Saul Alinsky pours for the Tea Party
I had heard a great deal about Saul Alinsky's book Rules for Radicals, but had never read them. The Right has demonized Alinsky, linking him to Obama. Curious to know more, I went to Wikipedia and found the Rules themselves.
As I read them, it occurred to me that these Rules are strategic, not ideological. Alinsky was of the Left, but the Rules have no party.
As I look around America in 2010, it occurs to me that the group currently using these Rules most effectively is the Tea Party.
From Wikipedia:
* Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.
* Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people. The result is confusion, fear, and retreat.
* Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.
* Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. "You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."
* Rule 5: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It's hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
* Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. "If your people aren't having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic."
* Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues.
* Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage."
* Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself.
* Rule 10: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, "Okay, what would you do?"
* Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don't try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.
40 Comments
Leave a comment
The Webby Awards
Person of the Year
Best Blog: Natl. Soc. of Newspaper Columnists
One of the year's best blogs -- Time
Year's best blog: Am. Assn. of Sunday and Feature Editors
Roger Ebert
Search
About this Archive
Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.
![lifeitself.jpg](https://web.archive.org/web/20120919190102im_/http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2011/07/lifeitself-thumb-175x265-36782.jpg)
Buy from Barnes & Noble
Buy from Borders
Buy from Indiebound
___________________
Read intro and buy
___________________
Buy from Amazon.com
Buy from Barnes & Noble
Buy from Borders
___________________
Tweet / Facebook
Pages
- "Helicopter." A film about his mother's death
- "The Sad Song," a touching video made with smoke and mirrors
- 88 Books That Shaped America
- A Monty Python Christmas
- Anne Keegan was a newspaper reporter
- Aujourd'hui, c'est 14 JUILLET
- Beyond the Mainstream: IV
- Britain's Got Talent 2012 auditions: Not what you may be expecting
- Chaz's final Cannes report
- David Lynch on watching movies on an iPhone
- Ebert Club All-Time Short Film Retrospective
- Everything Jeff saw in "Rear Window"
- Exclusive footage of the Last Supper
- Farewell, First Lady of the Air
- He lives in Detroit, in the old Packard plant
- I am Nicolas Cage's agent
- If you love The Daily Illini, it needs your help
- If you were a teenager in the 1950s...
- Infinity: ♬ That's about the size of it ♬
- Intro: "A Horrible Experience of Unbearable Length"
- Joey Lauren Adams on Joey Lauren Adams
- Many of my losing entries in the New Yorker Cartoon Caption Contest.
- Many of my losing entries in the New Yorker's daunting Cartoon Caption Contest
- Mike & Ike split up! Fans deeply disturbed
- My entry in the 342nd New Yorker Cartoon Caption Contest
- My video tour of Cambridge, York and London
- Obama ratings plunge with Lonely Guy video
- Oh, what a wonderful world
- On a photo of Marilyn at 12
- On reaching my father's age
- Orson Welles on Gregg Toland
- Oscar-worthy B-rated trailers
- Parents want to euthanize texting teenager
- Particle physics explained for you by Woody Allen and Dick Cavett
- Public Edition #9
- R. L. Burnside: A something man
- Raindrops in Singapore's Changi Airport
- Ramin Bahrani's first music video
- recent Two Thumbs Up® reviews
- Rude service: A Chicago dining tradition
- She photographs elderly animals
- Shep Smith again says something unexpected on Fox News
- Silent weirdness with the Alloy Orchestra
- Six of Herzog's less-known documentaries, streaming
- Strategies of a Pub Dog
- Superheroes always make three-point landings.
- The AP's Christy Lemire gives "two stars-thumbs down" to "The Dark Knight Rises"
- The Best B-Rated Movie Trailers Ever!
- The birthday of the cinema
- The Kirk Cameron film Piers Morgan didn't ask about
- The Lady from Shanghai
- The man inside the Nicolas Cage suit
- The story of a dog named Stanley
- The Strange World of Max X
- The world's smallest car chase
- the Your Movie Sucks™ files
- Tom Cruise's PSA for Scientology
- Tucson educator explains ban on Mexican-American studies
- Two very different poems about love
- Videos of every panel at Ebertfest 2012
- When movie montages get way out of hand
- Who goes there? A map of science-fiction
- Woody Guthrie, born July 14, 1912
- 3D
- Animation
- Archives
- Art in many forms
- "I don't know anything about architecture, but I know Brutalism when I see it"
- "In the Morning," a short fim inspired by Edward Hopper
- Gregg Toland, cinematographer
- Have you ever seen a Tintin story?
- Is The Phantom the only sexually-active superhero?
- Pogo's lament on Earth Day
- The world's largest indoor photo in 360 degrees
- Being here
- A photo of a little girl, and memories of two beloved aunts
- Hitchens is eloquent in the face of death
- How to be alone
- Jean Shepherd reads his original "A Christmas Story"
- Let's get together and feel all right
- My master thinks this is art
- To be young and mixed in America
- Werner Herzog meditates on The Bear
- West Virginia 8th grade test in 1931
- C'est moi
- "Memory." How my memoir "Life Itself" opens
- Best films 1967-2009: Siskel & Ebert & Scorsese
- Helicopter crashes in our house!
