The ‘linsky Lindy

The ‘linsky Lindy

–Joe Bakanovic, July 24, 2012

Saul Alinksy, the hero of the American Left, News Media and author of the Leftist guide book to community organizing and radical revolution, “Rules for Radicals,” devised a set of rules for disrupting one’s political opponents while pushing your own political agenda.  These rules have become so ingrained in our society that many of us have adopted them without even realizing.  However, nowhere are these tactics more apparent than with the leftist drones who have been programmed to deploy them whenever they meet an argument of position which threatens their own ideology.  Once one becomes familiar with these rules and how they look in action, they become so easy to spot that one can actually learn to predict which rule will be employed against you before it is even uttered.  But not to worry: so complete is the indoctrination that the drones will still attempt to use it even after you have told them to their face what it is they are going to do.  What’s more, they will often deny that they are doing it while they are in the process of doing exactly what you said they would.  I like to call this little dance the “’linsky Lindy,” and I would like to give you a short little lesson on how it goes.

First, you need to know Alinsky’s rules:

“Tactics are those conscious deliberate acts by which human beings live with each other and deal with the world around them. … Here our concern is with the tactic of taking; how the Have-Nots can take power away from the Haves.” p.126

Always remember the first rule of power tactics (pps.127-134):

1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”

2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear and retreat…. [and] the collapse of communication.

3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”

6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”

7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time….”

8. “Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.”

9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”

10. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.”

11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside… every positive has its negative.”

12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”

13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and ‘frozen.’…

“…any target can always say, ‘Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?’ When your ‘freeze the target,’ you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments…. Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the ‘others’ come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target…’

“One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.” (pps.127-134)

Now, assume you have presented your leftist friend with a well reasoned argument supported by facts, examples and illustrations.  Your friend will immediately recognize that they cannot do battle with you on grounds of logic and reason because this is your strength, so they will employ rule #2 and seek to avoid having to use logic and reason.

They most often do this by making statements you can’t simply confirm or refute and then acting as though you are stupid for not knowing them in an attempt to infer their your apparent ignorance implies your argument must be wrong.  This is a combination of rules #1 (acting as though they have the high ground and know more than you do) and #3 (simply using irrational thinking against someone who uses reason).


President Obama saying that, if you have a business, you didn’t build it: someone else did that.  This is the perfect example.  They assume that they have refuted you by telling you that Obama did not say what he said, and then they play him saying exactly these words and assume they have made their point (rule #3).  If you try to point out that they just made your point, they tell you that you must be stupid or call you a hater and pretend like you can’t possibly understand because of this (rule #1).

This rule also includes the unwritten command to NEVER try to match a rational opponent with a reasoned argument or objective research.  Real thinking and “book work” are both outside the expertise of the leftist drone.

Another favorite of the ‘linsky Lindy drones is to hold you to your own standards while never admitting to them or even their own.  This is rule #4.


Have you ever tried to point out the hypocrisy of the left just to have them deny it when it is as plain as the nose on their face?  That is rule #4 in action.  If you pay attention, you will see this one in use on a daily basis.

Another favorite of the drones – and possibly their most popular – is rule #5.  This one consists of nothing more than making fun of you and/or calling you names.  Often, they throw in a little rule #1 and act as though everyone who is “hip” understands how right they are in making fun of you.  But to those of us living in the real world, this is called ad hominem and it is pure irrationality in motion.

Rule #6 is easy: if the drones think it is fun – and being bullies at heart, they love to make fun of people – then it is a “good” tactic.

Rule #7 explains why you can never get the drones to stay on point: if you do anything too long, the drones get bored.  Consequently, they use rule #7 whenever they get tired of the conversation.

Rule #8 plays to that basic character of the drone: the bully.  They like to kick people when they are down.  They also have more than a little “nagging wife” in them, so this tactic also falls under #6 – do something fun.  Rule #8 simply states “pile on and don’t let up.”  This is why the drones are always badgering people – even about things that happened under the first Bush.

#9 is “threaten.”  This rule appeals to the inner terrorist in all leftists.  Simply put, threaten to destroy your opponent’s character, or life, or business.

#10 says to keep pushing until you frustrate or piss off your opponent until they make a mistake and say something they don’t mean.  Then you go back to the top of the rules and start hammering them for the mistake all over again – acting the whole time as though you proved something when you only proved you are an irrational bully.  You will never get the ‘linksy Lindy drones to see or admit to this (see rule #2 and 4)

#11 is a little more sophisticated.  This rule involves pressing a despicable act so hard and so long that people start thinking the drones are right – mostly just to shut them up.


