We’re all aware of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, the “bible” used by radicals to influence the masses to do their bidding. Alinsky first published Rules for Radicals in 1971 with the intent of providing counsel to young radicals on how to effect social changes. He’s come to be known as the “father of community organizing.”
When I say that “we’re all aware,” I’m referring to those of us who have been paying attention and don’t include the others who are essentially “inert,” never bothering themselves with the political machinations of the country, just riding the bench, at peace in their apathy.
Those of us who do follow politics have witnessed numerous occasions where the influence of Alinsky’s Rules is plainly evident.
Some of Alinsky’s rules jump right out as being recognizable staples of the radicals of today. What struck me was how closely some of our currently active rebellious groups seem to be following his directions.
Let’s take the “transgender” group, for instance. Transgender people are those whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex.
We’re seeing our existing institutions being attacked by those promoting the concept that transgendered individuals warrant special consideration and privileges. The fact is that according to a June 2016 study by the Williams Institute, transgendered individuals’ account for about 1.4 million people or 0.6% of adults in the population. It should be noted that the Williams Institute is a pro-transgender advocacy group at the University of California at Los Angeles
That means that 99.4% of the population are not transgender, yet the overwhelming majority (99.4%) are being forced to accept accommodations made for the 0.6 percent. Where is that “fairness” that the left so often rages about (but only when it suits them)?
Publicity surrounding the transgender issue has become a cause célèbre for the left and their influence results in media stories appearing everywhere. If one went simply by the number of references in the media, transgendered people would appear to be far more numerous and wield more power than is the case.
The left is experienced in these tactics since they are the same ones used to establish the LGBT crowd as being “normal.” Similar tactics are also being used by pro-Muslim groups (like CAIR) to gain influence for Islam in America so Islam can be accepted on an equal basis with Christianity.
Remember that Alinsky says, “Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.” So, they flood the media with stories relating to the issue so that consumers believe that the issue is far more important to a large portion of the population (which results in the perception that the group holds more power) than they really deserve.
That conjures up visions of the favorite word of activist blacks when they’re attacking white institutions: Disproportionality. Anytime that blacks occupy less than their proportional place in society (currently about 13%), the “D” word (Disproportionality) is used as a cudgel. But when blacks have penetrated other areas to a greater degree than their 13% might dictate, magically, the issue disappears from prominence. Where is the issue of disproportionality in the NFL (70% blacks) and the NBA (75% blacks)? And pretty much all of those players are paid millions to play the game.
It would seem that when only 0.6% of Americans identify as transgender, a proportional accommodation would be anything up to 5 percent might be acceptable. But no, what they’re lobbying for is representation in the restroom issue equal to heterosexual (normal) people – that accommodation seems to me to be clearly disproportionate. They want the ability for a man who supposedly identifies as a woman to be able to use the woman’s restroom and vice versa.
What does the public think about this accommodation? Ask the top management at Target Stores, who quickly jumped on the transgender bandwagon. I’ll bet that they have some pretty strong opinions after a public boycott caused them to lose over $15 billion dollars because of that decision.
In several highly-visible public entertainment and sports venue disputes, cities and states are being told that they must make changes to cater to transgender patrons or see the activity relocated to another locale where the trans people are thought to be more welcome. Both North Carolina and Texas are being warned that legislation relating to transgender bathrooms could result in losing sporting events. North Carolina could lose NCAA sporting events and the NFL has warned that sporting events wouldn’t consider Texas if the transgender bathroom bill passes.
Here we have two current cases of financial extortion devoted to influencing state legislation in favor of 0.6% of our population. The threats to withhold sporting events could amount to billions of dollars of lost income. In effect, they’re saying either make changes and treat transgender people as “special” and warranting special consideration or lose billions of dollars – isn’t that extortion?
That same Williams Institute survey (link above) also found that only 22.7% of people polled said that people should be able to change their legal sex by switching their preferred “gender identity.” So it’s not as if the entire population is clamoring for special treatment for those who are apparently confused with their gender identity.
So, that brings us to the big enchilada, the big question. When fewer than one-in-four Americans believe that changing one’s gender identity is reasonable and transgender people only make up 0.6% of our population …
WHO is pushing the agenda?