- I have no arms and I must play
- I read these in my bedazzed youth. Now it's the covers I love.
- I'll be honest and fight sqare
- If you were a kid in the 1950s, you remember...
- It's hard to believe it's been 12 years, Gene. I miss you.
- It's like so uncool to like sound like you know what you're like talking about
- Matinees and horse manure
- My drinking days, recalled in a noirish oil
- My other neighborhood on Red Arrow Highway
- My talk at TED 2011
- Portrait of the critic at home
- Siskel & Ebert and Howard Stern
- Cooking
- CyberWorld
- Directors
- A conversation with Atom Egoyan
- Claude Chabrol, RIP. The master at midpoint
- Herzog looks ahead to the Cave
- Jason Reitman in conversation
- Louis Malle: A do-it-yourself interview
- Manuel de Oliveira is 102: A tribute
- Scorsese on Elia Kazan: Watch the documentary
- The heart of the world and other organs: The singular cinema of Guy Maddin
- The secret of Jacques Tati
- Ebert Club
- Ebert Presents
- Ebert presents at the movies
- Ephemera
- Film Festivals
- Film classics
- Funny
- A personal letter from Steve Martin
- Aid rushed to movie overdose victims
- At this point, we all need a good laugh
- Attack of the Second-Rate Monsters
- Buddy Hackett: Up at drama, down at comedy.
- Dan and Dan: The Daily Mail Song
- David Mamet's "Lost Masterpieces of Porn," with your host, Ricky Jay
- Do the Creep!
- Down memory lane: Nic Cage goes batshit
- George W. Bush and Mike Tyson in "The President's Speech"
- Helen Mirren's breasts are the answer to everything
- Henny Youngman: "Doctor, it hurts when I do this!"
- How Michael Caine Speaks
- How to get a guy to notice you during sex (nsfw)
- I know every single word. So do you.
- I love it when I'm quoted correctly
- Push the dragon's head, and the marble runs down here, and...
- The 1982 Tron Holiday Special
- The helpful Robert Benchley
- Walken the Walk, by Walkin' Walken
- When Harry met Sally 2, with Billy Crystal and Helen Mirren
- Who cut the cheese?
- Yes! I won the New Yorker Cartoon Caption Contest!
- Literature
- "Fight Club," by Jane Austen
- "In Love with Raymond Chandler," by Margaret Atwood
- "The Premature Burial," by Edgar Allan Poe
- Gatsby in Scott Fitzgerald's handwriting
- In memory of the memories of W. G. Sebald
- Jack Kerouac: 3/12/22 - 10/21/69
- Let's hear it for the Oxford Comma!
- On 4/13/1906, Samuel Beckett started waiting
- Some bookstores just feel this way
- Stephen Colbert reads "The Lie," by T. C. Boyle
- Studs and Algren and Patterson, N.J.
- The Black Mask Boys
- The books everyone should read
- The enigmatic case of the oddly persistent mystery writer
- Walt Kelly, an immortal
- Werner Herzog reads "Go the F**k to Sleep"
- Why is film criticism important?
- London
- Meaning of it All
- Movies
- "As Penny Chenery's youngest son..."
- "Man in a Blizzard," by Jamie Stuart
- "Rosebud" was a rather tawdry device
- "Whose birthday, Lou?" "Yours, Bud!" "Mine?!? Waitaminit! You were born before me." "That's why your birthday is first." "Who's second?" "You. I was born first."
- 100 Great Moments in the Movies
- 36 Hitchcock death scenes all at once
- A double feature every day!
- All of Hitchcock's cameos
- Faster Pussycat! Kill! Kill!
- How Tom Cruise shot the skyscraper scene
- I could watch a Fellini film on the radio
- Jeff Bridges: The Starman within
- Marni Nixon: The secret voice of Hollywood
- Nick & Nora's hangover cure
- Revenge on "Revenge of the Sith"
- Richard Harris: Don't let it be forgot
- Robert Duvall: "Napalm, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that"
- Rock Hudson's secret
- Street scene: Movie theater, snow, rain, promise
- The 100 greatest movie threats of all time
- The Akira Kurosawa Song
- The Bechtel Test
- The Duke on Rooster: "My first good part in 20 years"
- The shower scene
- Why Pauline Kael never saw a movie twice
- Movies free online
- "Cyrano de Bergerac" (1950)
- "Inspired by Bret Easton Ellis," by Matthew Ross
- "Love Serenade"
- "Plan 9 from Outer Space," by the Worst Director of All Time
- "Sita Sings the Blues"
- "The Corporation"
- Dante's "Inferno," a 1911 Italian film with music by Tangerine Dream
- Freddie Mercury: The Untold Story
- Harold Lloyd: A rare early short and an interview
- John Huston's "Beat The Devil"
- Pauline Kael's favorite film: "Menilmontant"
- Peter Cook and Dudley Moore in Richard Lester's "The Bed-Sitting Room"
- Rene Clair's "And Then There Were None"
- Sherlock Holmes: Dressed To Kill (1946)
- The Kennel Murder Case
- Thomas Edison's "Frankenstein" (1910)
- Music
- "Chanda Mama" around the world
- "Gimme Shelter" by Playing for Change
- "Making Giant Hands," by Dog and Panther
- "Redemption Song" around the world
- "Swan Lake" by the Great Chinese Circus
- "What'll I do?" by Julie London
- A Labor Day concert
- A xylophone in a forest
- Bob Marley: One Love around the world
- Concert for an uncertain world
- Did Leonard Cohen save my life?