Marching on a house with a CEO’s when only his children are home, threatening to burn it down with the children in it, and ending up getting people to believe they were doing something moral and just by standing up the an “evil CEO” when they were really just terrorizing defenseless children.  The attack on the TEA Party is another example.

#12 has been largely forgotten.  The only thing the drones know is “TAX THE RICH” and “GIVE ME MORE.”  In reality, this rule has never been practiced by the drones, though their leaders think about it all the time.  Every one of them has their own utopian scheme, and none of them will ever work.

#13 is the most evil.  This is the rule of personal destruction.  Whenever the drones encounter a particularly effective opponent, they will viciously attack that person without conscience or remorse.


The attacks on Sarah Palin’s children to discredit her – even her special needs baby.  Also the attacks you see against Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh.


Look for name calling.  This is ad hominem and can be in the form of vicious insults to very subtle inferences.

Look for distractions.  They will often argue about something that is not related to your argument, or about some insignificantly small aspect of your argument.

Look for composition fallacy.  This is when they attack a small part of your argument and, if they get you to concede they have a point, or even if they sense people think they do when they don’t, they will use that small point to pretend as though they defeated your entire argument.

Look for straw man.  This is when they put words in your mouth and claim you said or meant something you never said.  This is how they get racism out of things people never say or do: they simply make it up and start acting like it is true.

Look for unsupported assertions.  This is when they just start throwing more accusations at you then you can counter.  They will NEVER offer anything to rebut you, nor will they even discuss their own accusations.  They will ask but never answer questions, and if they do answer, it will be more of the same diversionary confusion.

Naturally, ALL of this is irrational, but then, that doesn’t matter because it is designed to destroy reasoned arguments so you can insert your own political agenda in the void you have caused by destroying all reason in the public debate.  At its core, it is wanton destruction, thus, it is evil.

And there you have it: the ‘linsky Lindy in one easy lesson.


From Real Clear Politics:

Obama’s Affinity for Saul Alinsky

From Breitbart:

How Saul Alinsky Taught Obama to Say One Thing and Do the Opposite


CNN Turns Blind Eye To Obama-Alinsky Ties

From FOX News (video):

14 thoughts on “The ‘linsky Lindy

  1. President Obama saying that, if you have a business, you didn’t build it: someone else did that. This is the perfect example.
    How long are you going to insist that Obama said that? It doesn’t make sense! You said yourself, that he is not stupid, so why keep repeating such a stupid assertion? Even Utah knows better, b; time you caught up.

    • @Greg,

      See rules #11 and 8 (also #5 and 13 – as applied to those trying to expose the truth about what Obama really said)

      [see what I mean about predictability? Too easy – and they still do it anyway 🙂 ]

    • Notice how Joe followed your question about why he keeps misrepresenting a simple statement (#11 & #13) with an irrelevant distraction containing another distortion (the devil reference)? No wonder he seemingly knows so much about Alinsky–he’s a follower!

      • Let me get out on B’s limb with him; he is obeying Hitler’s dictum; repeat a lie often enough, and people will begin to believe it.

        • Apparently. I thought other folks here–if not Joe–might be interested in the info and link I provided below.

  2. The attacks trying to link the TEA Party to the Colorado shooting and those on Chick-fil-A are both examples of Alinsky-based attacks on political opponents. They are intended to force the acceptance of only one side’s agenda by destroying the other side. There is no “tolerance” or “diversity” in what is happening here: it is all about creating an issue for the purpose of building political power which is then wielded for the sole purpose of furthering an agenda. Alinsky, himself, said this is all that matters, and that there should be no concern for morality: the ends justify the means. That is why these people do not care that they are trampling the individual rights and liberties of innocent people in the name of “freedom.”

    Alinsky knew what he was doing when he dedicated his book to the devil.

  3. “Extensive research has failed to uncover even a single reference by Obama to Alinsky. … Alinsky was an aggressively anti-communist, anti-big government, populist with a healthy contempt for liberals. He seemingly would be more at home in the Tea Party than the Democratic Party. Jacques Maritain, Pope Paul VI’s mentor and prominent drafter of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights called Alinsky “one of the few really great men of our century.”

    That quote comes from Ralph Benko, a member of the Tea Party Patriots and advisor to the American Principles Project who is also a former member of the Reagan administration who writes for Forbes and the Daily Caller (which most people consider to be a conservative media, but which I suppose you’ll now consider to be Communist rags). He also points out, as other rational folks have, “Rules for Radicals, popular lore aside, is not dedicated to Lucifer, but to ‘Irene’— Saul’s wife and soulmate. Alinsky considered the highest good to be human dignity.”

    But even though the truth has been pointed out to you and you could check it with some other research, I’m sure you’ll keep lying about this, too. Right, Joe?

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.