Conservatives' Favorite New Intellectual

Puppycow · 13th August 2009, 01:08 AM

Not exactly new, but newly popular among conservatives.

Has anyone else noticed this recent trend among conservatives promoting radical leftist Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals to fellow conservatives?

One example:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/arti...t_for_Trolling

Search Google News for Alinsky or Rules for Radicals.

http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009...r_radicals.php

http://washingtonindependent.com/545...n-leftist-text

UnrepentantSinner · 13th August 2009, 01:33 AM

It is old news, but I noticed the meme propigating during the primaries in '08 and being applied to anyone who they considered "Leftist". Mhaze has brought RfR up numerous times in the AGW threads and not only had most of the folks he was accusing had not read it, but they hadn't even heard of Alinsky.

gtc · 13th August 2009, 01:57 AM

Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner

It is old news, but I noticed the meme propigating during the primaries in '08 and being applied to anyone who they considered "Leftist". Mhaze has brought RfR up numerous times in the AGW threads and not only had most of the folks he was accusing had not read it, but they hadn't even heard of Alinsky.

This is different, not smearing liberals with the idea that if they use his tactics then they embrace his ends but using Alinsky's tactics in support of Conservative ends.

The three articles are very interesting.

Puppycow · 13th August 2009, 02:19 AM

Originally Posted by gtc

This is different, not smearing liberals with the idea that if they use his tactics then they embrace his ends but using Alinsky's tactics in support of Conservative ends.

The three articles are very interesting.

Right. Last year he was basically a bogeyman for conservatives. Now he's the model for their new conservative activism.

UnrepentantSinner · 13th August 2009, 02:22 AM

Originally Posted by gtc

This is different, not smearing liberals with the idea that if they use his tactics then they embrace his ends but using Alinsky's tactics in support of Conservative ends.

The three articles are very interesting.

Oooo! That is an interesting twist. I have to read the articles when I get home.

maxpower1227 · 13th August 2009, 05:21 AM

I've never heard the words "conservative" and "intellectual" in the same sentence before...

.....seriously though, I thought this was going to be about Jonathan Krohn

linusrichard · 13th August 2009, 05:52 AM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Right. Last year he was basically a bogeyman for conservatives. Now he's the model for their new conservative activism.

Right, and liberals aren't allowed to complain, because Hillary Clinton wrote a paper about him umpty years ago. Brilliant.

Darth Rotor · 13th August 2009, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by maxpower1227

I've never heard the words "conservative" and "intellectual" in the same sentence before...
.....seriously though, I thought this was going to be about Jonathan Krohn

Educate yourself:
William F Buckley
Edmund Burke

for starters.

gtc · 13th August 2009, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by linusrichard

Right, and liberals aren't allowed to complain, because Hillary Clinton wrote a paper about him umpty years ago. Brilliant.

The second link talks about the impact of his writings on Obama too.

I remember reading about how the Republicans mastered direct marketing based on the widespread deployment of computers in the 1980s at the expense of the Democrats. I don't know how true that was but it sounds like maybe the Democrats have a lead in this new technique.

Brainster · 13th August 2009, 11:13 AM

Every political party after suffering a stinging defeat will cast about for reasons for that defeat and ways to avoid it again in the future. They will find especially appealing the notion that what they have to do is adopt the opposition's tactics (but not their positions). Remember how the liberals after 2004 embraced Lakoff's book about "framing" the issues properly? Why did they endorse his book? Because it offered them all gain, no pain.

I suspect that the same thing is happening here; an effort to avoid making painful decisions about which parts of conservative dogma are hurting the GOP at the polls (hint: stem cells), in favor of the notion that all they have to do is adopt the tactics used by the Democrats.

Darth Rotor · 13th August 2009, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Every political party after suffering a stinging defeat will cast about for reasons for that defeat and ways to avoid it again in the future. They will find especially appealing the notion that what they have to do is adopt the opposition's tactics (but not their positions). Remember how the liberals after 2004 embraced Lakoff's book about "framing" the issues properly? Why did they endorse his book? Because it offered them all gain, no pain.

