Filed under: Bureaucracy, Crime, Economy, Environment, Freedom, Global Warming, Health Care, Immigration, Iran, Islam, Law, Military, National Security, Police, Politics, Progressives, Terrorism | Tags: "The World As It Should Be", President Barack Obama, Saul Alinsky's Rules
Yesterday I received the alumni magazine from my alma mater in the mail, and among other changes, they announced the appointment of a new chief diversity officer. Which seems to put them right in line with the norm in colleges and universities today, when every gathering or crowd is scanned for the correct mixture of skin color and ethnic identity. That doesn’t seem quite right.
It seems to me that diversity, in the case of higher education, should be a diversity of ideas — not a diversity of skin color and ethnic origins, nor sexual diversity—there’s a lot of that going around — but diversity of ideas is pretty hard to find. Consider the speakers invited to campuses who are not just disagreed with, their divergent opinions are excoriated, their very presence is protested, loudly and violently, and security must be called to protect the person — who has improper ideas! Students need “safe spaces” to protect them from ideas with which they disagree.
Sometimes, I seem to be a little slow. I really hadn’t put together the innocuous idea of “diversity” which always seemed a little silly, with Saul Alinsky’s famous phrase “Rub raw the sores of discontent, galvanize them for radical social change.” Barack Obama was a student of Alinsky’s methods, and he’s been busily organizing us for over seven years. Hillary too, was a student of Alinsky.
The problem with the Alinsky method is that the end game is amorphous; the end game is the acquisition of power but little is said of what to do with that power once acquired. The core of Alinsky’s method is destruction, destruction of the “system” that allows a disparity of wealth. There is no discussion of what is to replace this system once it is brought down. However, there is little doubt that Alinsky’s idea of a better “system” is one that brings forced equivalence or Marxism. Fundamentally, the struggle to get power is the essence of Alinsky, what to do with the power once acquired is another matter altogether.
“The Obama administration is the embodiment of the failure of politics because it is not about politics—politics involves concession and compromise—it is about victory at any cost. The American people expected hope and change, as that is what they voted for, but what they really wanted was stability and prosperity.”
Well, no wonder the people are so angry with their government— and looking for someone, anyone, who can fix it. Their government has been furiously busy trying “to rub raw the sores of discontent.” They not only didn’t get “hope and change” — they didn’t get stability and prosperity either. “Diversity” has been a false promise. The people know and like people of all different races and ethnic backgrounds, and we like the ideas and the foods they have brought with them as well.
The race riots in Ferguson and Baltimore were urged on by imported community organizers. The campus protests and demands for more racial equality and more racial segregation at the same time, the banishing of statues or buildings named for anyone who once owned slaves, the racial hoaxes, were all stirred up by organizers from Black Lives Matter, Acorn, Occupy, and Organizing for America. Did you wonder why race relations seemed to get worse rather than better? Did you wonder why Black Lives Matter seemed to be stirring up animus against the police instead of improving relations? Why more policemen were being attacked or killed? That was deliberate community organizing.
Michelle Obama at the Democratic Convention:
“Barack stood up that day,” talking about a visit to Chicago neighborhoods, “and spoke words that have stayed with me ever since. He talked about “The world as it is” and “The world as it should be…”“All of us are driven by a simple belief that the world as it is just won’t do – that we have an obligation to fight for the world as it should be.”
Here’s David Horowitz:
This is something that conservatives generally have a hard time understanding. As a former radical, I am constantly asked how radicals could hate America and why they would want to destroy a society that compared to others is tolerant, inclusive and open, and treats all people with a dignity and respect that is the envy of the world. The answer to the this question is that radicals are not comparing America to other real world societies. They are comparing America to the heaven on earth — the kingdom of social justice and freedom — they think they are building. And compared to this heaven even America is hell.
