COMMUNIST SAUL ALINSKY, TOPIC OF HILLARY CLINTON THESIS AT WELLESLEY COLLEGE Fools here want us to believe Glenn Beck uncovered this Communist

Markle wrote:Panicked Progressives want us to believe that Communist Saul Alinsky is an unknown bit player in the Progressive Agenda.

That is an unadulterated LIE

Wednesday, 24 September 2014
Letter From Hillary Clinton to Saul Alinsky Reveals Close Relationship
Written by  Raven Clabough

[...]

Alinsky was a proponent of fanning the flames of hostility. He wrote in Rules for Radicals that the organizer must “rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression.”

He must make the people “feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future.”

In the same book, Alinsky contends that a true community organizer "does not have a fixed truth; truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing." He is a political relativist. (Some say this may be where Obama's former regulatory czar Cass Sunstein’s philosophy on conspiracy theories is grounded.) Critics note that it sounds like a page right out of George Orwell's 1984 — the idea that fixed truths are a danger and must be eliminated.

Quoting Lenin, Alinsky wrote in Rules for Radicals, “They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and for reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be through the bullet.”

Alinsky also observed, “Utilize all events of the period for your purpose,” an idea reminiscent of Obama's former Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's remark “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

Alinsky's chilling rules outlined in Rules for Radicals can be found here. Alinsky’s theories espouse Marxist and socialist ideologies, and this is the man on whom Hillary Clinton wrote her Wellesley College thesis. While writing her thesis at Wellesley on Alinsky’s theory of community organizing, Clinton met with Alinsky to have what she would later refer to as “biennial conversations.”

In her thesis, Hillary attempted to portray Alinsky as a mainstream American icon, writing, “His are the words used in our schools and churches, by our parents and their friends, by our peers. The difference is that Alinsky really believes in them.”

In the conclusion to her thesis, Clinton attempts to paint a rosier view of the ideologies Alinsky espoused:  

Alinsky is regarded by many as the proponent of a dangerous socio/political philosophy. As such, he has been feared — just as Eugene Debs [the five-time Socialist Party candidate for U.S. president] or Walt Whitman or Martin Luther King has been feared, because each embraced the most radical of political faiths — democracy.

Her thesis showcases what is clearly a reverence for Alinsky and his views.

Still, Clinton did her best to downplay her relationship with Alinsky. In her memoir Living History, she references Alinsky just once when she indicates that she rejected a job offer from him in 1969 so that she could attend law school instead. She writes in that memoir that her intent was to follow a more conventional path.

Likewise, evidence that Clinton wanted to disconnect herself from Alinsky became clear when the White House had requested that Wellesley College seal her 1968 thesis from the public.  But the publication of a 1971 letter from Clinton to Alinsky, and the response she received from Alinsky’s secretary, undermine any assertion that Clinton was not faithful to Alinsky and his ideology.

The letters were obtained by the Free Beacon news website and are part of the archives for the Industrial Areas Foundation, a training center for community organizers founded by Alinsky. According to the letters, Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals was earnestly anticipated by a young Clinton, who reached out to Alinsky in the summer of 1971 to ask,

When is that new book [Rules for Radicals] coming out — or has it come and I somehow missed the fulfillment of Revelation? I have just had my one-thousandth conversation about Reveille [for Radicals] and need some new material to throw at people. You are being rediscovered again as the New Left-type politicos are finally beginning to think seriously about the hard work and mechanics of organizing. I seem to have survived law school, slightly bruised, with my belief in and zest for organizing intact.

[...]

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/19179-published-letter-from-hillary-clinton-to-saul-alinsky-reveals-close-relationship

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:Panicked Progressives want us to believe that Communist Saul Alinsky is an unknown bit player in the Progressive Agenda.

That is an unadulterated LIE

Wednesday, 24 September 2014
Letter From Hillary Clinton to Saul Alinsky Reveals Close Relationship
Written by  Raven Clabough

[...]

Alinsky was a proponent of fanning the flames of hostility. He wrote in Rules for Radicals that the organizer must “rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression.”

He must make the people “feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future.”

In the same book, Alinsky contends that a true community organizer "does not have a fixed truth; truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing." He is a political relativist. (Some say this may be where Obama's former regulatory czar Cass Sunstein’s philosophy on conspiracy theories is grounded.) Critics note that it sounds like a page right out of George Orwell's 1984 — the idea that fixed truths are a danger and must be eliminated.