I suspect that the same thing is happening here; an effort to avoid making painful decisions about which parts of conservative dogma are hurting the GOP at the polls (hint: stem cells), in favor of the notion that all they have to do is adopt the tactics used by the Democrats.

In a nutshell: the old "form over substance" policy.

Dr Adequate · 13th August 2009, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by Brainster

I suspect that the same thing is happening here; an effort to avoid making painful decisions about which parts of conservative dogma are hurting the GOP at the polls (hint: stem cells) ...

Data?

Stem cells? Really? Even I'd put that way down my list of things to bitch about. Do the polls say that that's what's hurting them at the polls?

Brainster · 13th August 2009, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by Dr Adequate

Data?

Stem cells? Really? Even I'd put that way down my list of things to bitch about. Do the polls say that that's what's hurting them at the polls?

I'm not saying it's the only issue where the GOP is out of touch with the mainstream, but it's a major one, and it plays into the perception that the GOP is anti-science, anti-progress.

Quote:

In searching through polls this morning to try to find out whether embryonic research is, as many suggest, widely popular among the American public, it seems this Gallup study provides the best long view of how public opinion on the research has changed. Gallup reports that, between 2002 and 2007, more and more people found embryonic stem cell research "morally acceptable," while fewer found it "morally wrong." The divergence went from 52/39 (in favor of embryonic research's morality) to 64/30. Gallup's graph and more polls after the jump.

Dr Adequate · 13th August 2009, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by Brainster

I'm not saying it's the only issue where the GOP is out of touch with the mainstream, but it's a major one ...

Hmph. That's not what I asked.

The issue is, not just who thinks what, but how much does anyone care? If the GOP reversed its position on this, how much would that swing the vote? It isn't a "major issue" just because a lot of people favor the "liberal" point of view, it would only be a major issue if a lot of people had it high on their lists of reasons why they should vote one way or the other.

This is way off topic, and now I think about it I don't want to advise Republicans on how to win elections.

leftysergeant · 13th August 2009, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

In a nutshell: the old "form over substance" policy.

That's the GOP in a nutshell. Always has been.

Easier to inflame passions and tell people they are being ripped off than to provide any actual government services.

maxpower1227 · 13th August 2009, 10:15 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Educate yourself:
William F Buckley
Edmund Burke

for starters.

It was a facetious cheap shot, not meant to be completely serious. I'm familiar with Buckley, and do consider him to be worthwhile (of course, I say the same about George Will, but have recently been disappointed to find out that he propagates climate change denialism).

Puppycow · 13th August 2009, 11:27 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Educate yourself:
William F Buckley
Edmund Burke

for starters.

Yes indeedy. The species once walked the earth. It was not a mythical creature like bigfoot. They still find their fossils even today, I'm told.

13th August 2009, 01:08 AM	#1
Puppycow Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 6,323	Conservatives' Favorite New Intellectual Not exactly new, but newly popular among conservatives. Has anyone else noticed this recent trend among conservatives promoting radical leftist Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals to fellow conservatives? One example: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/arti...t_for_Trolling Search Google News for Alinsky or Rules for Radicals. http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009...r_radicals.php http://washingtonindependent.com/545...n-leftist-text
	__________________ I can't come to bed yet, honey. Someone on the Internet is wrong. -XKCD Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous Religions are God's way of telling us that He doesn't exist. -Pat Condell

13th August 2009, 01:33 AM	#2
UnrepentantSinner A post by Alan Smithee Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: USAian is not a word Posts: 23,209	It is old news, but I noticed the meme propigating during the primaries in '08 and being applied to anyone who they considered "Leftist". Mhaze has brought RfR up numerous times in the AGW threads and not only had most of the folks he was accusing had not read it, but they hadn't even heard of Alinsky.
	__________________ "The permanence of the stars was questioned, the justice of slavery was not" - Carl Sagan in Cosmos discussing the content of the Library of Alexandria. a post by Alan Smithee explained. Blutoski's taxonomy of woo Join my The Not Cool Kids Club