Freedom is important to Americans, but it is sometimes hard to recognize where and why and how it is being taken away. We hate the EPA for its dumb overregulation, are shocked when Condoleeza Rice is invited to speak at an American university, and turned away because students protest. Environmentalists suggest prison terms for people who claim that global warming is natural. People are laid off, but will not get severance pay unless they train the foreign workers who will replace them. Scandals erupt throughout the government, but no one is ever fired. Veterans are denied medical care, but the promised changes never take place. Government workers who break the law are placed on paid leave, instead of being dismissed.
Detainees are released from Gitmo, and turn up as spokesmen for al-Qaeda. Relations are resumed with a nasty little Communist dictatorship just south of Florida, who continue to abuse their people and emphasize that they will change nothing at all — in return for a resumption of trade. Immigration laws are ignored, the borders are ignored as well, and illegals flow into the country to be distributed to every state. Obama makes speeches about the importance of constitutional law regarding appointment of a judge to replace the distinguished Antonio Scalia, but notes that he has a phone and a pen, and he cannot be bothered to attend the distinguished jurist’s funeral.
The American people are indeed angry. But their anger is somewhat misplaced. It is not “the establishment” that is turning loose drug pushers to go back to the streets in the name of “prison reform.” It’s not “the establishment” that is letting convicted criminal illegal aliens back into the country to commit more crimes. It’s not “the establishment” that made an impossible deal with Iran that practically assures that we will be attacked with nuclear weapons. It is not “the establishment” that has so weakened our national security that we are warned to expect a direct attack from ISIS this summer. And it’s not the establishment that stuck us with ObamaCare, nor “the establishment” that has reduced our army to the smallest since 1940 and the Navy the smallest since 1915. Nor is it “the establishment” that has given us the worst economic recovery in the last 70 years.
I think we need to do some serious reassessing.
ADDENDUM: “White college students are undergoing a weekly “deconstructing whiteness” program at Northwestern University. The ‘6-part’ workshop series for undergraduate students who self-identify as white” launched in January and runs through March according to the university’s website.” The program is voluntary, but comes under the rubric of “Social Justice Education.” Forgive me, but there is no such thing as “social justice”— we have one kind of justice in the United States of America which involves the Constitution, the body of laws, the courts, the judicial system and the officers of the law. Northwestern University declined to give any details.
F.I.R.E. reports that 33 “public colleges have elected to ignore a deadline to respond to the House Judiciary Committee’s request to adopt new speech codes on campus. Bob Goodlatte, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, asked 160 schools to change at least one of their existing policies after a FIRE report showed that these schools substantially restricted their students’ free speech rights.”
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, National Security, Politics, Progressivism, Statism, Taxes, The United States | Tags: Organizing the Public, Saul Alinsky's Rules, Spending is Not the Problem
I think most people know that Obama was a “community organizer” when he first moved to Chicago. His teachers said he was the best student of Saul Alinsky’s principles they had ever had. I’m not so sure that many have given any thought to what a community organizer is, or what he does. Saul Alinsky’s book is called Rules for Radicals. Obama was an enthusiastic disciple of the old lefty.
Essentially, it’s a course in how to manipulate people and get them to do what you want. Alinsky was dead long before Obama got to Chicago, but Obama took right to the rules. His organizing efforts were devoted to getting home loans for minorities. Protestors picketed banks and put pressure on bankers, which of course was in line with Democrats’ efforts to build on the Community Reinvestment Act, which ended up in the housing bubble that caused the financial collapse. This is the reason why Obama went to such lengths to blame Bush for the financial crisis. If people discovered that it wasn’t due to Bush’s two wars, they might look for the real reason for the collapse.
See Saul Alinsky’s Rule 3: “Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty., or in other words— Spread disabling fear far and wide. Rule 8: “Keep the pressure on, Never let up.” Rule 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Rule 10: The major premise of tactics is the development of operations that will maintain constant pressure on the opposition. Rule 13: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.” In other words —personalize the target; pick out hate figures and demonize them.
So Jay Carney demonized the right every day last week for allowing a “tax break” for corporate jets. Peggy Noonan’s column this week was “Government by Freakout.”
It is always cliffs, ceilings and looming catastrophes with Barack Obama. It is always government by freakout.
