kankune Loc: Iowa

Marxist strategist Saul D. Alinsky published his infamous handbook for “community organizers,” titled “Rules for Radicals,” which ever since has been the essential resource for left-wing agitators, including the Clintons and Obama.

Alinsky dedicated his “Rules for Radicals” to “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” [the entity also known as Satan, the Father of Lies and Ens***er of Mankind].

As we conservative populists begin to reclaim our nation from Alinsky’s anti-American Bolsheviks, we need a resource for pro-American constitutionalists. These Rules for Radicals of the Right are dedicated to the One who conquered Lucifer:

1. Tell the t***h without hesitation or apology.

T***h is our most powerful weapon and strategy. T***h is objective, verifiable and self-evident to a clear-thinking mind grounded in rationality and knowledge of the facts. Rationality proceeds from recognition and respect for the created order and the Creator Himself. His immutable laws provide the fixed standards by which any material or spiritual thing can be measured, proved and trusted. Without fixed standards there can be no steadfast rule of law making all men equal and free, only arbitrary rule by those with power to enforce their will.

2. Keep it simple but not stupid.

The enemy relies on confusion to create chaos and then exploits it to take control. He weaves a complex fabric of falsehoods, half-t***hs, misrepresentations, misdirection, hidden false assumptions and sophistry designed to mislead the gullible into drawing false conclusions. Complexity favors the deceivers. Honest and intelligent simplification frees captive minds.

3. Trust or not trust, but always verify.

People who spin narratives or otherwise interpret facts or events instead of providing the straight facts to interpret for yourself often have their own agenda. This includes not just l*****t media but can be any information source, including those you think are trustworthy. Whenever you’re expected to form a conclusion on any issue based on the authority of the source rather than the full and free presentation of the facts, including opposing opinions and interpretations, don’t trust it. This is especially true when an inherently controversial narrative is repeated consistently over time from only one perspective, such as “c*****e c****e,” the “born gay” assumption, or the theory of evolution.


4. Think for yourself.

Human beings are susceptible to jumping on bandwagons or joining teams to meet social needs, but this makes us vulnerable to manipulation by people who form or control teams to serve their own agenda (i.e, the R’s and D’s). Beware of any group, system or institution that requires or expects you to substitute their conclusions for your own, or to adopt a “team” position on a whole slate of issues, and shuns or denigrates you for disagreeing on one or more items. (E.g., many liberals recognize an essential natural order in the eco-systems of living things but are forbidden from acknowledging the natural family as humanity’s ecosystem because “gay rights” is a “must-embrace” l*****t goal.)

5. See the good and bad on both sides.

Remember that the devil works both sides of the street, and it serves his goals if we evaluate people by the team they’re on, not their character or the rationality of their arguments. If t***h is our standard and filter, we’ll judge things and people fairly and thereby lessen the “us vs. them” stupidity that makes us so easy to manipulate in e******ns and other cultural conflicts.

6. Restore critical thinking.

The goal of the elites has always been to “dumb down” Americans to make us easier to deceive and control. Thus liberal terminology always avoids simple definitions and distinct boundaries, especially when used in social policy or laws (e.g., “homophobia”: a nonsense word that implies all disapproval is an anxiety disorder). We can defeat the elites by mastering critical thinking sk**ls and restoring true literacy that employs only clearly defined words in unambiguous sentences conveying true and trustworthy knowledge.

7. Reclaim objectivity.

The elites always obscure the distinction between objective t***h and subjective opinion, and between hard science (which is never contradictory to biblical t***h, properly understood) and “soft science” (which can easily be manipulated to serve a hidden agenda). We must always promote and defend objective t***h and contrast it with the subjective opinions and belief systems of the often-fraudulent “soft sciences” that have been driving our social policies for decades.

8. Challenge the know-it-alls.

The elites on both sides invariably assume an attitude of moral and intellectual superiority. It’s easy to expose their errors by practicing the Socratic Method of interrogation. Just ask 1) “What do you mean by that?” (i.e., define your terms), and 2) “How do you know that’s true?” (i.e., what is your source of authority). You don’t have to be an expert on any given topic to take command of the discussion and expose liberal illogic and it’s lack of sound presuppositions.

9. Avoid the tar-babies.

Remember that you can’t persuade a true-believer l*****t with fact and logic. Intellectually, most of them embrace a closed-loop Cultural Marxist narrative similar to paranoid schizophrenia. If someone proves himself incapable of recognizing self-evident t***hs (such as denying the humanity of an unborn baby while looking at an advanced stage ultrasound image), disengage immediately. Conservative populists should largely ignore the left and their delusions and just focus on taking the seats of power away from them.

10. Be an army of one.

Paradoxically, populism is a movement of individualists whose common denominator is the U.S. Constitution. Unlike our cultural opponents who hold the hive-mind mentality of big-government statists, our true strength isn’t in our numbers, but the rightness of our cause. We don’t need to wait for marching orders from Donald Trump or any other perceived leaders; we can act on our own or in small groups on the inherent authority granted to us by God and affirmed by the founders. The quicker we all decide just to do that, the quicker we can restore this republic. (I figure we’ve got about a two-year window.)


Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/01/10-rules-for-radicals-of-the-right/#vcTv4oAcZArYfUGJ.99

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

Those are excellent rules to live by and not just for conservatives, but for everyone.