Quoting Lenin, Alinsky wrote in Rules for Radicals, “They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and for reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be through the bullet.”

Alinsky also observed, “Utilize all events of the period for your purpose,” an idea reminiscent of Obama's former Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's remark “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

Alinsky's chilling rules outlined in Rules for Radicals can be found here. Alinsky’s theories espouse Marxist and socialist ideologies, and this is the man on whom Hillary Clinton wrote her Wellesley College thesis. While writing her thesis at Wellesley on Alinsky’s theory of community organizing, Clinton met with Alinsky to have what she would later refer to as “biennial conversations.”

In her thesis, Hillary attempted to portray Alinsky as a mainstream American icon, writing, “His are the words used in our schools and churches, by our parents and their friends, by our peers. The difference is that Alinsky really believes in them.”

In the conclusion to her thesis, Clinton attempts to paint a rosier view of the ideologies Alinsky espoused:  

Alinsky is regarded by many as the proponent of a dangerous socio/political philosophy. As such, he has been feared — just as Eugene Debs [the five-time Socialist Party candidate for U.S. president] or Walt Whitman or Martin Luther King has been feared, because each embraced the most radical of political faiths — democracy.

Her thesis showcases what is clearly a reverence for Alinsky and his views.

Still, Clinton did her best to downplay her relationship with Alinsky. In her memoir Living History, she references Alinsky just once when she indicates that she rejected a job offer from him in 1969 so that she could attend law school instead. She writes in that memoir that her intent was to follow a more conventional path.

Likewise, evidence that Clinton wanted to disconnect herself from Alinsky became clear when the White House had requested that Wellesley College seal her 1968 thesis from the public.  But the publication of a 1971 letter from Clinton to Alinsky, and the response she received from Alinsky’s secretary, undermine any assertion that Clinton was not faithful to Alinsky and his ideology.

The letters were obtained by the Free Beacon news website and are part of the archives for the Industrial Areas Foundation, a training center for community organizers founded by Alinsky. According to the letters, Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals was earnestly anticipated by a young Clinton, who reached out to Alinsky in the summer of 1971 to ask,

When is that new book [Rules for Radicals] coming out — or has it come and I somehow missed the fulfillment of Revelation? I have just had my one-thousandth conversation about Reveille [for Radicals] and need some new material to throw at people. You are being rediscovered again as the New Left-type politicos are finally beginning to think seriously about the hard work and mechanics of organizing. I seem to have survived law school, slightly bruised, with my belief in and zest for organizing intact.

[...]

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/19179-published-letter-from-hillary-clinton-to-saul-alinsky-reveals-close-relationship

"Alinsky is regarded by many as the proponent of a dangerous socio/political philosophy. As such, he has been feared — just as Eugene Debs [the five-time Socialist Party candidate for U.S. president] or Walt Whitman or Martin Luther King has been feared, because each embraced the most radical of political faiths — democracy."    Sounds more like a patriot than a villain!!

2seaoat wrote:Sorry Markle......an undergraduate paper is not a thesis.   What she wrote was a term paper called a thesis by Wesley.  She never was in a graduate or doctoral program, and she NEVER had to defend her thesis.   She submitted an undergraduate paper which she received an A.   Her paper was extremely advanced for a senor undergraduate student where she actually did interviews with the subject of the paper.   Although she was sympathetic, she was also critical.   What a stupid sophomoric propaganda attempt which backfires if people actually look at how fricking intelligent this woman is.   My friend who was her classmate said she has a remarkable mind even back in high school, where I can tell some silly story about her going door to door for Barry Goldwater just like I did.....you know Hillary was a diehard Republican when she arrived at Wesley.   I wrote undergraduate papers which were actually radical, and more conservative, but to think those papers define who I am now could only be pushed by anti intellectual slugs who are idiots....which you continually try to prove here.   Undergraduate programs can call a paper a dissertation......it does not make it so....Hillary wrote a fricking paper which her undergraduate program called it a thesis.......

othershoe1030 wrote:

Anyone wishing to effect change in our culture, whether to register voters or organize workers into unions or to change the criminal justice system or the tax code can use these principals set down by Alinsky.

2seaoat wrote:.....quit spamming.

othershoe1030 wrote:Markle, let me put your quote in context.

othershoe1030 wrote:Quoting Lenin, Alinsky wrote in Rules for Radicals, “They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and for reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be through the bullet.”


