Skip navigation

Category Archives: Saul Alinsky

Generally speaking, neither political party can hold itself out as being better than the other in this author’s opinion.

But clearly, the leftwing of all parties globally has a long and documented history of social anarchy, support of autocratic and utopian social models of government, and a desire to suppress dissent and overthrow models of government which oppose them.

Those of the right and middle persuasion often find all of this inexplicable among citizens of the same country, particularly in the US where leftist models of social collectivism have not (yet) been fully implemented.

On top of that, unindoctrinated citizens who are paying attention know that there is no history of success with this model unless one counts growth of the state as an achievement. And in the experiments which have occurred (think Marx onward), tyranny against the citizenry has been widespread and lethal on a massive scale accompanied by economic dysfunction.

Stand for ChangeWhat follows is a critical view of the American left. It centers on the left’s Cloward-Piven theory, and Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”.

Both are established and published methods for American economic and societal overthrow and are ascendant in the Obama administration.

Cloward-Piven and Rules for Radicals are explained. Following this is a list of the many things the left has done and is still doing to break our societal structures.

Ask yourself at the end: does all of this, carried out over all this time, look random? Do you want this? What comes next if this succeeds? Ask a convinced leftists over 25 years of age about the latter. Do not expect a straight answer.

* * *

Read More »



Debating ideas is a core functional element in a democratic society which values freedom of expression and embraces concepts of equality as America does.

In its best and most acceptable form the debater moves beyond moral and personal instinct onto a plane of logical argument. When done effectively major shifts in public opinion can be effected. This is a skill and usually requires significant topic knowledge, learning around persuasion techniques, and preparation.WFB

[William F. Buckley, Jr.]

And it is an equal-opportunity endeavor; anyone is free to debate anything. As a result it is used by society’s active participants as well as by people such as anarchists and by groups of all stripes who are focused on their narrow cause.

The listeners and voters, us, are mostly off doing something else everyday. If we happen to come into a pivotal debate as a listener or want to comment or participate in one, we are usually in learning mode compared to those advocating.

Because of this, we cannot often: 1) convince ideologues; or 2) out debate them. So we are often left, at the end of the day, with the views we walked in with – perhaps hardened.

The people of the America need to understand that the public voice of issue debaters is a purposeful attempt to change opinion into some new direction or to support a view that person already holds.  It is done with skill and uses psychological concepts often to mask what is really being proposed or discussed.

The Left has brought this to a high art form and it can be seen in the main stream media repeatedly.  Obama was elected on 30-second sound bytes; he fooled everyone and is still at it (or was it all David Axelrod).

Look for manipulation when public voices speak (both sides of the aisle). Try to deduce what their agenda really is.  The times demand it. [image of Saul Alinsky]

Pass this on.