Candace Loc: USA

Hard science is never contradictory to biblical t***h? You already blew critical thinking!!

kankune Loc: Iowa

Hard science is ALWAYS contradictory to biblical t***h. Here's a little lesson on critical thinking. Maybe you should give it a shot.

Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the highest level of quality in a fair-minded way. People who think critically consistently attempt to live rationally, reasonably, empathically. They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed nature of human thinking when left unchecked. They strive to diminish the power of their egocentric and sociocentric tendencies. They use the intellectual tools that critical thinking offers – concepts and principles that enable them to analyze, assess, and improve thinking. They work diligently to develop the intellectual virtues of intellectual integrity, intellectual humility, intellectual civility, intellectual empathy, intellectual sense of justice and confidence in reason.

They realize that no matter how sk**led they are as thinkers, they can always improve their reasoning abilities and they will always at times fall prey to mistakes in reasoning, human irrationality, prejudices, biases, distortions, uncritically accepted social rules and taboos, self-interest, and vested interest. They strive to improve the world in wh**ever ways they can and contribute to a more rational, civilized society. At the same time, they recognize the complexities often inherent in doing so.

They strive never to think simplistically about complicated issues and always consider the rights and needs of relevant others. They recognize the complexities in developing as thinkers, and commit themselves to life-long practice toward self-improvement. They embody the Socratic principle: The unexamined life is not worth living, because they realize that many unexamined lives together result in an uncritical, unjust, dangerous world.

~ Linda Elder, September 2007

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

You seem to have made two totally contradictory statements, which puzzles me. In point #7 of your original post you said "The elites always obscure the distinction between objective t***h and subjective opinion, and between hard science (which is never contradictory to biblical t***h, properly understood)". Then in this post you stated "Hard science is ALWAYS contradictory to biblical t***h."

Can you explain these conflicting statements?

ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island

[quote=kankune]Marxist strategist Saul D. Alinsky published his infamous handbook for “community organizers,” titled “Rules for Radicals,” which ever since has been the essential resource for left-wing agitators, including the Clintons and Obama.

Kankune - Thank you for this post and the piece by Linda Elder on Critical Thinking. I have saved these rules, as well as Linda's comment on Critical Thinking. It is finding gems like these that I continue to come back to OPP.

thinksense

Candace and LAPhil both spotted what seems to be something contradictory. I too would like to read what you meant. Are the key words "properly understood" meaningfull in this context?

kankune Loc: Iowa

I didn't write this. I just found it and found it very interesting. I don't agree with every little bit of it, but thought it was a good read. I believe properly understood is to offer ones own definition. What I got from it was: take a step back, even if it be a physical one and think about things clearly and realistically. Its so easy when on line to seem that you are 10 feet tall and invincible, when in reality, if you met that person face to face, the tone and mood would definitely(hopefully) change. I guess I'm just saying...listen, access, before jumping all over someone. Even if we dont agree with someone, it's ok to agree to disagree. Mutual respect goes along way. It also grows ones self esteem and dignity. It was just my take on it anyway.

kankune Loc: Iowa

[quote=ACP45]
Thx ACP. I thought it was an enjoyable read that got me to thinking.

thinksense

Kankune, Thanks for placing Scott Lively’s “Ten Rules”as well as Linda Elder’s thoughts here.

I see that the answer to the contradictory thoughts on science are simply because Scott is a religionist and espouses the first thought, that “ Hard Science is never in conflict with biblical t***h, as long as properly understood (he doesn’t say which bible or which version/t***slation you are to understand) . Linda Elder is not a religionist and espouses the second thought that Hard Science is “always in conflict with biblical t***h”.

Actually both are right in some circumstances and wrong in others. (Assuming you have the right bible and right version for the case you are arguing.) (;-)

And so, before we even get to the bottom of the first page we find confusion because not enough information is given.

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

I'm still a little confused. You say you didn't write the article(s). So when you said "Hard science is ALWAYS contradictory to biblical t***h" were those YOUR words or was it part of the piece you were quoting? It definitely seemed like the former, but it's hard to tell since you never used any quotation marks to indicate what parts of your post were the words of the writers and which were your own.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Is "hard science" contradictory to respect for others, treating others with kindness as you'd wish to be treated, feeding the hungry, etc, etc??

kankune Loc: Iowa

Hi 2007. I really don't think hard science has anything to do with respect, treating others with kindness, or feeding the hungry. Hard science to me anyway is fact and theories. Was the world created by evolution? I have a lot of engineering friends that believe that. I myself believe the we were created by God. We didn't evolve from monkeys.But as I said we can all agree to disagree. But they all... as do I ...believe in kindness, respect, and being there to help anyone that needs it. Hope that helps. It's just my personal opinion.....

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

You'd made the comment that hard science is always contradictory to biblical teachings, thus I had to ask.

By the way, science doesn't claim the world was created by evolution nor does evolution claim man evolved from monkeys, just so you know.

Big Bass

Thank you, Kankune, that is as beautiful as your avatar. These liberals (or, rather, c*******ts) do have a herd-mentality - a need to belong. This helps explain the success of web-sites like Facebook. (I do not "belong" on this site, simply because I do not want to learn the intricate details of somebody else's bowel movements.) I did find it interesting. I also learned that the devil is incarnate in some of the Nation's supposed leaders.