Markle, let me put your quote in context. In the passage you posted (above) the conversation or exchange of ideas is not between Alinsky and his readers or followers but between Trotsky and Lennin... Alinsky is talking about viable options for taking power as expressed by Trotsky and Lennin.

"A naked illustration of this point is to be found in Trotsky's summary of Lenin's famous April Theses, issued shortly after Lenin's return from exile. Lenin pointed out: "The task of the Bolsheviks is to overthrow the Imperialist Government. But this government rests upon the support of the Social Revolutionaries and Mensheviks, who in turn are supported by the trustfulness of the masses of people. We are in the minority. [Lenin says] In these circumstances there can be no talk of violence on our side." The essence of Lenin's speeches during this period was "They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and for reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be through the bullet." And it was.

"Mahatma Gandhi and his use of passive resistance in India presents a striking example of the selection of means. Here, too, we see the inevitable alchemy of time working upon moral equivalents as a consequence of the changing circumstances and positions of the Have-Nots to the Haves, with the natural shift of goals from getting to keeping."

Markle wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:Panicked Progressives want us to believe that Communist Saul Alinsky is an unknown bit player in the Progressive Agenda.

That is an unadulterated LIE

Wednesday, 24 September 2014
Letter From Hillary Clinton to Saul Alinsky Reveals Close Relationship
Written by  Raven Clabough

[...]

Alinsky was a proponent of fanning the flames of hostility. He wrote in Rules for Radicals that the organizer must “rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression.”

He must make the people “feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future.”

In the same book, Alinsky contends that a true community organizer "does not have a fixed truth; truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing." He is a political relativist. (Some say this may be where Obama's former regulatory czar Cass Sunstein’s philosophy on conspiracy theories is grounded.) Critics note that it sounds like a page right out of George Orwell's 1984 — the idea that fixed truths are a danger and must be eliminated.

Quoting Lenin, Alinsky wrote in Rules for Radicals, “They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and for reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be through the bullet.”

Alinsky also observed, “Utilize all events of the period for your purpose,” an idea reminiscent of Obama's former Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's remark “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

Alinsky's chilling rules outlined in Rules for Radicals can be found here. Alinsky’s theories espouse Marxist and socialist ideologies, and this is the man on whom Hillary Clinton wrote her Wellesley College thesis. While writing her thesis at Wellesley on Alinsky’s theory of community organizing, Clinton met with Alinsky to have what she would later refer to as “biennial conversations.”

In her thesis, Hillary attempted to portray Alinsky as a mainstream American icon, writing, “His are the words used in our schools and churches, by our parents and their friends, by our peers. The difference is that Alinsky really believes in them.”

In the conclusion to her thesis, Clinton attempts to paint a rosier view of the ideologies Alinsky espoused:  

Alinsky is regarded by many as the proponent of a dangerous socio/political philosophy. As such, he has been feared — just as Eugene Debs [the five-time Socialist Party candidate for U.S. president] or Walt Whitman or Martin Luther King has been feared, because each embraced the most radical of political faiths — democracy.

Her thesis showcases what is clearly a reverence for Alinsky and his views.

Still, Clinton did her best to downplay her relationship with Alinsky. In her memoir Living History, she references Alinsky just once when she indicates that she rejected a job offer from him in 1969 so that she could attend law school instead. She writes in that memoir that her intent was to follow a more conventional path.

Likewise, evidence that Clinton wanted to disconnect herself from Alinsky became clear when the White House had requested that Wellesley College seal her 1968 thesis from the public.  But the publication of a 1971 letter from Clinton to Alinsky, and the response she received from Alinsky’s secretary, undermine any assertion that Clinton was not faithful to Alinsky and his ideology.

The letters were obtained by the Free Beacon news website and are part of the archives for the Industrial Areas Foundation, a training center for community organizers founded by Alinsky. According to the letters, Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals was earnestly anticipated by a young Clinton, who reached out to Alinsky in the summer of 1971 to ask,

When is that new book [Rules for Radicals] coming out — or has it come and I somehow missed the fulfillment of Revelation? I have just had my one-thousandth conversation about Reveille [for Radicals] and need some new material to throw at people. You are being rediscovered again as the New Left-type politicos are finally beginning to think seriously about the hard work and mechanics of organizing. I seem to have survived law school, slightly bruised, with my belief in and zest for organizing intact.

[...]