- Ella: It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing
- Esperanza Spalding. Yes.
- Four-year-old Jonathan conducts conducts the Chandler Symphony Orchestra
- Freddie Mercury vs. the Platters & Wayne's World
- George Shearing, 1919-2011
- Happiness is being on the road again
- I could listen to Ronnie play guitar all day long
- I went to school with Andy Cohen
- I'll never smoke weed with Willie again
- If Wagner's "Ride of the Valkyries" had been a tango
- Jammin' cellos: Stjepan Hauser and Luka Sulic
- Joan Baez: There is a clearing where one is almost happy
- John Prine: A concert in Ireland
- John Prine: American Legend
- Jonathan is three and loves great music
- Joni MItchell: "Big Yellow Taxi"
- Julie London: The torch is burning
- New Year's with Steve: In tribute to a great heart
- Que sera, sera
- Sing a song of newspapers
- Sonny Terry & Brownie McGhee
- Still Bill: The life and songs of Bill Withers
- Sweet Dreams, Baby: For Patsy Cline
- The Platters perform "The Twist"
- The night Hank Williams came to town
- The triumph of the day-fly
- The ukulele orchestra of Great Britain
- Tom Waits serenades New York harbor
- We need Punk Vaudeville. Jarmean?
- Won't you ride in my little red wagon?
- Yankee Doodle Dandy: Born on the Fourth of July
- Your Christmas morning concert
- ♫ Deck us all with Boston Charlie, Walla Walla, Wash., and Kalamazoo! ♫
- ♫ Don't know much about history... ♫
- ♫ My funny valentine, sweet comic valentine, you make me smile with my ♥
- ♫ Nestor Torres and the spirit in the music
- New Yorker captions
- News
- Newspapers
- O'Rourke's magazine
- Oscars
- Pages for Twitter
- People
- "By the age of 50, every man has the face he deserves."
- "It's not like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde," Cher said.
- Bill Mauldin, American
- Bob Hope: Thanks for the memories
- Bronson: Coming of age in Scoop Town
- Dorothy Dandridge: In Memory
- Falling in Love Again: Marlene Dietrich
- Farewell, First Lady of the Air
- Keanu thought his two years were running out
- Kirk Douglas: I've killed so many Romans, so many Vikings, so many Indians...
- Lars von Trier, meet Klausi Kinski
- Leslie Nielsen, RIP. "And don't call me Shirley"
- Liza, when all was still ahead
- Mae West and Rock Hudson: "Baby, It's Cold Outside!"
- Maria Schneider comes to America
- Orson Welles sells peas
- Pete Postlethwaite: 1946-2011
- Robert Mitchum remembers Marilyn Monroe
- Susannah York, 1939-2011
- The last days of Tiny Tim
- Werner & Erroll & the mystery of Ed Gein's grave
- Who is Billy "Silver Dollar" Baxter?
- Woody Allen interviews Billy Graham
- Zuppke of Illinois: A football coach
- Photos in need of a caption
- Photos in need of comment
- Poetry
- "Hell is a Lonely Place," by Charles Bukowski
- "Nirvana," by Charles Bukowski
- "Poetry Readings," by Charles Bukowski
- "Portrait of a Lady," by T. S. Eliot
- "The Perfect High," by Shel Silverstein
- "This Be the Verse," by Philip Larkin (nsfw)
- "You being in love," by e. e. cummings
- 'Twas the Night Before Pogo
- All the world's a stage
- Dylan Thomas goes not gently
- Emily Dickinson's life closed twice before its close
- Evening Prayer
- Good-bye to All That
- Gray's "Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard"
- I love this sweet grandmother
- In Just-Spring, when the world is mud-luscious...
- Marilyn Monroe and Carl Sandburg
- Remembering Bukowski
- Samuel Taylor Coleridge
- Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?
- So anyway, Charles Bukowski, Errol Morris and Roger Ebert walk into this bar...
- So much depends upon a red wheel barrow
- W. B. Yeats: "Horseman, pass by!"
- Walt Whitman: I sing the body electric
- When icicles hang by the wall
- William Blake: Of innocence and experience
- e. e. cummings lives in a pretty how heaven
- e. e. cummings talks dirty (nsfw)
- Politics
- Christopher Hitchens at length on BBC's Newsnight
- Pogo says it for the very first time
- Saul Alinsky pours for the Tea Party
- The Battle Hymn of the Tea Party
- The financial crisis explained (nsfw)
- The rich are waging war on America
- The smoker and the Cheshire Cat
- Update on the TSA breast milk incident
- Will Rogers on unemployment
- Willam F. Buckley was not an Ayn Rand fan
- Satire
- Science and not
- Ants have built-in pedometers
- Do Creationists make good science students?