13th August 2009, 02:19 AM	#4
Puppycow Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 6,323	Originally Posted by gtc This is different, not smearing liberals with the idea that if they use his tactics then they embrace his ends but using Alinsky's tactics in support of Conservative ends. The three articles are very interesting. Right. Last year he was basically a bogeyman for conservatives. Now he's the model for their new conservative activism.
	__________________ I can't come to bed yet, honey. Someone on the Internet is wrong. -XKCD Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous Religions are God's way of telling us that He doesn't exist. -Pat Condell

13th August 2009, 02:22 AM	#5
UnrepentantSinner A post by Alan Smithee Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: USAian is not a word Posts: 23,209	Originally Posted by gtc This is different, not smearing liberals with the idea that if they use his tactics then they embrace his ends but using Alinsky's tactics in support of Conservative ends. The three articles are very interesting. Oooo! That is an interesting twist. I have to read the articles when I get home.
	__________________ "The permanence of the stars was questioned, the justice of slavery was not" - Carl Sagan in Cosmos discussing the content of the Library of Alexandria. a post by Alan Smithee explained. Blutoski's taxonomy of woo Join my The Not Cool Kids Club

13th August 2009, 05:21 AM	#6
maxpower1227 Critical Thinker Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 462	I've never heard the words "conservative" and "intellectual" in the same sentence before... .....seriously though, I thought this was going to be about Jonathan Krohn
	__________________ Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF. - Rolfe Last edited by maxpower1227; 13th August 2009 at 05:26 AM.

13th August 2009, 01:57 AM	#3
gtc Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: the downunderverse Posts: 7,109	Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner It is old news, but I noticed the meme propigating during the primaries in '08 and being applied to anyone who they considered "Leftist". Mhaze has brought RfR up numerous times in the AGW threads and not only had most of the folks he was accusing had not read it, but they hadn't even heard of Alinsky. This is different, not smearing liberals with the idea that if they use his tactics then they embrace his ends but using Alinsky's tactics in support of Conservative ends. The three articles are very interesting.

13th August 2009, 05:52 AM	#7
linusrichard Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Lansing, Mich. Posts: 2,355	Originally Posted by Puppycow Right. Last year he was basically a bogeyman for conservatives. Now he's the model for their new conservative activism. Right, and liberals aren't allowed to complain, because Hillary Clinton wrote a paper about him umpty years ago. Brilliant.

13th August 2009, 07:23 AM	#8
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 26,819	Originally Posted by maxpower1227 I've never heard the words "conservative" and "intellectual" in the same sentence before... .....seriously though, I thought this was going to be about Jonathan Krohn Educate yourself: William F Buckley Edmund Burke for starters.
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton____"Atheism is no safeguard against stupidity."--The Atheist____If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok____ "Your onus is aimed in the wrong direction." -- Cleon

13th August 2009, 08:06 AM	#9
gtc Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: the downunderverse Posts: 7,109	Originally Posted by linusrichard Right, and liberals aren't allowed to complain, because Hillary Clinton wrote a paper about him umpty years ago. Brilliant. The second link talks about the impact of his writings on Obama too. I remember reading about how the Republicans mastered direct marketing based on the widespread deployment of computers in the 1980s at the expense of the Democrats. I don't know how true that was but it sounds like maybe the Democrats have a lead in this new technique.

13th August 2009, 11:13 AM	#10
Brainster Philosopher Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,063	Every political party after suffering a stinging defeat will cast about for reasons for that defeat and ways to avoid it again in the future. They will find especially appealing the notion that what they have to do is adopt the opposition's tactics (but not their positions). Remember how the liberals after 2004 embraced Lakoff's book about "framing" the issues properly? Why did they endorse his book? Because it offered them all gain, no pain. I suspect that the same thing is happening here; an effort to avoid making painful decisions about which parts of conservative dogma are hurting the GOP at the polls (hint: stem cells), in favor of the notion that all they have to do is adopt the tactics used by the Democrats.
Brainster Philosopher Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,063	__________________ 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Check out my (Republican-oriented) Political Blog. Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

