“Rules for Radicals” By President B. Obama…

So I was listening to the Presidents speech and his little “where the world is if we are going to change it to where we think it should be” line, and I knew it sounded familiar.  Then I caught a bit of Mark Levin today and heard him mention Saul Alinksy and his book “Rules for Radicals”, and it clicked.

The opening line, Chapter “The Purpose”,  “What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be.  The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the haves on how to hold power.  Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away”

If you haven’t read this book, you really should, not only is it important to know what the other side is doing, but those of us fighting for liberty could benefit from doing some of this ourselves.  Another quote used by Saul Alinsky himself, “Let them call me rebel and welcome, I feel no concern from it; but I should suffer the misery of devils, were I to make a whore of my soul by swearing allegiance to one whose character is that of a sottish, stupid, stubborn, worthless, brutish man.”  Those words of course are from Thomas Paine.

Rules for Radicals tells us about another story as well, that of Liberia and their history of “freedom”.  While speaking at the United Nations a Liberian Delegate stated, “that his country had been deprived of the benefits of colonialism.”  Reactions to this were shocking but the example has deep meaning.  The people of Liberia had never been exploited by colonial rule and so never banded together in order to win their freedom.  They had been handed their freedom as a gift and hence the political sterility of Liberia.

As Finley Peter Dunne’s Mr.Dooley put it,

DON’T ask f’r rights. Take thim. An’ don’t let anny wan give thim to ye. A right that is handed to ye f’r nawthin’ has somethin’ the matther with it. It’s more than likely it’s on’y a wrong turned inside out.  

I’m a firm believer in the use of truthful satire.

Funny thing about the history of Liberia, even though the people who were “settled” there were free, the Americo-Liberians, African-American colonists and their offspring, they were not the indigenous people to inhabit the area.  The indigenous people of the area engaged in resistance, much of it brutal from the inception of colonization until at least 1980.  It seems history repeats itself once again.  When land is simply claimed and handed over, it often leads to generations of fighting and war, which leads to a whole new generation of folks looking to fight for their freedom.

Rules for Radicals might be the work of a leftist Marxist, but it’s still a good guide book on how to fight, politically.

I

Who is Rand Paul?

Who is this man really?

I’ve noticed a pattern with Rand that troubles me.  He goes back and forth between Supporting his principles and selling them down the drain.  Yesterday he sold out during his CPAC speech calling for a 17% personal income tax but today he stands for principles introducing the Life at Conception Act. Last week he opposed drones with his filibuster but  just the week before, he voted for John Kerry for Secretary of State even after vilifying him publicly just days prior.

This is a troubling time for those us who are trying to recruit new members into the cause of liberty.  What are the young generations to think?  Can you imagine a teenager or a college freshman who jumps onto the  liberty bandwagon, mostly unaware of the last 10 years.  Who starts reading and learning Mises, Rothbard, and Bastiat by YAL along with the words of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington but has never been exposed to Ron Paul’s consistent rhetoric and voting record, who consistently applied Mises, Rothbard, and Bastiat to his brand of Jeffersonian practical politics.

The young buck instead gets introduced to Rand Paul as the current figurehead of the liberty movement. This new student and activist doesn’t see consistency in his rhetoric or deeds.  Rothbard talks about non-aggression while Rand votes for sanctions on Iran.  Thomas Jefferson said, “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” Rand says, “An Attack on Isreal is an attack on the United States”. Rothbard says taxation is theft and Rand supports a 17% personal income tax on people making minimum wage.

What effect do you think that will have on newcomers to the movement?

When Rand Paul talks about principles, Who’s principles? When he talks about standing for something, standing for what exactly?  I think it’s too early to tell yet just what kind of leader Rand Paul is going to become.  I still have hope, but I’d like to see more consistency.  So far, he’s just another Republican looking to get support from as many camps as he can, saying whatever he needs to.