- If Disney had animated mushrooms
- Our beautiful, awesome, terrifying universe
- Snakes on mathematical planes
- Starting with one cell, we arrive at Prof. Hawking
- The God Gene. A breakthrough
- The python's dinner
- We are part of all worlds
- Werner Herzog explains radioactive albino crocodiles to Stephen Colbert
- Sex and stuff
- Siskel and Ebert
- Letterman, Siskel & Ebert go door-to-door in New Jersey
- Letterman: "The lovely & talented Siskel & Ebert"
- Siskel & Ebert & Stern
- Siskel & Ebert fight over a toy train
- Siskel & Ebert on home video in 1988
- Siskel & Ebert on how to be a film critic
- Siskel & Ebert recommend great summer movies
- Siskel & Ebert's 1980s Holiday Gift Guides
- Siskel & Ebert's animated appearance on "The Critic"
- When Siskel & Ebert were on "Sneak Previews"
- Strange
- Television
- Trailers
- Videos
- What could go wrong?
Categories
- 3D (5)
- Best film lists--and worst (16)
- Books and reading (5)
- Books and such (3)
- Cannes 2009 (10)
- Cannes 2010 (10)
- Darwin, My Hero (9)
- Deeper into movies (36)
- Film festivals (3)
- Just for Twitter (1)
- My Life and Times (47)
- My Old Gang (13)
- People (23)
- Political (32)
- Popular entries (17)
- Specific films (27)
- Supposedly funny (13)
- The Immensity (32)
- The Seasons (3)
- The Webopolis (8)
- The show (9)
- Toronto 2009 (11)
- Toronto 2011 (6)
Monthly Archives
- July 2012 (4)
- June 2012 (5)
- May 2012 (6)
- April 2012 (4)
- March 2012 (4)
- February 2012 (5)
- January 2012 (4)
- December 2011 (8)
- November 2011 (7)
- October 2011 (4)
- September 2011 (11)
- August 2011 (6)
- July 2011 (6)
- June 2011 (4)
- May 2011 (6)
- April 2011 (3)
- March 2011 (4)
- February 2011 (4)
- January 2011 (7)
- December 2010 (6)
- November 2010 (4)
- October 2010 (7)
- September 2010 (12)
- August 2010 (5)
- July 2010 (5)
- June 2010 (5)
- May 2010 (13)
- April 2010 (6)
- March 2010 (5)
- February 2010 (4)
- January 2010 (7)
- December 2009 (9)
- November 2009 (4)
- October 2009 (7)
- September 2009 (15)
- August 2009 (9)
- July 2009 (7)
- June 2009 (6)
- May 2009 (13)
- April 2009 (7)
- March 2009 (7)
- February 2009 (10)
- January 2009 (6)
- December 2008 (5)
- November 2008 (8)
- October 2008 (6)
- September 2008 (6)
- August 2008 (6)
- July 2008 (4)
- June 2008 (5)
- May 2008 (11)
- April 2008 (4)
I have been watching the Tea Party's employment of Alinsky's rules for the past couple of years. For a while I had thought this was somewhat ironic, as Alinsky was a Jewish leftist, and has often been reviled by the right.
However, looking at Rule #11, one realizes that there is no irony whatsoever:
"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don't try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame."
Obama - the target - could be easily targeted via guilt-by-association by focusing on his association with Alinsky's ideas. In fact, it is this association that led to some of the initial claims of Obama's "socialism" (and it didn't help Obama in the eyes of the right that both he AND H. Clinton shared this association - link below). It's almost like while evidence of guilty associations were being searched for, these handy, movement-fueling rules were accidentally discovered along the way.
---
Obama, Clinton and Alinsky: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/24/AR2007032401152.html
American Thinker on the Alinsky/Obama connection:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/24/AR2007032401152.html
World News Daily suggests that SOCIALIST AGITATOR Saul "The Red" Alinsky suggested Obama enter Harvard:
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=76170
I don't know. I think the left is still the master at these rules, especially number 11.
"* Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don't try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame."
Defining all tea partiers as racists despite no evidence of the sort? That's a pretty good strategy. It's hard to counter because even when the tea partiers show that they're not racist (and, let's be honest, they're not), the left can still go back and say "nope, you are racist." It's a joke the way political debate is now, and one of the worst perpetrators is Roger Ebert.
Ebert: Not all Tea Partiers are racists. Unfortunately, those who are not never seem to object to the racist signs and caricatures of their friends.
Two other links:
Via the Chicago Tea Party: Did Saul Alinsky create the new blueprint for modern politics? What is the link between Alinsky and the rise of Barack Obama? What ethical, strategic, and tactical lessons can tea party activists and other liberty loving Americans learn from the writings of Saul Alinsky?
http://teapartychicago.netboots.net/events/2010-06-04/community-organizing-101-lessons-from-saul-alinsky
Conservatives Find Town Hall Strategy in Leftist Text: Organizers See 'Rules for Radicals' as Blueprint for Taking Down 'Obamacare'
http://washingtonindependent.com/54554/conservatives-find-town-hall-strategy-in-leftist-text
Sheesh Jake way to miss a point!!
Rule#11 includes "Identify a responsible individual" & Jake proceeds to use the entire Tea Party conflagration as the example of identifying an INDIVIDUAL?
