Saul Alinsky, the favorite “Community Organizer” the Progressives love to follow and emulate including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, followed Antonio Gramsci (Italian Communist) who believed that no one would outright embrace Communism, but would accept it if “fed” to them through Gradualism and Dialectic Process.
Obama learned his lesson well. I am proud to see that my father’s model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday.” –Letter from L. DAVID ALINSKY, son of Neo-Marxist Saul Alinsky
Obama helped fund ‘Alinsky Academy‘: “The Woods Fund, a nonprofit on which Obama served as paid director from 1999 to December 2002, provided startup funding and later capital to the Midwest Academy…. Obama sat on the Woods Fund board alongside William Ayers, founder of the Weather Underground domestic terrorist organization.… ‘Midwest describes itself as ‘one of the nation’s oldest and best-known schools for community organizations, citizen organizations and individuals committed to progressive social change.’… Midwest teaches Alinsky tactics of community organizing.”
Hillary, Obama and the Cult of Alinsky: “True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism, Alinsky taught. They cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the system from within. Alinsky viewed revolution as a slow, patient process. The trick was to penetrate existing institutions such as churches, unions and political parties…. Many leftists view Hillary as a sell-out because she claims to hold moderate views on some issues. However, Hillary is simply following Alinsky’s counsel to do and say whatever it takes to gain power.
Notes on Saul Alinsky and Neo-Marxism:
Alinsky’s tactics were based, not on Stalin’s revolutionary violence, but on the Neo-Marxist strategies of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Communist. Relying on gradualism, infiltration and the dialectic process rather than a bloody revolution, Gramsci’s transformational Marxism was so subtle that few even noticed the deliberate changes.
Like Alinsky, Mikhail Gorbachev followed Gramsci, not Lenin. In fact, Gramsci aroused Stalins’s wrath by suggesting that Lenin’s revolutionary plan wouldn’t work in the West. Instead the primary assault would be on Biblical absolutes and Christian values, which must be crushed as a social force before the new face of Communism could rise and flourish. Malachi Martin gave us a progress report:
“By 1985, the influence of traditional Christian philosophy in the West was weak and negligible…. Gramsci’s master strategy was now feasible. Humanly speaking, it was no longer too tall an order to strip large majorities of men and women in the West of those last vestiges that remained to them of Christianity’s transcendent God.”
Of Means and Ends [Forget moral or ethical considerations]
“The end is what you want, the means is how you get it. Whenever we think about social change, the question of means and ends arises. The man of action views the issue of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms. He has no other problem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the possibilities of various choices of action. He asks of ends only whether they are achievable and worth the cost; of means, only whether they will work. … The real arena is corrupt and bloody.” p.24
“The means-and-ends moralists, constantly obsessed with the ethics of the means used by the Have-Nots against the Haves, should search themselves as to their real political position. In fact, they are passive — but real — allies of the Haves…. The most unethical of all means is the non-use of any means… The standards of judgment must be rooted in the whys and wherefores of life as it is lived, the world as it is, not our wished-for fantasy of the world as it should be….” pp.25-26
“The third rule of ethics of means and ends is that in war the end justifies almost any means….” p.29
“The seventh rule… is that generally success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics….” p.34
“The tenth rule… is you do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments.… It involves sifting the multiple factors which combine in creating the circumstances at any given time… Who, and how many will support the action?… If weapons are needed, then are appropriate d weapons available? Availability of means determines whether you will be underground or above ground; whether you will move quickly or slowly…” p.36
|Notes: Apparently, Michelle Obama referred to these words during her Democratic National Convention speech:
Do you wonder who — or whose values — should determine what “the world… should be?”
