by Manon Welles
The following is a list of Alinsky’s 13 rules for radicals (sometimes it’s shortened to 12), along with suggestions for successfully using these techniques against the Left.
Rule No. 1: Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.
Alinsky says that power is derived from two things: money and people. The Leftists in his day were what he called the Have-Nots. They had little money but lots of numbers. This was before the Left completed its “long march through the institutions,” rising in power to some of the highest positions in politics, media and academia.
The Left tries to brand the Right as the evil rich who are in control. They even believe that the mainstream media is biased toward the Right. [32] They don’t know that everyday conservatives are dismayed by the actions of neocon and RINO elected officials and feel just as powerless as the Have-Nots in Alinsky’s day.
The fact that most conservatives are disenfranchised (and by that I mean middle class, without endless resources to devote to political aims) actually works in our favor. Because that’s who Alinsky’s Rules were written for — the poor and disenfranchised.
Rule No. 1 explains that if you don’t have money, numbers of people can make up for it. And if you don’t have a lot of people, making a big enough ruckus will give the impression that you have a ton of supporters behind your cause.
This rule explains why SJWs show up to protest everything they can think of and are loud and violent. In truth, the numbers of people as radical as SJWs are very small. At colleges, students have started to speak out and say, “Please don’t judge all of us by these crazies — there’s only a small number of them.” In addition to their numbers being small, SJWs generally only exist on college campuses and other areas where a pseudo-intellectual Left can convince gullible people to support impractical policies. But being loud and violent gets them noticed, gets them reported on, and gets the public thinking their numbers are much larger than in reality.
Numerous examples of the “low numbers can have a big impact” were seen during the nationwide speaking tour of Breitbart.com tech editor Milo Yiannopoulos. Yiannopoulos called it the “Dangerous Faggot Tour” — he’s a gay conservative who’s controversially politically incorrect and supports Trump — and at every event at a college campus there were protests. At an event at Rutgers University in New Jersey, female protesters in the audience stood up and smeared fake blood on their faces during his speech.
At a June 2016 talk at UCLA, protesters blocked the entrance of the building where the speech was to be held, then blocked new doors opened by police. The program was finally able to go on an hour late. Shortly after its conclusion the LAPD entered and cleared the remaining attendees out of the room due to a bomb threat. (Police dogs swept the room and no bomb was found.) [33] The protesters were small in number, but capable of massive disruption.
SJWs also use hoax “hate crimes” to get attention. Before a Yiannopoulos event at DePaul University, a student painted “TRUMP 2016 FUCK MEXICO” on the sidewalk, which students called a “hate crime.” After the student was apprehended by the Chicago police, it was revealed that he studied “poverty and inequality” and previously participated in Occupy Chicago events and an anarchist rally. [34] Not exactly the profile of a legitimate Trump supporter.
Another “hate crime” hoax at DePaul involved an alleged “noose” that was found hanging on campus. The only problem was that the “noose” was just a piece of rope. [35] As writer Mike Cernovich discovered, the girl who found the rope previously Tweeted “How can I get famous?” and said she considered doing a sex tape. Then she deleted the Tweet of the noose after Cernovich told her she’d get arrested if she filed a false police report. [36] The radical Left is so desperate they’re now inventing stories about “hate crimes” to try to prove that the Right is intolerant and threatening. Meanwhile, they continue to assault people, send death threats to people, and block traffic so supporters can’t make it to Trump rallies.
One of the most important lessons conservatives can learn from Trump is how to use people to show how much power you have, all without having to resort to violent protests, shutting down free speech and making up hate crimes. In the beginning of his presidential run, a lot of pundits said Trump was running as a joke and had no chance. But Trump took every opportunity to self-promote and call attention to how much support he had. Every time he took the mic he talked about how 30,000 supporters attended his rally in Mobile, Alabama. At the start of his speeches he read off lists of polls he was winning. It helped that Trump actually was drawing huge crowds and doing great in the polls. But the takeaway is that anything you can do to make your candidate or issue seem more popular, the better. Using a bit of what Trump calls “truthful hyperbole” can work wonders here.
One of the fundamental tactics in sales is that people want to buy what everyone else is buying. It sounds counter-intuitive because most of us like to think of ourselves as individuals who have unique tastes. But if you look over lists of best-selling books, music or shoes, it’s easy to see that popularity brings more and more people to your side. Being popular, or even just giving the impression of popularity, snowballs until you have massive numbers. No doubt much of Bernie Sanders’ support came from peer pressure among college students and the fear of ostracism if they didn’t support him. This is why the Left denigrates conservatives. They try to make everyone think only a few rednecks in trailer parks are still Republican. Conservatives need to be “loud and proud” like the gay community in order to show our numbers.
Here’s one example of how to use “power is what the enemy thinks you have” in everyday activism. If you’re targeting a business, you only need a small number of people to convince them that they’re the target of a massive boycott. Just five to 10 dedicated callers over a period of a couple months can make a local business think there are hundreds of people angry about its policies. Hit *67 before making the call so your number doesn’t show up on caller ID and use various phones to call from, to avoid detection of your small numbers.