Hilarious. How can anyone have a rational argument w/ these types?
Ebert: Not all Tea Partiers are racists. Unfortunately, those who are not never seem to object to the racist signs and caricatures of their friends.
It's hard to decipher your answer. You seem to say that you don't believe tea partiers are racist, but at the same time you claim they are because they don't object to supposed racist signs. And it is supposed because there really isn't evidence to show that tea partiers have brought racist signs or shouted racist comments at any of the rallies. There are signs that people assume are racist, but those people are trying to patch together a narrative. The congressmen who claim racist things were said to them in DC never had any evidence to back up their claims. And it's really hard to concretely know that any racist sign that shows up to a tea party event is by a tea partier because some individuals have tried to infiltrate the tea party rallies to make the tea party look racist. For an organization that is supposedly racist, why would people need to infiltrate the rallies to make the tea party appear racist? Unless, well, there haven't been actual signs of racism at the rallies and therefore people need to create this narrative.
The worst part about your reply is that you were blatantly dishonest. Your statement goes against what you've been saying for the past year. For example, a tweet from March 20th: "I wonder how many additional "yes" votes the racist, spitting, cursing Tea Party louts inspired." And another, from March 21: "The Tea Party mob is racist, and let's frankly say so." Come on Roger, let's be honest for once. I love your movie reviews. I own a couple of your books on film. There is no one I would rather go to for his/her insight on film than you. Your genius in the field is unsurpassed. However, your lunacy and dishonest as you attempt to bash all things Tea Party is silly and pathetic.
Ebert: A man holding a racist sign at a Democratic Party rally would be quickly made to feel extremely unwelcome. You seem to believe such signs are fakes at Tea Party rallies, where they are common. Why don't the non-racist Party Members ask them to leave? You have to admit, it's a good question.
Jake, I disagree with you that what you're describing fits #11, and I imagine we differ in our opinions of the subjects of this post (I refuse to associate them with honorable patriots). You are right, though, I think, in calling the racist argument a straw man, at least to a degree. Of course some are, because conservatism in general calls forth scared and hateful individuals, but I'd say these folks are actually less racist in general than the average body of Republicans. While the GOP stays rooted in the Christ, Corporations and KKK conservatism of the south, these guys are much more of the individualist, libertarian breed, more west/southwestern, hating government interference more than begging for welfare to be given to rich white men.
The problem is that, while they claim this, they also love laws that demand handing over papers for any reason at all, bringing federal troops en masse (that's French, sorry) to their (or, more likely, other) states. They want total liberty for their in-group and total fascism against all others. This is that confusion-inducement Alinsky mentions, extremism in every direction. That's also the basis for the movement's appeal, in my opinion. It allows any frustration to be voiced through it, no matter how incompatible it is with the others also being voiced.
So yes, if you're pissed that a black man's the president and you're unhappy even though your whole family's white, or that some Mexican's getting $3 an hour to do backbreaking work while you have to struggle by on ten-times his monthly wages in unemployment checks, these people will welcome you and let you yell, and as long as the movement stays amorphous and leaderless, both the accusations and the denials will be valid, but at least according to the talking points its posters proclaim, the thing itself isn't inherently racist, it just, as Ebert points out, feeds off hatred.
So good point.
Ebert: Why don't the non-racist Party Members ask them to leave? You have to admit, it's a good question.
Good question indeed, Roger. The answer is even better. They do. The racist members do ask them to leave. For example, take this article from the Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050405168.html
Key paragraphs:
"Judson Phillips, the founder of Tea Party Nation, said that at the heart of the effort to counter racism accusations is dissociating from protesters who cross the line. Around the time of the health-care vote, FreedomWorks and Tea Party Nation worked to form a federation of tea party groups to coordinate strategy and do a better job sticking to a similar message, organizers said.
At a protest in Nashville, Phillips said, there were "a couple of signs -- which I'm not convinced weren't plants from the other side -- that were really tasteless and inappropriate." The people who carried them "were told to put their signs down and leave. . . . They were literally thrown out of the event," he said."
That's right Roger. They are trying to dissociate themselves from the supposed racist fringe of the party. They have asked those carrying racist signs (but might not have been tea partiers) to leave. Of course, that's just one article, but it's a pretty good article to counter your outrageous claims that non-racist tea partiers are complicit in the supposed racism. In my defense, I'm no tea partier and I find the whole group a big nuisance. However, I believe ideas should counter any opinion one thinks is unpopular and not baseless attacks towards the group's mindset.
Brilliant article! At first I worried that raising this point could inadvertently help the Tea Party leaders who seem to be neglecting Rule 7 about tactics that drag on too long, but then I figured that this might be balanced by rank and file Tea Party followers who finally wake up to the fact that the rules are used to manipulate them as much as the opposition. Rule 1 has made them think they are really the majority, Rule 9 has them terrified of nonexistent threats, and Rule 2 has them sucking up guff from demagogues who are obviously talking down to people they don't really have anything in common with.
