The other difference is that in the Alinsky model, the organizer is supposed to be hidden and subordinate to the movement s/he organizes. Once you get to be president, your cover has been blown, and the movements you once organized become disposable.
Joel Blau Max Sawicky wrote: > Let's recall that Alinsky organizing is terminally small-bore and > localist. > The idea of a national movement aimed at some big change in political > economy is foreign to it. Though it looks good on the resumé! > > > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Jim Devine <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Julio: > >> He [Obama] does > >> not trust in, believe in, or want popular involvement in politics. > > Doug: > > He comes from the school of thought that Adolph Reed once > characterized as believing that if you just got all the smart > people together on the Vineyard, they could solve everything.< > > whatever happened to Saul Alinsky and BHO's old job of "community > organizer" (that Rudi the Duce made so much fun of at the GOP > convention)? Yeah, I know: it was mostly -- or almost entirely -- an > illusion. But you gotta ask those rhetorical questions! > > BTW, in contrast, the GOP doesn't reject popular involvement in > politics, as long as its moneyed. > -- > Jim Devine / "The conventional view serves to protect us from the > painful job of thinking." - John Kenneth Galbraith > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