Although generally newspapers insist that letters to the editor be signed with your real name, if they don’t verify your name with an ID it’s possible to use this tactic for letter-writing campaigns as well. Just one person can ghostwrite 10 articles if there are multiple aliases or multiple people willing to sign their name to one.
Rule No. 2: Never go outside the expertise of your people.
Alinksy didn’t want community organizers to go outside of supporters’ comfort zones because it creates too much fear and confusion, and can even paralyze people from taking action. A tactic people consider too bold can end up backfiring if people back out or do it half-heartedly.
Similarly, even just talking about policies your supporters don’t understand can cause misunderstandings, or lead to people abandoning you. This effect can be seen in the SJW crowd. Moderate liberals have been pushed away because of the violence from supporters of Black Lives Matter, La Raza, Bernie Sanders and other SJW causes. While it’s true these groups have pushed the liberal agenda to the Left, in doing so they also pushed large numbers away.
This tactic can be seen in action in some of Infowars’ YouTube videos where reporters interview anti-Trump protesters at rallies. A reporter will ask someone holding a “Trump’s a racist” sign to give a few examples of why he’s racist. The only words they can spout back are either more name-calling or incoherent mistruths with no basis in reality. Debate, logic and facts are completely outside of their area of expertise — and that’s why those are great to use.
Although Trump introduced a plethora of new tactics into the political process, he never went outside the experience of his supporters. This included keeping his talking points simple. When you’re trying to appeal to a mass audience you must appeal to the lowest common denominator (LCD). If you talk at a graduate level, like many Libertarians do when trying to explain the gold standard to the general public, many people just can’t follow along
. Trump didn’t get caught in this trap. Rather than detail a Heritage Foundation study on the cost of amnesty to Americans, he focused on a few points that everyone can relate to: crime, drugs and building the wall. Those obsessed with details were free to talk about policies in-depth on their own; meanwhile, everyday Americans had the visceral and powerful image of a wall to throw their support behind.
His critics said the way Trump talked was at an elementary school level due to his use of simple words and sentences that sometimes seemed to be backward. To be precise, according to the Flesch – Kincaid readability test, Trump’s announcement speech was at a fourth-grade level (4.1). Ben Carson’s was at 5.9, Rand Paul at 7.5, Hillary Clinton at 7.7, Jeb Bush at 8.0, Marco Rubio and Chris Christie both at 8.6, Ted Cruz at 8.9, and Bernie Sanders 10.1.
One analysis of Trump’s language showed there was a method, even genius, to the madness. From a random 220-word selection from Trump, 78 percent of his words were just one syllable. Only four words had three syllables, and three of those words were the word “tremendous.” Trump uses simple sentences, like “We have a real problem” He uses the second person frequently, saying “Look at Paris. Look at what happened in Paris” and “if you remember.” He repeats himself to drive home the message. He rearranges sentences around, even awkwardly, so that they end on the most punchy word. Often, the words at the end of a sentence are the ones that linger in the listener’s mind. [37] All of this has the effect of hitting people deep in the heart and making the message resonate. If Trump used a lot of big words, his speeches would be over many people’s heads.
This tactic comes into play if you’re trying to organize people on a local level. Always think about what type of people support your cause and what’s within their comfort zone. A 20-year-old organizing a group of fellow college students will want to use some extreme (and fun) tactics like showing up to provoke SJWs at their events, filming them and making up infamous nicknames for them on social media in order to embarrass them. A younger crowd familiar with entryism would be keen on infiltrating social justice groups and pushing them ridiculously to the Left to cause them to lose supporters. If you really want to destroy an SJW group, pose as a member and try to get on TV or interviewed by the local media and say something outrageous.
If, on the other hand, you’re trying to organize a typical group of 65-year-old Republicans from the suburbs, such tactics go beyond their experience. You’ll have better luck getting them to write letters to the editor, make phone calls, or share more straightforward memes on Facebook.
The takeaway is, when rallying a group of people to action, don’t push for activities that will make them scared or uncomfortable, don’t talk over their heads and don’t isolate any supporters.
Rule No. 3: Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.
This is simply the reverse of Rule No. 2: By going outside of your opponents’ expertise, you’ll create anxiety, insecurity and confusion.
To reverse engineer this tactic, we only need to ask “what are SJWs’ areas of expertise?” and go outside of them. The answer is simple: SJWs never talk about real policies and they never use logic. Everything is “fear-mongering,” name-calling, catchphrases and false data. They have no expertise in anything else. More importantly, they’re so used to name-calling causing people to succumb that they’ve never developed a back-up plan.