13th August 2009, 02:27 PM	#11
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 26,819	Originally Posted by Brainster Every political party after suffering a stinging defeat will cast about for reasons for that defeat and ways to avoid it again in the future. They will find especially appealing the notion that what they have to do is adopt the opposition's tactics (but not their positions). Remember how the liberals after 2004 embraced Lakoff's book about "framing" the issues properly? Why did they endorse his book? Because it offered them all gain, no pain. I suspect that the same thing is happening here; an effort to avoid making painful decisions about which parts of conservative dogma are hurting the GOP at the polls (hint: stem cells), in favor of the notion that all they have to do is adopt the tactics used by the Democrats. In a nutshell: the old "form over substance" policy.
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton____"Atheism is no safeguard against stupidity."--The Atheist____If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok____ "Your onus is aimed in the wrong direction." -- Cleon

13th August 2009, 04:11 PM	#12
Dr Adequate Banned Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Waiting Long Enough By The River Posts: 17,902	Originally Posted by Brainster I suspect that the same thing is happening here; an effort to avoid making painful decisions about which parts of conservative dogma are hurting the GOP at the polls (hint: stem cells) ... Data? Stem cells? Really? Even I'd put that way down my list of things to bitch about. Do the polls say that that's what's hurting them at the polls?

13th August 2009, 04:22 PM	#13
Brainster Philosopher Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,063	Originally Posted by Dr Adequate Data? Stem cells? Really? Even I'd put that way down my list of things to bitch about. Do the polls say that that's what's hurting them at the polls? I'm not saying it's the only issue where the GOP is out of touch with the mainstream, but it's a major one, and it plays into the perception that the GOP is anti-science, anti-progress. Quote: In searching through polls this morning to try to find out whether embryonic research is, as many suggest, widely popular among the American public, it seems this Gallup study provides the best long view of how public opinion on the research has changed. Gallup reports that, between 2002 and 2007, more and more people found embryonic stem cell research "morally acceptable," while fewer found it "morally wrong." The divergence went from 52/39 (in favor of embryonic research's morality) to 64/30. Gallup's graph and more polls after the jump.
Brainster Philosopher Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,063	__________________ 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Check out my (Republican-oriented) Political Blog. Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

13th August 2009, 05:09 PM	#14
Dr Adequate Banned Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Waiting Long Enough By The River Posts: 17,902	Originally Posted by Brainster I'm not saying it's the only issue where the GOP is out of touch with the mainstream, but it's a major one ... Hmph. That's not what I asked. The issue is, not just who thinks what, but how much does anyone care? If the GOP reversed its position on this, how much would that swing the vote? It isn't a "major issue" just because a lot of people favor the "liberal" point of view, it would only be a major issue if a lot of people had it high on their lists of reasons why they should vote one way or the other. This is way off topic, and now I think about it I don't want to advise Republicans on how to win elections.

13th August 2009, 06:07 PM	#15
leftysergeant Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 6,719	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor In a nutshell: the old "form over substance" policy. That's the GOP in a nutshell. Always has been. Easier to inflame passions and tell people they are being ripped off than to provide any actual government services.

13th August 2009, 10:15 PM	#16
maxpower1227 Critical Thinker Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 462	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor Educate yourself: William F Buckley Edmund Burke for starters. It was a facetious cheap shot, not meant to be completely serious. I'm familiar with Buckley, and do consider him to be worthwhile (of course, I say the same about George Will, but have recently been disappointed to find out that he propagates climate change denialism).
	__________________ Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF. - Rolfe

13th August 2009, 11:27 PM	#17
Puppycow Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 6,323	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor Educate yourself: William F Buckley Edmund Burke for starters. Yes indeedy. The species once walked the earth. It was not a mythical creature like bigfoot. They still find their fossils even today, I'm told.
	__________________ I can't come to bed yet, honey. Someone on the Internet is wrong. -XKCD Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous Religions are God's way of telling us that He doesn't exist. -Pat Condell