to see the dangers that criminals as lawmen cause. Unfortunately, in real life, we don't have John Wayne going up against them.
Wednesday, February 4 Report this
thePuma
It is Trump and his GOP MAGA-ts who are practicing politics without principal. Their entire game plan is as Robert Sica (-phant) outlines in the 3 steps described. There is nothing 'radical' about the "have nots" wanting a little. Yet they/we are demonized by the right wing as less deserving, or vermin and unamerican for wanting a few percent more of what the "economic aristocracy' continues to hoard beyond moral parameters.
To interpret the reality of current events, politics, and social justice in any other way can only indicate a woeful misanthropic sense of humanity, a severe lack of empathy, and borderline psychopathy.
"C'mon people now, smile on your brother, everybody get together, try to love one another right now"
Wednesday, February 4 Report this
fcannisi
@thePuma, I couldn't have said it better.
Thursday, February 5 Report this
Valete
Two Birds With One Stone
You seem to view law enforcement agencies like ICE as adversaries who break the law and endanger people. You also criticize the GOP for prioritizing the wealthy over the less fortunate and compassionate.
The Democratic Party and its allies have been violating the US Constitution and Republic by exploiting undocumented immigrants for votes. Violent protestors in Minneapolis, who burn, loot, or ram vehicles into police, endanger people.
(It’s important to note that some protestors in Minneapolis are carrying guns instead of roses and are driving motor vehicles into law enforcement.)
Law enforcement is present in Minneapolis to quell the chaos and violence caused by the revolutionaries, who are attempting to initiate a Bolshevik Revolution.
Thursday, February 5 Report this
thePuma
Word Man, keep drinking that nasty kool-ade. Not sure where you get your news/information from, though I have strong suspicions, but your near verbatim Kristi Noem talking points are not based in any observable facts. Please expand your sources and hopefully wipe the crud off your goggles.
Friday, February 6 Report this
Valete
Saul Alinsky, a committed agnostic, used religious structures, especially the Catholic Church, for social change. He famously dedicated Rules for Radicals to Lucifer, calling him the “original radical.” Raised observant, Alinsky later embraced a worldly perspective, seeing morality as a tool and religion’s power structures as levers for organizing the “Have-Nots."
Alinsky’s quote, “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon,” highlights his belief that “the ends often justify the means in political organizing.” This often defined him as a devoted radical and communist.
Alinsky’s book, “Rules for Radicals,” outlined his strategies for grassroots activism. While his beliefs aligned more closely with socialism and activism than communism, his ideas and methods have often been conflated or criticized as part of a broader radical agenda aimed at dismantling America.
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, both Alinsky’s principles during their early careers and political philosophies.
Collectivism, aiming for social equity and reducing class disparity, has historically faced severe economic and social challenges. Suppressing individual rights and economic inefficiencies are key arguments against its implementation, making it problematic in practice. These failures continue to shape contemporary discussions on economic and political systems.
In conclusion, critics argue that Saul Alinsky’s approach in ‘Rules for Radicals’ can lead to a focus on single-issue campaigns that may overlook broader systemic change. They also contend that it often empowers professional organizers at the expense of grassroots participation. Furthermore, some believe that his methods can exacerbate polarization and conflict rather than fostering inclusive dialogue and community building.
Saturday, February 7 Report this