Reformer's Blog
The Right Discovers 'Rules for Radicals'
Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky is one of the Leadership Institute's favorite books to pass out to students at CLP training. Today, Ralph Benko at Parcbench writes that the left is dismayed that so many on the right have discovered Alinsky's primer on activism:
Mossburg’s most fascinating observation, however, may have been that: The group collectively lamented that the Right discovered Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.” “It’s kind of scary! They have learned all of the tricks,” said Sue Esty, the assistant director of American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees Maryland.
And then, last week, the superb investigative journalism of James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles, posing as a pimp and a [explicit] engaged in child prostitution and human trafficking, exposed the tawdry culture and deeply compromised morality of ACORN...
I recently finished reading Rules for Radicals and marveled that despite going to one of the most liberal universities in the country, I had never heard of the book until I attended an LI training.
Looking back at all of the campaigns I've worked on and advocacy issues that I've championed, this book would have helped tremendously.
One of Morton Blackwell's The Laws of the Public Policy Process states, "Political technology determines political success." Rules for Radicals has great advice for political technology.
We've given several copies of Rules for Radicals away over at our Twitter feed. Follow us at @campus_reform. You might win something!
- Login to post comments
Printer-friendly version




Comments
So, "Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky is one of the Leadership Institute's favorite books to pass out to students at CLP training."? Does that make the Leadership Institute Radical itself?
Alinsky wrote about his book, Rules for Radicals: "The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away"
Shouldn't you be reading The Prince by Machiavelli instead?
Oct 27, 2:42 am