Alinsky's Rules for Radicals

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Nick_A
Posts: 4314
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: They're not Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, remember?

Post by Nick_A » Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:10 pm

-1- wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 11:18 am
uwot wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 11:04 am
-1- wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 10:51 am
Thanks, uwot, for the link... could I please ask you to write down here in a post the essence of the link?
Here's the opening paragraph: "Throughout his adulthood, Albert Einstein must have endured a continual barrage of visits by unstoppable, if kindly intentioned, eccentrics. One, the persistent poet William Hermanns, later wrote a book called Einstein and the Poet." Long story short: Hermanns was a crank.
thank you.

Sh'ma, o Israel. Hear this, o Nick_A.
William Hermanns (1895-1990) was one of the best personally informed authorities of the events in Germany from World War I through the Hitler era who recorded and expressed his experiences primarily as a poet, but also as a writer of books plays and a couple of songs, which we will feature on this site.

Dr. Hermanns was an academician, as well, having earned his doctorate in Sociology, and was prepared for a diplomatic career with the League of Nations, but that international attempt at peace had an early ending with Mussolini's march into Abysinia (Ethopia). He would later in the United States become a Professor in German Language and Literature at San Jose State College (now University).

His gift to the world was as a Poet Sociologist shining light on conscience, that he learned to respect on his journey from the imaginary hero self as a volunteer soldier marching at the side of his Kaiser victoriously through the Arc de Triomphe to his discovery of conscience and its guiding power in the trenches of war.

His vow, screamed from the battlefield of Verdun upon being half-buried by an exploding shell, "God, save me and I will serve You as long as I live!" remained present to him everyday of the rest of his life.
We need more cranks. We need more of those who experience objective value rather than blindly becoming slaves of indoctrination into statist slavery through progressive education

Walker
Posts: 6882
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: They're not Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, remember?

Post by Walker » Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:28 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:10 pm
We need more cranks. We need more of those who experience objective value rather than blindly becoming slaves of indoctrination into statist slavery through progressive education
Holy Schnikes. Look at this list, complete with evidence.

(The Left hates facts.)

Rap Sheet: ***594** Acts of Media-Approved Violence and Harassment Against Trump Supporters
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/201 ... upporters/

*

10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.

Walker
Posts: 6882
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: They're not Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, remember?

Post by Walker » Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:34 pm

Re: not Alinsky's Rules

Remember? How could anyone forget the dirty tricks of the Left.

*

Alinsky says that in war, the end justifies the means.

Alinsky methods can neutralize Alinskyites.

Alinsky neutralizing Alinskyites is like a double-negative.

It’s a positive.

Wise up, conservatives.

Walker
Posts: 6882
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Alinsky's Rules for Radicals

Post by Walker » Sat Oct 13, 2018 4:05 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:53 pm
Walker wrote:They don't apply to the hundred dollar challenge, which is:

“Today we’re at the University of Georgia, offering a hundred dollars to any student that can give me an example of a liberal speaker shouted down by conservative students.” And, to this he added, on any campus. ...
https://reason.com/blog/2017/10/16/whit ... p-shutdown

How do I get my $100?
You could try getting your hands on the free money with this link. Like your last one, it also changes the arbitrary absolute that is required for accurate and truthful analysis during the noise of Alinsky distractions, which granted, may have been merely a deficiency in reading comprehension.

From April 10, 2017:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/gra ... bb7bf850d7

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 2833
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

Re: Alinsky's Rules for Radicals

Post by -1- » Sat Oct 13, 2018 4:59 pm

Dear Walker:

I am not contesting any facts who hackles or shouts down whom more.

I am contesting, however, the methodology used by the interviewer. The methodology was wrong, and no valid conclusions can be drawn from it. This is my point; no more, no less. I am not nit-picking; I am pointing out that conclusions have been drawn when they ought not to have. That's not nit-picking; I believe that's a serious charge.

I have already stated why the methodology was wrong. It was wrong because it did not test for the opposite. The interviewer's findings are interesting, maybe even useful, but not for the conclusion you advocate it supported.

I am not disagreeing with your opinion, nor agreeing. Your opinion being that Leftist hackers shout down substantially more Rightist speakers than the other way around. I am just saying that you ought not base your opinion on this news piece, and you ought not to use it as evidence to support your opinion, because it is logically false to deduce your conclusion from it.

If you like, quote other statistics. I won't stand in your way. I have never stood against your opinion on this issue. I am just saying that the newspiece on the YouTube video was not conclusive at all, and you made a mistake by drawing the conclusions from it that you have.

Walker
Posts: 6882
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Alinsky unbound

Post by Walker » Sat Oct 13, 2018 5:42 pm

You can prove my conclusion wrong with an example that fits the parameters of the $100 challenge.

The one who pays the money gets to set the parameters, although Alinskyites immediately try to take control by changing the parameters of the challenge, changing word definitions*, changing the debate, etc.

*
Alinskyitis transcends national borders.

Right learns Left’s dirty tricks
http://www.thehinduchronicle.com/2016/1 ... ty-tricks/

“Leftists and liberals are aghast that Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis disgraced himself and his office by succumbing to MNS chief Raj Thackeray’s bullying over the release of Ae Dil Hai Mushkil. But, to a large extent, the bleeding-hearts themselves are responsible for the mess. For the Right is using the weapons that were used with impunity by intellectuals over the decades—argumentum ad hominem, guilt by association, plain calumniation, sentimentalism. And using them with a devastating effect.”


* Example: changing progressive to mean repressive via actions.

Nick_A
Posts: 4314
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: They're not Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, remember?

Post by Nick_A » Sat Oct 13, 2018 6:10 pm

Walker wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:34 pm
Re: not Alinsky's Rules

Remember? How could anyone forget the dirty tricks of the Left.

*

Alinsky says that in war, the end justifies the means.

Alinsky methods can neutralize Alinskyites.

Alinsky neutralizing Alinskyites is like a double-negative.

It’s a positive.

Wise up, conservatives.
You are right. Nothing is more abused than the word "compromise." I watch these foolish people on TV speaking of the value of compromise. They are blissfully unaware that the Alinsky agenda is only concerned with the end justified by whatever means. If there are useful idiots speaking of compromise, they only serve as stepping stones supporting whatever means reaches the desired end.

AMod
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Alinsky's Rules for Radicals

Post by AMod » Sat Oct 13, 2018 6:24 pm

I'm bored of this forum being used to argue America's partisan politics. As such I'm locking this thread and will be deleting any future posts that have no philosophical content. You want to argue politics go to a political forum.

AMod.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests