Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals

time to be re-reminded of Alinsky’s rules again.  What are your thoughts on them?  do you think they work, don’t work, are inline with the underlying principles of organizing, etc,.?

RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/8925/alinsky.htm

what kind of city am i?

A city is comprised of people.  If there were no people in the city, it would no longer be a city.

In Grace’s last few columns has been writing about examples of Cities of Hope built from the Heart.  From an almost carless city to a mercy-justice centered revolution, she has been sharing examples of what is possible for Detroit through examples from other cities as well as from people from other cities seeing Detroit with their Hearts.  The examples she shared were of people coming together, with a shared vision, and making dreams into reality.

Recently, I have also been reading the BBC News (British Broadcasting) and they have been reporting that the United States has been in a downturn, and they have used Detroit as an example of this.  They said that Detroit used to be a symbol of prosperity and Hope and now it is a fallen apart, broken down shell of a city.  They use Detroit as a symbol of what could happen to the United States, if the economy does not turn.

Detroiters, what do you see?

A few weeks ago, I attended a workshop that went as follows: the facilitator of the workshop had everyone sit in a circle.  The facilitator held out a crisp, new $50 bill.  She held it in front of her, showed it to everyone and said, “The instruction for this workshop is that whoever comes to up first and asks for the money, it’s will be theirs.”

There were about twenty adults in the room, sitting in the circle, and only two people stood up.  Everyone else stayed in their seats.  Of the two that stood up, they both took off running, and both asked for the money.  Then, one person slowed down and almost came to a stop.  The other person kept running and took the money.  A pause occurred.  And then everyone started talking.  “I thought that there would be other instructions.”  “I did not think that you were really going to give us the money.”  “I started to get up, but when no ones else did, I stayed.”  “I was tried and was not fully paying attention.”  “He tripped me!”  “I will never run for money.”  “I would not look cool running for money.”  “We don’t do that in my culture.”  “As soon as I saw the money, I knew that it was mine.”

The facilitator then said, “This is an example of opportunity.  I said exactly what I said, and you made your choices based on your past assumptions, justifications, and judgments.”

“Remember this: the way you do one thing is the way you do everything.”

Detroiters, how do you do things?

If , the way that I do one thing, is the way that I do everything, then it must also follow that, since the city is defined by its’ people, then the way that I do everything is the way that Detroit does everything.

Detroiters, what kind of city are you?

How do you do everything?  Do you go through life saying, “I was tired, not fully paying attention, and did not want to look uncool.” Or do you say, “As soon as I see that I could do something to improve the situation, even though it would require me to step outside of what I know, I will do it.”  Do you approach challenging situations saying, “No matter what I do, I will never make a difference anyways.”  Or do you say, “No matter what I do, I will follow my Heart, and do the best I can with what I have because I Am enough.”

Perception creates reality.  Look at how you see yourself and look at how you see Detroit.  If the way you do one thing is the way you do everything, then what kind of city are you?  If you are not the Detroit that you want to be, what steps will you take to become that city?

(a column that i wrote for Grace as a reflection on some of her columns.  not sure if it’ll be published…perhaps.)

“Foreign Spouses” formally known as “Mail-Order Brides”

How much would you pay for a wife?  What is your life like that you would give your picture and information to an organization where a man from another country would choose you from your picture to be his wife?  What is the value of a life? 

Over the past two decades, Taiwan has experienced an immigration boom composed largely of foreign spouses from China and Southeast Asian countries. These new immigrants, more than 90 percent of whom are female, presently number approximately 300,000, making them the fifth-largest demographic group in Taiwan. More than 190,000 come from China (including Hong Kong and Macau), with significant numbers also from Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand. (http://www.gio.gov.tw/taiwan-website/5-gp/yearbook/p238.html)  One in five newly-wedded Taiwanese are married to foreign spouses and, 3.5 percent of newborns are the children of foreign spouses. (http://www.bikhim.com/2005/chinese/internet/news/news_cont.asp?news_id=297&newsType=01)  Starting in the late 1980s many different organizations offer a chance for women to “start a better life” and men an opportunity to “find a good wife.” 