Well, TM, it looks like I missed one word in the rule. Individual. Of course, the rule also states not to go after abstract institutions like corporations and bureaucracies. And one could see the tea party as an organization of individuals, unlike corporations and bureaucracies. But, that's splitting hairs. Your attempt to imply that I am not on the same intellectual level as you because the rule carried the word "individual" neglects to address the point I was making. And if you decide the rule only encompasses individuals, then we only need to look into the left's ridicule of individuals such as Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, etc, etc, etc. All in all, your dismissive comment was pointless. You are going with the "Wizard of OZ" style of arguing, that of "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." Ignore the meat of my argument and attack a sole, inconsequential part. Kudos.
Ebert is either an idiot or an intellectual ho or both.
Saul Alinsky was a known communist and he formulated his Rules for Radicals based on the works of Antonio Gramsci, a known Italian Marxist agitator.
I hope Ebert's expertise on movies is substantially better than his understanding of history.
Ebert: Here's an Alinsky quote for you:
"I've never joined any organization—not even the ones I've organized myself. I prize my own independence too much. And philosophically, I could never accept any rigid dogma or ideology, whether it's Christianity or Marxism. One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're right.' If you don't have that, if you think you've got an inside track to absolute truth, you become doctrinaire, humorless and intellectually constipated. The greatest crimes in history have been perpetrated by such religious and political and racial fanatics, from the persecutions of the Inquisition on down to Communist purges and Nazi genocide."
In any event, what do his politics have to do with the Tea Party using his Rules? Given how much the TeePees mention Alinsky, it's a cinch they know about them.
BTW, Saul Alinsky dedicated his book, "Rules for Radicals," to Satan:
"Lest we forget at least an over the shoulder acknowledgement of the very first radical, from all our legends, mythology, and history … the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer."
You'll have to be more specific about what constitutes racism nowadays. The word has lost its potency through overuse, much like "fascism".
I thnk Fox News may be the most guilty of employing these tactics
Rule #1 reminded me of what a university student union leader said when asked about radical student groups on campus:
"Two guys and a $100 can look like a revolution" - Paul Normandeau
Huh! Where'd my short and sweet one go? Coming up?
Was gonna add a rule 13, but forgot what it was. Oh! Yeah! 13. Never use people expecting money for their cause. And if your opponents are NOT expecting money, you're a goner.
Am I just making this up, or did we not wipe out Supervisorial boards in 2 different counties in 2 different states this way, virtually overnight?
I'm in agreement with Jake here. I love Roger's film reviews, even when I disagree with them, and I enjoy much of what he writes, but having followed his Twitter page for a steady two months of continual bashing/insulting of the Republicans and particularly the Tea Party movement.....I just don't see anything positive that is ever going to grow out of all the dirt that he flings. He's quoted as saying "The Tea Party mob is racist." For someone who is as skilled with language as Roger is, that doesn't convey to me that he feels that a small percentage of people associated with the Tea Party are racist. I'm not a literary expert, but that statement seems to paint the whole movement with pretty broad brushstrokes.
I just want to go on record as saying that I consider myself a liberal and that I agree with a lot of the individual statements that Roger makes, but the incessant negativity and bashing and attacking just wore out my ability to really listen. I wish he'd use his platform in a more positive manner, on both sides of the issues because he has a great ability to do so and I personally think he'd have a greater impact doing so.
How often does the right create a "concerned citizen's group" who tend to 'protest' laws and regulations aimed at companies/corporations re: polluting, discrimination, etc.? And usually these concerned groups are funded by those very companies? I'm waiting for a concerned citizen's group to show up this week to protest anything introduced or suggested against bp or other oil companies.
"It's hard to decipher your answer. You seem to say that you don't believe tea partiers are racist, but at the same time you claim they are because they don't object to supposed racist signs."
I understand why it was hard for you to understand Ebert's answer, Jake. Maybe point form would work better for you:
- some Tea Party folks hold up racist signs (making them racists.)
- other Tea Party folks aren't very reliable at making the racist people in the first group feel unwelcome (making them, at best, indifferent to the racism of their fellows.)
- If group 1 (the racists) and group 2 (the people indifferent to racism) make up the majority of the Tea Party movement (assertion), then, yes, I believe it would be fair to call it a racist movement.
Is the assertion true? I think so and so does Ebert. More importantly, there is nothing dishonest or crazy about believing that assertion -- it could be true, and there's at least some evidence that it is true.
Jeez Jake, what a crock to call Roger's original answer "hard to decipher". Do you believe there are hidden codes in his answer? (Hint: THERE'S NOTHING TO DECIPHER!)
No ciphers involved whatsoever.
I'm starting to think Jake is also JakeD @WaPo, but he's trying to be polite for Roger; same type of faulty arguments.
Hmmm...definitely seems like Sarah Palin's rules of the road, especially Rule numbers 5, 10 and 11.
We have to define racism properly. No one in the tea party fits within the old definition of a racist: someone motivated by racial hatred to commit acts of violence or other injustices against black people.
The tea party is compromised of people who would have 30 or 40 years ago been the average American--that is to say, not particularly malicious, yet filled with the firm conviction that there are significant differences between people of different races and the white race is superior.
Today, that belief is the province of people on the right. Racism has also become counter-cultural, so it is considered somewhat edgy and cool in certain circles to tell racial jokes and to raise one's eyebrows at the prevailing mainstream consensus of racial equality.
Today's tea partiers are just a bit behind the times. In the 1960s, there were plenty of liberals who, with all good intentions, patronized black people no end. That's another form of racism--ironically, the kind that drove Clarence Thomas to the right. It is that kind of unthinking, non-vicious racism that the tea party traffics in.
" It's hard to counter because even when the tea partiers show that they're not racist (and, let's be honest, they're not)"
"there really isn't evidence to show that tea partiers have brought racist signs or shouted racist comments at any of the rallies."
Jake is quite clearly a crazy person
you sir, are trollin'
Call it trollin', call it trying to hold a public figure accountable for his quotes, so be it. I can deal with what you're saying precisely because many of you are not giving any evidence for your positions, but rather parroting what the anti-tea party talking points are.
And Roger, I see you posted one of the comments I made late last night, but the other one is not up yet and I hope it gets up soon. The one linking to the Washington Post article that shows that the Tea Party organizers do take a proactive approach to get racist signs out of their rallies. If you can't allow comments that link to other newspapers, I understand. However, if you can't allow comments that disprove one of your arguments, that's inexcusable.
Never mind. Just saw that. I'm sorry I was mistaken. Thanks for your fairness and integrity.
It's not that either sentence in Mr. Ebert's comment about racist TPers is hard to "decipher". It's that in the first statement he acknowledges that not all TPers are racist, then in the second he accuses them of being racist (by omission as it were)!
It was a sly way of reining in his broad baseless attack, while still promoting it. And it was confusing.
I wonder if TPers don't object to racist speech as much because they understand free speech. . . I mean, there are racists with mouths everywhere, so what? Discredit them logically and move on.
No Les, he was very simply asking where are the TPers who object to the extremists? And don't tell me it isn't racist to hold signs that say "First Kenyan President" or "Barry HUSSEIN Obama". Nor is it a free speech issue; no one's telling them how to run their own rallies or protests. But if the racist rhetoric is accepted by them (the more anger the better) then they can hardly complain if their image is fashioned as a bitter and bigoted movement.
And not to kick a dead horse here, but the TPers continually crack me up how they cloak themselves in Founding Fathers attire and say "Let's take our country back to 1776". Who wants to explain to them that back in the days of the early Republic politicians would be far less sympathetic to their voice than they are today?
"I don't know. I think the left is still the master at these rules, especially number 11."
Let me get this straight. You're saying that "The Left", in attacking the Tea Party in general for its widespread use and general acceptance of overtly racist messages, is somehow utilizing a strategy that instructs one to avoid attacking an organization in favor of personifying an individual.
Sorry, but that would actually be the exact opposite of employing Rule 11.
As for this bullshit argument involving the ludicrous strawman accusation that "all TPers are racist", allow me to break it down.
- The individuals of the tea party that make overtly racist statements and arguments are indeed racists.
- The individuals of the tea party that would not make such statements or utilize such arguments are probably not racists, but their general unwillingness to stand up to the racists in their house makes them cowards.
Those rules look like they're chapter headings from a political strategy textbook. You are right, they have no party affiliation.
Maybe the TPers who aren't "standing up" to the racists protesting are just busy people who have better things to do than wag their finger at racist. It's not like there's a membership registry for the TP. It's just a neologism trying to describe a social phenomenon.
I've been to some TP events and I just want to lend my personal attendance to "the cause" for a bit and get back to my life. I don't want to go through the crowd accosting everyone with a ___ist sign.
Do you address everyone who has an objectionable opinion at your work? school? church? and every other organization you belong to? It's untenable!
So, as I said, logically discredit the racists and start discussing the legitimate issues surrounding the TPers. Stop obfuscating valid POVs by trying to create guilt by association with racism.
For more info on "the cause" as I see it, visit www.downsizedc.org
Peace!
I just wanted to say that it seems a great shame that some of the first comments on this post are disingenuous and manipulative rubbish by the likes of "Jake" and "Peter".
Mr Ebert, in an attempt to counterbalance their malign presence, allow me to say that I love your social commentary pieces. They strike me as being both wise and humane. American public discourse has been dominated for far too long by a brand of so-called conservatism that is nothing of the kind. It is good to hear someone, anyone - let alone someone as articulate as yourself - speaking out against them.
(For those who want to see the damage that the "Reagan Revolution" and its lackeys have done, try looking here for a small sample:
http://www.alternet.org/story/147262/6_shocking_ways_conservatives_helped_cause_the_economic_destruction_of_america/)
Tea Party Movies - a celebration of an American movement
http://chinokino.blogspot.com/2010/07/tea-party-movies-celebration-of.html
Roger...
You are correct - but the Tea Party is now just giving back what the left has been dishing out since Obama was nominated.
I point to these three rules specifially:
Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose.
Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.
Keith Olbermanns "World's Worst People" was on long before the tea parties. On MSNBC' the ED SHOW just yesterday I heard Michelle Backman referred to as a "psychotalker", Shawn Hannity was called "Slant head" and Sarah Palin was called "an idiot"
This sort of targetted ridicule is FAR common and relentless on MSNBC than by the tea parties or anyone on the right. Alinsky was a "community organizer" and this book was written as an instruction manual for them. 'nuff said.