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/19179-published-letter-from-hillary-clinton-to-saul-alinsky-reveals-close-relationship

"Alinsky is regarded by many as the proponent of a dangerous socio/political philosophy. As such, he has been feared — just as Eugene Debs [the five-time Socialist Party candidate for U.S. president] or Walt Whitman or Martin Luther King has been feared, because each embraced the most radical of political faiths — democracy."    Sounds more like a patriot than a villain!!

Of course, you would be drawn to a Communist who idolized Stalin.  Tell us something we do not know.

2seaoat wrote:Do not care to feed this type of spam.....Hillary Clinton a communist.....dear God Mr. Markle is a fool.   It is so idiotic that it would otherwise be funny except this constant distortion and propaganda is purposeful......it makes otherwise normal human beings believe that Hillary Clinton broke the law and begin chanting lock her up.....when reality is that she broke no laws.....so to give this kind of propaganda any deference is a waste of time....it is idiotic.  Point out the distortions, and do not try to explain what does not have to be explained.

Saul Alinsky wrote:

Thank the sweet baby Jebus, we strong-armed Boards into allowing this fascist propagandist a voice on our forum.

Hatred, and intolerance, and outright lies are so beguiling and fun.

What would we do without him??[/font]

2seaoat wrote:Sorry Markle......an undergraduate paper is not a thesis.   What she wrote was a term paper called a thesis by Wesley.  She never was in a graduate or doctoral program, and she NEVER had to defend her thesis.   She submitted an undergraduate paper which she received an A.   Her paper was extremely advanced for a senor undergraduate student where she actually did interviews with the subject of the paper.   Although she was sympathetic, she was also critical.   What a stupid sophomoric propaganda attempt which backfires if people actually look at how fricking intelligent this woman is.   My friend who was her classmate said she has a remarkable mind even back in high school, where I can tell some silly story about her going door to door for Barry Goldwater just like I did.....you know Hillary was a diehard Republican when she arrived at Wesley.   I wrote undergraduate papers which were actually radical, and more conservative, but to think those papers define who I am now could only be pushed by anti intellectual slugs who are idiots....which you continually try to prove here.   Undergraduate programs can call a paper a dissertation......it does not make it so....Hillary wrote a fricking paper which her undergraduate program called it a thesis.......

Bob wrote:

Saul Alinsky wrote:

Thank the sweet baby Jebus, we strong-armed Boards into allowing this fascist propagandist a voice on our forum.

Hatred, and intolerance, and outright lies are so beguiling and fun.

What would we do without him??[/font]

The hatred Markle has for Obama is equaled only by the hatred you people have for Trump.  lol

Markle wrote:

Bob wrote:

Saul Alinsky wrote:

Thank the sweet baby Jebus, we strong-armed Boards into allowing this fascist propagandist a voice on our forum.

Hatred, and intolerance, and outright lies are so beguiling and fun.

What would we do without him??[/font]

The hatred Markle has for Obama is equaled only by the hatred you people have for Trump.  lol

ANOTHER LIE.  Not unexpected.

Unlike you, and most other Progressives, I don't HATE ANYONE.  I pray nightly for the safety and health of Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama and all our leadership.

I do VEHEMENTLY HATE what he has done to our country and to the rest of the world.

I certainly do not hate you although I do wonder why you find it necessary to lie about me.

Floridatexan wrote:

Markle wrote:

Bob wrote:

Saul Alinsky wrote:

Thank the sweet baby Jebus, we strong-armed Boards into allowing this fascist propagandist a voice on our forum.

Hatred, and intolerance, and outright lies are so beguiling and fun.

What would we do without him??[/font]

The hatred Markle has for Obama is equaled only by the hatred you people have for Trump.  lol

ANOTHER LIE.  Not unexpected.

Unlike you, and most other Progressives, I don't HATE ANYONE.  I pray nightly for the safety and health of Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama and all our leadership.

I do VEHEMENTLY HATE what he has done to our country and to the rest of the world.

I certainly do not hate you although I do wonder why you find it necessary to lie about me.

Oh, please...you pray for President Obama...who's the liar?  I'm going to wager here that your church preaches the prosperity gospel.  I'm also going to guess that you've crossed a few ethical boundary lines in your less-than-stellar real estate career and that you console yourself with money and things.  I bet you're too lazy to cook for yourself and clean your own house.  Why else would you support a hate mongering, narcissistic thief like Trump?