We read this book in order to get into the entrenched minds of the Obama administration. It is a fairly well-known fact that Barack Obama is a big fan of Alinsky’s ‘rules’ and utilized them during his community organizing days in Chicago. Not surprisingly, the pages are full of references to ‘the organizer,’ which bares a unique resemblance to the Obama administration.
Why does one need to know any of the information in this book? To be blunt, the audience for whom Saul Alinsky wrote tends to be devoid of any tactful social skills that your everyday problem solver might have. Those radical personas turn instead to violence, which accomplishes very little (besides, at best, earning yourself a place in history next to Che Guevara).
Initially, this book was a tiresome, irrelevant, rehash of how a typical problem solver would react to unfavorable political or social movements. Alinsky gave no information that isn’t taught by many responsible parents. However, that changes once the reader gets into the middle of the book. The chapters on words and communication were the most enlightening sections. Alinsky’s depiction of the word ‘ego' elicited visions of Barack Obama as the community organizer. Alinsky relates experiences to communication, which was very interesting. However, it contained nothing any sociable individual wouldn’t already understand.
Alinsky talks like the typical hippie of his day. He envisions Moses and God as though they were somehow negotiating with one another. Alinsky lacks the realization that a Jew like Moses would want to please God, not negotiate for a better deal.A central flaw in Alinsky’s reasons for political change is that the so-called ‘status quo' is a bad thing. We don’t deny that it isn’t because change is a universal constant and our world will always have good and bad parts. But Alinsky says that the ‘have-nots’ (radicals) would be against the status quo, whereas the ‘haves’ desire to maintain it and their power. Upon closer inspection, the radical’s desire is to change the fundamental structure of the constitution like modern-day progressives. Alinsky’s ‘haves’ also want to change the ‘status quo’ but they want to take it back to the economic model that the U.S. was founded upon. It was funny because Rush Limbaugh often describes Barack Obama as a "community agitator," which riles up the left. However, that’s exactly how Alinsky describes the community organizer.
In his haste to dramatically change America, Obama has caused a diverse group of citizens to organize WITHOUT a central leader. This group could be called the tea party or whoever. Either way, Obama’s Alinsky-esque tactics are backfiring and have created a galvanized group, thus polarizing his radical movement. Could this group of ‘have-nots' or 'tea partiers' be considered today’s version of the ‘radical'? That’s a conversation for another time.
Rules For Radicals is a must-read for those interested in political theory or negotiating. It presents legitimate ways to negotiate, although they are often shrouded in the cover of racism and class warfare. Alinsky claims the book is written for neither side of the political aisle, which is debatable. One thing is certain – this book is perfect for debates for the future book clubs on the upcoming official Bookworm Patriots website!
The Bookworm Patriots.