Right on, Paul, and I'm sorry it took me so long to find this article. Do the Tea Partiers adhere to the 11 rules as much as some claim? Are they sometimes unfair in their tactics? My answer to both questions is: I don't know, but I certainly hope so. About time.
I came across this article while looking for proof that Saul Alinsky praised Satan, or Lucifer in the preface to his handbook. I see a few people quoted that but I could not find proof that it is true. When you google that, hundreds of sites come up regarding it. I had to scroll a few pages until I came to something which looked reputable (Roger Ebert) Any authentic websites or just B.S. perpetrated by fearmongers?
Great article, Mr. Ebert.
Funny, just today, the NY Times published an article about "FreedomWorks, the Washington advocacy group that has done more than any other organization to build the Tea Party movement." According to the article, "New employees receive a required-reading list that includes 'Rules for Radicals,' by Saul Alinsky."
See the full article at
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/26/us/politics/26freedom.html
Um, these look racist to me. Especially the ones depicting Obama as a monkey and / or witch doctor.
http://www.google.com/images?q=racist+tea+party+signs&oe;=utf-8&rls;=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client;=firefox-a&safe;=strict&um;=1&ie;=UTF-8&source;=og&sa;=N&hl;=en&tab;=wi&biw;=1024&bih;=562&safe;=on
I've been disappointed, Mr. Ebert, by your demonization of Republicans and anybody on the right. The Tea Party is going to have some bad apples -- people are bad apples, on all sides.
Here's a Democratic party official calling Andrew Breitbart "gay." Nice:
http://biggovernment.com/amarcus/2010/10/25/identified-right-nation-protester-who-called-andrew-breitbart-gay-is-a-democrat-party-official/
Let's not pretend the left are all wonderful and the right are all evil. I used to respect you, but since I've been reading your tweets, I don't anymore. Truly balanced people understand that politicians are generally out for themselves, and are able to look at the other side without demonizing them entirely. I'm pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and pro a lot of other things you probably are, but I also think there's a lot of wasteful government spending. Does that make me an evil Republican or an evil Independent (I can't vote Republican because of their positions on social issues)?
Ebert: The Tea Party uses Saul's playbook. I said so. That's all.
Alinsky, Goebbels, Hoffman, what have you - The tactics are all common sense to running a grass-roots campaign, especially when you have minimal control of the media...
Regarding the "racist" tea party folks - I've spoken with people at the meetings, and it seems like nobody knows the folks on the lunatic fringe... And it is very difficult/impolite to just ask someone to leave... Quite a few "conservative" folks are too polite for their own good. And until recently they had little idea about how to actually organize a coherent message/group.
Crying "racist" is also a very effective way to detract attention from the Tea Party "group's" message - small government, fewer and simpler regulations, lower taxes, and the rest. People knee-jerk when they hear some words. That's why they get used so much... Saying that a black politician is a crooked incompetent isn't racist any more than saying the same about a white (or hispanic or asian...) politician... But it's still effective...
When I suggest to someone that they need to read something called "Steal this Book" to understand how to get a message across, they usually look at me with horror... And after they've read it, they tell other people to read it.
The grass roots campaigns of the 1960s and 1970s were essentially co-opted by people in search of raw power - today's grass roots campaigns are full of people who want to see things simplified, with an emphasis on common sense instead of "you must follow the nonsensical rule, because it is the rule, or else."
re: She is an idiot about whom TPartiers should be deeply ashamed: "Outrage at Bachmann Over Huma Hit." Good luck dumkopf.
According to media pundits, Michelle Bachman is the new Joe McCarthy after addressing the issue of Huma Abedin’s links to the Muslim Brotherhood via her family.
However, in her letter to Ellison, Bachmann explained that much more was behind her concern about Abedin than guilt-by-association based on family members: “The concerns about the foreign influence of immediate family members is such a concern to the U.S. Government that it includes these factors as potentially disqualifying conditions for obtaining a security clearance, which undoubtedly Ms. Abedin has had to obtain to function in her position. For us to raise issues about a highly-based U.S. Government official with known immediate family connections to foreign extremist organizations is not a question of singling out Ms. Abedin. In fact, these questions are raised by the U.S. Government of anyone seeking a security clearance.”
And in Abedin’s case, there are ample reasons for raising these questions. Her father, Syed Z. Abedin, was a professor in Saudi Arabia who founded the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs, an organization supported by the Muslim World League, a Brotherhood organization. Her mother, Saleha Mahmoud Abedin, is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood, the Brotherhood’s adjunct organization for women. The Brotherhood itself is in its own words, according to a captured internal document, dedicated to “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house.”
As Bachmann noted, “these questions are raised by the U.S. Government of anyone seeking a security clearance.” So why should Huma Abedin be exempt? Would an official who had family connections with the Ku Klux Klan or the Aryan Nations be similarly exempt from scrutiny? If not, why should someone with familial connections to a group dedicated to “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within”?
It is the same political correctness and liberal appeasement of Muslims that has been cited in the Fort Hood shooter investigations that prevents an honest assessment of the risk to Americans that Bachman attempts to address. Oh, and by the way, history has shown that McCarthy was essentially correct.