If you can successfully call them out for lying or not knowing the facts, SJWs tend to get so upset that they literally run away or resort to screaming tantrums that make them look even more ridiculous. You can see this in action when Gavin McInnes talks to an anti-Trump supporter outside of a Long Island, New York, rally. The protestor was, according to her sign, an “American Student Feminist Human Against Trump.” After being overloaded with facts, she misunderstood the meaning of “coyotes” who rape women crossing the Mexican border and ran off. [38]
Sometimes just holding a sign can trigger an SJW into becoming a maniac. Someone filmed a Christian holding a sign and being very civil while an atheist gay man screamed at him about how awful Christians and Muslims were until the cops showed up. Then the man told one of the cops, “You need to do something about the Christians on here! I don’t feel comfortable with them!” When an officer told him he needed to quiet down and that the Christians weren’t disturbing the peace, the man asked, “Well can I report them [for] just being complacent?” Even the people who normally would have sided with atheism and gay rights were laughing at him. [39]
At Arizona State University, a student assaulted a man holding a sign that quoted a Bible verse about the unrighteous not inheriting the kingdom of God. The student continually lunged at the man (causing his Christian friend to fight him off). The student screamed things like, “F-ck you!” and “Your sign is f-cking offensive!” When the man tried to hand him his glasses that had fallen on the ground, the student hit him and cried, “I don’t like you!” then started moaning or growling before screaming “That’s hate speech!” The Christian man, who by this time was talking into the camera filming the incident, said he wasn’t going to press assault charges. The student screamed that his “hate speech” was what “provoked assault.” [40]
Conservative author and political commentator Ben Shapiro said there are only two reasons to debate a liberal: If you’ve met the one logically minded Leftist in the world who’s open to hearing new facts, or if you have an audience. “Not every fight is worth having. You have to pick your fights,” he said. [41] In the examples of people screaming above, there’s not much point in having a debate unless there are a lot of people watching. The same is true for online debates such as comment sections or on social media. Don’t waste your time trying to convince someone with the opposite view unless they seem reasonable or unless a lot of people are following the thread. If you’re at a city council or PTA meeting (i.e., a large audience), arm yourself with facts and pose questions to the Left. Facts and questions are two of the best ways to go outside their area of expertise.
Another simple way to go outside of the expertise of SJWs is to attack their name-calling by using logic and general intelligence (both outside their experience). If an SJW calls you a bigot, tell them that a bigot is defined as “a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions” then ask, “So by calling me a bigot, you realize that means you’re a bigot too, right?” If they’re confused or agitated, it’s a sign you’ve gotten under their skin and should keep going. Ask them why you should value the opinion of someone who’s obviously so bigoted. They’ll probably change the subject, walk away, or call you another name — all signs they’ve been defeated.
The reason the above example works is because this throws a wrench into the SJW’s game plan. When a conservative is called a bigot, their typical response goes something like, “No, I’m not a bigot! Please — say anything but that! Let me list off a million examples of how I’m not bigoted so you’ll quit calling me names!”
So you spend five minutes detailing all your non-bigoted views, or explaining why being opposed to illegal immigration isn’t bigoted. Then you turn to the SJW expecting them to accede to your view. Instead, they say, “Yeah, but you support a wall so you’re a racist!” Whatever you do, don’t get caught in the trap of explaining yourself — that’s been within the Left’s realm of experience for decades and they ignore it. More often than not, it’s their goal to get you on the defensive because it makes them seem morally superior. Go on the attack, make them go on the defensive, then watch them squirm.
Another favorite insult of SJWs is that someone’s “intolerant.” Intolerance is “unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one's own.” But SJWs are the most intolerant people in the world, probably about the same level as radical Muslims since members of both groups have even called for people they disagree with to be killed. Yet SJWs’ lack of self-awareness means they don’t even realize they’re intolerant. They actually believe they’re accepting of “a
ll people,” without recognizing the irony in how intolerant they are of conservatives. This lack of self-awareness is a weakness ripe for exploiting.
This rule is one reason Trump’s primary campaign was so successful. He went completely outside the experience of every other politician and strategist, causing rabid panic throughout the GOP establishment. Here are just a few examples of how he went outside of his opponents’ expertise:
He wasn’t a slave to political correctness. By being willing to actually say the things that everyday Americans were already thinking, he made the other Republicans look weak cowards.
He was willing to talk strongly about immigration rather than pander to the Hispanic voters who wouldn’t vote Republican even if he took a softer tone.
He was willing to take a hard stance on radical Islamic terrorism, even suggesting a temporary ban on Muslim immigration until we can “find out what’s going on.” The idea of such a ban was something that Leftists and the GOP establishment thought would be political suicide. Instead, Trump continued to rise in the polls because he was tapped into what real conservatives were thinking.
He talked about putting “America first” — another statement usually deemed heretical but had enough popular support to bring rallying cries of approval.
He drew away the curtain of how most politicians are just puppets for their Wall Street and big business donors, a message that resonated with liberals as well.
Demanded that states have more control, such as being able to be in charge of their own “bathroom laws” and schools.
Gained support from the LGBT community when he said North Carolina’s bathroom law would be bad for the state’s economy and that Caitlyn Jenner could use any bathroom she wanted in Trump Tower — a radical departure from what most conservatives would have said.