Think about it.  These women, for whatever reason, get on a plane for the first time; go to this brand new country where they cannot speak the language in order to marry a man they have never met.  These men, for whatever reason, find that their prospects of marriage are not good, go to another country to find a wife.  They have never met the woman, only seen a photo of her, invite her into their homes and marry her. 

On Saturday, I went to this organization that is run by the Good Shepherd Sisters (http://www.goodshepherd.org.tw/english/) to help with translation of their literature.  (Side note: I can do translations…as long as the pronunciation is by the characters…yay!  J)  While there I met some women who came to Taiwan to marry a Taiwanese man.  (On a purely intellectual level, it will be interesting to see 50 years from now what the ethnic makeup of Taiwan is.  The migration of women from Vietnam, Indonesia, China, and the Philippines will change the concept of “Taiwanese” completely.)  The women that I met were all so young!  They  decided (or their parents, economics, etc.)when they were 20 or 21 to immigrate to Taiwan to get married.  One woman told me that she wanted to seek a better life.  She was a farmer and felt that her chances of having a better life would be in Taiwan.  So when this man from Taiwan found her to be of his liking, she came to Taiwan.  She has been here for six year and has two children.  She chose to come over herself, so she was excited about her prospects.  She married a man who does cement work; her sister went to Korea and married a man who runs a store.  When she first came here, she could not speak the language and when her husband was at work, she had nothing to do and missed home.  The people from Good Shepherds contacted her and told her about the classes that they offer for foreign spouses.  Any thoughts on foreign spouses?           

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail-order_bride (Wikipedia’s discussion on mail-order brides)

http://db.npa.gov.tw/fore-eng/e_f_spouses/e_f_spouses.htm (Handbook of Living Information for Foreign Spouses in Taiwan)

http://www.goodwife.com/ (a website to find a ‘good wife’)

equals two movies with five endings.

I’m in Taiwan! The plane ride was about 16 hours, 24 hours with layovers. I was out of the airport last night by about 10pm Taiwan time (13 hour time difference from Eastern Time).

 

On the way over, I watched parts of five movies. Together they make for a very interesting two movies. For some reason, the idea of watching movies in the middle of the air while flying over Alaska made me think about the fact that I like to think of myself as an environmentalist, yet I am flying across the world on a plane. You’re thinking, “Of course! That is exactly what anyone would being thinking about while watching Japanese cartoon cars and X-Men 2.” Well just in case that wasn’t your first thought when watching Lamp House, below are some of my musings. Please share your thoughts with me as well.
Each of us arrive to the present moment with a set of ideals. Mine are that of a dreamer, a idealist, a believer in hope for joyfulled people, a craving for justice. Yet in so many ways I do not live these ideals. Does being a hypocrite make the ideals irrelevant or is the struggle towards living ideals enough? The privilege, the gift I have of being able to travel to Taiwan is awesome. That I can go across the world in less than 24 hours is incredible. That I can learn and bring back to the United States is such a blessing. Yet friends in Detroit are struggling to find jobs and pay the bills and global warming is submerging islands. I encourage people to recycle and compost, to take care of the earth, and I fly in a plane. What type of wisdom and knowledge will I gain that justifies or allows for my actions? What is the pull towards understanding that draws me to this space and what do I have to offer? Is my decision to be with my family and roots more valuable than finding ways to struggle with the family who is trying to live off a minimum wage job? Is struggling with the family struggling that is trying to live off a minimum wage job more valuable than being with my family, my roots? I am not asking these questions to dissuade traveling or acceptance of blessings, merely as a way of challenging and understanding what is of value and what is enough. I do not believe that there is a right or wrong answer, nor that each decision that I make is full of guilt or reckless self-indulgence. I do believe that everything is connected and the choices I make cannot only reflect my own wants. I guess it is about the process of walking the path that most reflects and internalizes Love. As the Bible says, there is a time for everything; perhaps then, the question that really needs to be asked is: “For the present, based on the past and the future, what gives life?”