Alinsky and Lucifer
On Sunday November 28, I created a new file in a graphics
program. While editing the image, I noticed that the titlebar
took on a specific file name rather than the default for a new
file. I was posed thereby by the accidental press of the save
button to delete a file containing controversial content. Was
this a deliberate hack? The controversy contended pertains to the
|From the preface of Rules for Radicals by Saul
|Screenshot of quote
in its context of an Amazon.com book preview.
Unlike the legendary Faust, the falsely accused Paganinni, or the
possibly misrepresented leader of the Freemasons, Saul Alinsky is
recorded here for all to see giving his due to the Devil.
The real Faust has been obscured by his legend. Paganinni played
the violin so well that he was presumed to have supernatural
help. In reality, a disease producing loose joints is more likely
to have given rise to his gift rather than the devil. Freemasonry
apologists say that one of their leaders tarnished their reputation by
publishing his ideas on the secular meaning of the latin word lucifer,
although the deep secrecy of their proceedings may not allow this to
suspicions. However, Saul's more direct inference
may reflect on the state of the conscience of modern liberalism as a
whole. How can the conscience of those accepting pass over that
which would repulse those of a more sensitive sort?
The contradictory nature of modern liberalism, simultaneously pursuing
noble goals without wisdom, and rationalizing corrupt goals, while
declaring some moral high ground nullified by that corruption, seems
consistent with an unknowing complicity with the devil. Thus
infanticide is called a women's right over her body, homosexuality an
alternative lifestyle, and occult practices constitutionally protected
religious practices. And some would dare invoke God in this
unholy context, a context that makes Alinsky's comment an accidental
allusion to the true power behind the evil of this age.
Saul Alinsky is praised by his liberal following for championing the
cause of the poor. This seems noble enough, however it is the
tactics he practiced and taught that raise questions. He said an
organizer must "fan the latent hostilities" and "he must search
out controversy and issues, rather than avoid them." Once he
demonstrated this tactic by dumping a truckload of garbage at the front
door of a politician in order to get his response. It appears he
teaches the crafty exploitation of people and opportunity for political
ends. Controversy and conflict are often incidental to an
honest pursuit of noble ends, but to deliberately pursue them as
a means to an end is not noble at all.
The Clinton administration kept Hillary's fondness of Alinsky hidden
while they had power. Her birth in Chicago put her in his sphere
of influence, until her writing a final college thesis on him and his
methods marked her ideological change from Republican to Democrat when
she was 21. Barack Obama's desire to change things played him
into Alinsky's spell as well when Alinsky's followers hired him to
organize in Chicago when he was 23 years old.
It would be fair to say that Clinton and Obama are not Alinsky's only
followers. His success in organizing was well known and many
activists read his books and patterned their activities after
him. The attempted handcuffing of Karl Rove by Code Pink, the
pursuit of Japanese whaling ships by ecopirates, and others show the
spread of questionable political means. That the
ecopirates are depicted as if their ends justified their means implies
the ideological approval of those who produce and broadcast their
How does this affect your conscience?
1Peter Slevin, "For Clinton
and Obama, a Common Ideological Touchstone," The Washington Post,
Sunday, March 25, 2007
2Transcript of episode "Democrats
and the Legacy of Activist Saul Alinsky," from ALL THINGS CONSIDERED,
NPR News, May 21, 2007
December 3, 2010 Created.
December 3, 2010 Corrected "handcuffing of Karl Rove"
handcuffing of Karl Rove"