“Liberation Theology was a perfectly faithful exercise of Gramsci’s principles. It could be launched with the corruption of a relatively few well placed Judas goats. Yet it could be aimed at the culture and the mentality of the masses. It stripped both of any attachment to the Christian transcendent. It locked both the individual and his culture in the close embrace of a goal that was totally immanent; the class struggle for socio-political liberation. [p. 260-261]
[**Note by Romanticpoet here: Liberation Theology was embraced by James Cone who was admired by the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Remember him? “The U S of KKK”…..Related Link**]
1. The belief in or the policy of advancing toward a goal by gradual, often slow stages.
The boiling frog story is a widespread anecdote describing a frog slowly being boiled alive. The premise is that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death. The story is often used as a metaphor for the inability of people to react to significant changes that occur gradually.
“We can’t expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to Communism,
but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism,
until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism.”
By Lynn Stuter
Articles have surfaced recently concerning the writings of Antonio Gramsci; writings that figure predominately in what is happening in America today.
One such article is Gramsci and the U.S. Body Politic. This article is a must read for anyone wishing to understand what they are seeing happen in America today.
Antonio Gramsci was a transformational Marxist. As laid out in the above linked article, what Gramsci advocated was the transformation of a society to the communist state via gradualism — the gradual erosion of old ideals, replacing them with the new. As opposed to Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Mussolini, Gramsci advocated the quiet revolution.
The Hegelian Dialectic of thesis (and idea), antithesis (the opposite), and synthesis (the bringing together of opposites) to form a new thesis, ever evolving, plays a heavy role in the gradualism Gramsci proposed. Today, in America, the Hegelian Dialectic is played out in meetings at every level, all across America, under the name of consensus building using facilitators heavily trained in group dynamics.
The year 1939 is one that should be forever bookmarked in the pages of American history. In that year, several individuals from Austria arrived in the United States.
One was Peter Drucker who would become a good friend to Abraham Maslow, humanist, and father of Third Force Psychology and the Hierarchy of Human Needs. Maslow’s work, based on humanism, would be furthered in the works of men like Carl Rogers, the father of the Human Potential movement utilizing self-actualization (spirituality from within) and focus groups to break down the moral bearing and individuality of people, two very important concepts in the struggle to bring about the quiet revolution. Rogers’ works, although denounced by Rogers in his later years, are used heavily in education in America today, from the college and university classroom to the elementary school classroom.
The Gaia Hypothesis is the outreach of the environmental movement and reads as follows: the earth is a living, breathing organism (a living entity), irreducible to its parts (one system); what affects one part affects all parts (interconnected and interdependent); if we are to save spaceship earth, we must change our ways.
***[Think Al Gore and Agenda 21 here]***
From Twisting Truth through Group Consensus: “Tension, created by diversity, is essential to the dialectic process. It energizes members and — when manipulated by well-trained facilitators — produces synergy. You can’t guide people toward synthesis (compromise) unless there are opposing views — both “thesis and antithesis.” That’s why the consensus process must include all these elements:
a diverse group
dialoguing to consensus
over a social issue
led by a trained facilitator
toward a pre-planned outcome.
The true dialectic group never reaches a final consensus, for “continual change” is an ongoing process: one step today, another tomorrow. To permanently change the way we think and relate to each other, our leaders must set the stage for conflict and compromise week after week, year after year. Dialectical thinking and group consensus must become as normal as eating. Eventually, people learn to discard their old mental anchors and boundaries — all the facts and certainties that built firm convictions. They become like boats adrift, always ready to shift with the changing winds and currents.
[**Think Obama’s new group “Organizing for Action” (formerly Obama’s campaign of Organizing for America
Michelle quotes in video:
“If we want to finish what we started and make that CHANGE we truly believe in….”
“The lessons you have learned; in the coming years can change our country.”
“It will be determined by your energy and your feedback”
“World as it is and the world as it should be” Quote of Saul Alinsky
“Our obligation to bridge that divide”]
Webster’s dictionary defines the word dialectic as “(Hegelian philosophy) a logical subjective development in thought, from a THESIS through an ANTITHESIS to a SYNTHESIS, or … a continuous unification of opposites.”
