
Although the "activist's Bible" was originally intended for left movements, the tactics endorsed in Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals are what defines the whole game landscape today.
That's why conservatives now engage in ridicule and parody, in contrast to the 1960s and '70s when they were lopsidedly the stodgy targets of counterculture or New Left lampooning. Scoring satiric points for mockery is an essential complement to arguments.
That's why there is no middle ground or "waffling in limbo" today -- you can't get anywhere without a choosing a definite target, and one that you don't mitigate with "but it or they are not completely diabolical or conspiratorial".
That's why polarization is king. In this era, stumbling around in a boundary between two sides or orientations without even the appearance of a solid and reliable commitment just means waving a flag to others that one is an indecisive and confused yokel.
IOW, be careful about making a celebratory ruckus about that tasty morsel (hipster bible) you found in your soup. Everybody else in the restaurant will be perusing it in the future, too.
Rules For Radicals (1971)
https://ia801202.us.archive.org/28/items...dicals.pdf
EXCERPTS: . . . The fourth rule carries within it the fifth rule: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.
[...] In a fight almost anything goes. It almost reaches the point where you stop to apologize if a chance blow lands above the belt.
[...] The thirteenth rule: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
In conflict tactics there are certain rules that the organizer should always regard as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and "frozen." By this I mean that in a complex, interrelated, urban society, it becomes increasingly difficult to single out who is to blame for any particular evil. There is a constant, and somewhat legitimate, passing of the buck.
[...] Obviously there is no point to tactics unless one has a target upon which to center the attacks...
[....] With this focus comes a polarization. As we have indicated before, all issues must be polarized if action is to follow. The classic statement on polarization comes from Christ: "He that is not with me is against me" (Luke 1 1:23). He allowed no middle ground to the moneychangers in the Temple.
One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other. A leader may struggle toward a decision and weigh the merits and demerits of a situation which is 52 per cent positive and 48 per cent negative, but once the decision is reached he must assume that his cause is 100 per cent positive and the opposition 100 per cent negative.
He can't toss forever in limbo, and avoid decision. He can't weigh arguments or reflect endlessly — he must decide and act.
[...] Many liberals, during our attack on the then-school superintendent, were pointing out that after all he wasn't a 100 per cent devil, he was a regular churchgoer, he was a good family man, and he was generous in his contributions to charity.
Can you imagine in the arena of conflict charging that so-and-so is a racist bastard and then diluting the impact of the attack with qualifying remarks such as "He is a good churchgoing man, generous to charity, and a good husband"? This becomes political idiocy...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
THE RULES
That's why conservatives now engage in ridicule and parody, in contrast to the 1960s and '70s when they were lopsidedly the stodgy targets of counterculture or New Left lampooning. Scoring satiric points for mockery is an essential complement to arguments.
That's why there is no middle ground or "waffling in limbo" today -- you can't get anywhere without a choosing a definite target, and one that you don't mitigate with "but it or they are not completely diabolical or conspiratorial".
That's why polarization is king. In this era, stumbling around in a boundary between two sides or orientations without even the appearance of a solid and reliable commitment just means waving a flag to others that one is an indecisive and confused yokel.
IOW, be careful about making a celebratory ruckus about that tasty morsel (hipster bible) you found in your soup. Everybody else in the restaurant will be perusing it in the future, too.
Rules For Radicals (1971)
https://ia801202.us.archive.org/28/items...dicals.pdf
EXCERPTS: . . . The fourth rule carries within it the fifth rule: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.
[...] In a fight almost anything goes. It almost reaches the point where you stop to apologize if a chance blow lands above the belt.
[...] The thirteenth rule: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
In conflict tactics there are certain rules that the organizer should always regard as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and "frozen." By this I mean that in a complex, interrelated, urban society, it becomes increasingly difficult to single out who is to blame for any particular evil. There is a constant, and somewhat legitimate, passing of the buck.
[...] Obviously there is no point to tactics unless one has a target upon which to center the attacks...
[....] With this focus comes a polarization. As we have indicated before, all issues must be polarized if action is to follow. The classic statement on polarization comes from Christ: "He that is not with me is against me" (Luke 1 1:23). He allowed no middle ground to the moneychangers in the Temple.
One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other. A leader may struggle toward a decision and weigh the merits and demerits of a situation which is 52 per cent positive and 48 per cent negative, but once the decision is reached he must assume that his cause is 100 per cent positive and the opposition 100 per cent negative.
He can't toss forever in limbo, and avoid decision. He can't weigh arguments or reflect endlessly — he must decide and act.
[...] Many liberals, during our attack on the then-school superintendent, were pointing out that after all he wasn't a 100 per cent devil, he was a regular churchgoer, he was a good family man, and he was generous in his contributions to charity.
Can you imagine in the arena of conflict charging that so-and-so is a racist bastard and then diluting the impact of the attack with qualifying remarks such as "He is a good churchgoing man, generous to charity, and a good husband"? This becomes political idiocy...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
THE RULES
- "Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
- "Never go outside the experience of your people."
- "Whenever possible go outside of the experience of the enemy."
- "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
- "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."
- "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
- "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
- "Keep the pressure on."
- "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."
- "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
- "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."
- "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
- "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."