That’s what’s happening now with the daily sequester warnings. Seven hundred thousand children will be dropped from Head Start. Six hundred thousand women and children will be dropped from aid programs.Meat won’t be inspected. Seven thousand TSA workers will be laid off, customs workers too, and air traffic controllers. Lines at airports will be impossible. The Navy will slow down the building of an aircraft carrier. Troop readiness will be disrupted, weapons programs slowed or stalled, civilian contractors stiffed, uniformed first responders cut back. Our nuclear deterrent will be indefinitely suspended. Ha, made that one up, but give them time.
Mr. Obama has finally hit on his own version of national unity: Everyone get scared together.
The president has apparently sent out orders to every department and agency and told them to inform the public of the very worst thing that could happen as a result of slashing 5% from their budget—the particular thing that would inconvenience the public the most—and see that the media expresses the scariest part. (I wonder what the actual orders were?) And see that it is all blamed on the Republicans in Congress.
Obama tried hard to blame the automatic cuts in the sequester law on Republicans, but it was his idea. That is confirmed by Polifact, the Washington Post, and in particular by Bob Woodward who detailed the account of meetings, interviews with key participants and contemporaneous notes — which make it clear that sequestration was a proposal advanced and promoted by the White House.
The whining and keening by the administration is nearly deafening. Global grind said that meat processing plants would be crippled as inspectors were furloughed, threatening the food supply, and risking food borne sickness. Thousands of teachers would be laid off (excuse me, teachers are not employees of the federal government) and thousands of parents would struggle to find child care. Six hundred thousand pregnant women and mothers of small children would be cut from WIC. 1,000 federal law enforcement officials, 1,500 corrections officers furloughed and 5,000 border patrol and customs officers at points of entry.
The Christian Science Monitor bemoaned the parks: fewer rangers, locked restrooms and visitor centers, trash cans not emptied — more bears in campgrounds! Cuts would be implemented over 7 months so it would hit families during vacation season. The New Republic, newly hard left, said “cancel the sequestration or Virginia gets it” with 10% of all job losses as a result of sequestration. Virginia state economy ravaged.
At the Huffington Post, Scott Lilly, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, said there’s a right way and a wrong way and sequestration was the most boneheaded way that could be concocted. (Speak to Mr. Obama). Public safety, military readiness, FAA operations, food safety, Medicare and Medicaid services, no cancer screenings, and anyway it wouldn’t even reduce the deficit significantly.
Yuval Levin, writing at National Review:
The Congressional Budget Office (on page 11 of its latest budget outlook, published earlier this month) estimates that while FY 2013 spending will ultimately be reduced by $85 billion, “discretionary outlays will drop by $35 billion and mandatory spending will be reduced by $9 billion this year as a direct result of those procedures; additional reductions in outlays attributable to the cuts in 2013 funding will occur in later years.”So in this fiscal year, we would actually be looking at a $44 billion spending cut, or less than a 1.5% reduction from what federal spending otherwise would have been.
President Obama does not want to reduce spending. He refuses to acknowledge that spending is a problem, and apparently cannot conceive of doing government without ever-increasing spending. He is fiercely competitive, and has moved decisively to expand government authority. It is clear that budgetary decisions will dictate the national defense profile. His desire to control the withdrawal of most international commitments will be a response to fiscal needs. Since Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are ‘untouchable’, that makes defense the target for dramatic retrenchment. He implies that the U.S. can no longer meet international commitments and cannot afford to be a superpower.
Herbert London wrote: “To achieve his goals, the president must regain control of the House. All efforts over the next two years will be deride, embarrass, and undermine Republican leadership. Republicans will be the target and divide and conquer will be the strategy with the encouragement of a third party a distinct possibility.”
“In another four years—should Obama be able to carry out his agenda—America will look like a very different country. The government will be the primary source of all economic activity. …And the U.S. bilateral defense agreements will have as much value as the paper they are written on. The U.S. will have been Europeanized just as Europe enters the dustbin of history.”
And you thought “fundamentally transforming America” meant efforts to end dissension between the parties— a better atmosphere in Washington D.C.