In the dialectic process, there must be two or more sides to everything. Nothing is absolute; everything is changing in a preplanned direction. As Ismail Serageldin, former vice president of The World Bank, said at the 1996 UN Conference on Human Settlements in Istanbul (Habitat II), “Let’s just make sure that social change and transformation are going in the right direction.”
From Legalizing Mind Control: “Would the American people allow government control and collectivism to replace freedom and individualism? You bet! So would the rest of the world. This social transformation is well under way, and the masses simply flow with the change. Planned over a century ago, the framework for managing and monitoring this worldwide revolution was in place by 1945.
From Justifying Mind Control: “Chisholm’s friend, Alger Hiss, agreed. In 1948, the infamous Soviet spy published Chisholm’s message on mental health in his socialist journal, International Conciliation. Hiss, then president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, added his own Preface which showed the involvement of the Rockefeller Foundation in the mental health movement.
The following are THREE examples of the Dialectic Process (*Twisting of the Truth**):
Today’s postmodern America shows the effects of that revolutionary ideology. So it should not surprise us that a fifth-grade teacher in the Seattle area would use intimidation to twist a student’s absolute truth into a personal opinion. She had told her class to complete the sentence, “If I could wish for three things, I would wish for…”
A Christian student, Matt Piecora, wrote “infinitely more wishes, to meet God, and for all my friends to be Christians.” Since each student’s wishes would be posted on a wall for “open house,” they had to be just right. Matt’s didn’t pass. The teacher told him that his last wish could hurt people who didn’t share his beliefs. Matt didn’t want to hurt anyone, so he agreed to add “if they want to be.”
He had to complete another sentence which began, “If I could meet anyone, I would like to meet…” Matt wrote: “God because he is the one who made us!” The teacher told him to add “in my opinion.”
When Matt’s parents visited the school, they noticed the corrections. “Why did you add this?” his mother asked.
“The teacher didn’t want me to hurt other people’s feelings.”
“But these are just your wishes….”
“I thought so.” Matt looked confused. Later, the teacher explained to Matt’s parents that she wanted “diversity” in her class and was looking out for her other students. But why couldn’t Matt share his views?
“I try to instill God’s truths in my son,” said Matt’s father, “but it seems like the school wants to remove them.”
He is right. Both absolute truth and contrary facts clash with the mind-set needed for the global management systems. The planned oneness demands “new thinking, new strategies, new behavior, and new beliefs” that turn God’s Word and values upside-down. Facilitated group discussion is key to the transformation, and UNESCO’s plan for “lifelong learning” calls for universal participation. Young and old everywhere must be trained to think and work collectively.
Professor Benjamin Bloom, called the “Father of Outcome-based Education,” summarized it well:
“The purpose of education and the schools is to change the thoughts, feelings and actions of students.” “….a large part of what we call ‘good teaching’ is the teacher’s ability to attain affective objectives through challenging the students’ fixed beliefs and getting them to discuss issues.”
Since Matt’s last comment exposed his “fixed beliefs,” the teacher challenged it. Absolute truths such as “God made us” can’t be modified or synthesized to please the group. Those who take a firm position on truth or facts will resist compromise and offend the group.
This mind-changing (Hegelian dialectic) process required students in Communist nations to “confess” their thoughts and feelings in their respective groups. Trained facilitator-teachers would then guide the group dialogue toward a pre-planned consensus. The original thesis and antithesis — opposing views such as Christianity versus Marxism — would be merged or synthesized into ever-evolving higher “truths.”
This revolutionary program was officially incorporated into American education in 1985, when President Reagan and Soviet President Gorbachev signed the U.S.-USSR Education Exchange Agreement. It put American technology into the hands of Communist strategists and sanctioned our use of their psycho-social strategies, including the mass media. As Julian Huxley suggested back in 1947,
“the techniques of persuasion and information and true propaganda” must be “deliberately” used “as Lenin envisaged – to ‘overcome the resistance of millions’ to desirable change.”