Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
He wanted everyone to be equal. He had no end game however and really wanted no governing bodies of any kind. He believed that the people could work it out.
Why people fear his process on a national level and everything he wrote was from the perspective of LOCAL, is because inherent in his beliefs is attack and make enemies...that was the crux of most of what he preached. Attack them, make them hate you, etc. THAT is what make people nervous on a national stage and if you restrict your understanding of Alinsky to this forum without doing some reading, it is not easy to understand.
Bottom line...he DID believe in helping the downtrodden...he DID believe in overthrowing the power to be, but never offered any replacement. I have always felt he really was an anarchist.
I suggest everyone read his writings. A very interesting read, but warning to you all, he uses very non political correct language :
" You are white, native-born, and Protestant. Do you like people? You like your family, your friends, some of your business associates (not too many of them), and some of your neighbors. Do you like Catholics, Irish, Italians, Jews, Poles, Mexicans, Negroes, Puerto Ricans, and Chinese? Do you regard them with the warm feeling of fellow human beings or with a cold contempt symbolized in Papists, Micks, Wops, Kikes, Hunkies, Greasers, *******, Spics, and Chinks? If you are one of those people who think of people in these derogatory terms, then you don't like people."
Reveille for Radicals by Saul Alinsky
I have read his works. I have done a bit of research. I admire his feeling for downtrodden. I detest his feeling that there must be hate involved. I detest his not wanting to work within, but to destroy and he is pretty clear on that stff. |
Thank you for this post. It makes me want to do more reading on my own about Alinsky although I am familiar with him on the surface.
What I can't piece together in my mind is exactly what you state in the last part of your post. How can someone admire a person who, although he may feel for the downtrodden and want to work toward raising them up, supports doing so by way of destruction and hate? That puzzles me to no end and is in total conflict with my upbringing and moral stance. I know that you were not saying you admire him, just his feelings for helping the downtrodden, but the poster to whom you were responding to seems to admire Alinsky and speaks of him as a kind person. I would tend to be very distrustful of someone like that because his actions do not match his words. A kind person walks what he talks and is kind to all. His teachings sound to me that by following them it makes you the judge - who to be kind to and who not to be. Confusing to say the least.
Again, thank you - I will be reading more on my own to try to come to an understanding, but it seems to me to be a "front" of kindness and generosity only to bring about an ulterior motive.