[Debate] (Fwd) Strategic toolkit: Naming the moment; Rules for radicals

Sun Apr 1 14:28:23 BST 2012

Not "perfect" but "better" ideologies, organizations, strategies, and
tactics than hitherto considered, let alone employed, are needed.
I've been following a lot of Egyptians (broadly on the left of center)
on Twitter -- a lot of them sound fairly desperate these days.  Errors
have to be analyzed as errors, or else better ideas and practices that
help people win rather than suffer more setbacks won't come about.

On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 9:02 AM, lfcscally at hotmail.com
<lfcscally at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Ah I get it the masses must have a perfect political  consciousness before
> they take to the streets not to say a perfect plan must b great to live in
> ur   abstract world of humann beings. Plse send me the address I wouldd like
> to live there
>
>
> Sent from my HTC
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" <critical.montages at gmail.com>
> To: "Debate is a listserve that attempts to promote information and analyses
> of interest to the independent left in South and Southern Africa"
> <debate-list at fahamu.org>
> Subject: [Debate] (Fwd) Strategic toolkit: Naming the moment; Rules for
> radicals
> Date: Sun, Apr 1, 2012 13:06
>
>
> ZABA, Mubarak, Gaddafi, Saleh, etc. weren't the point.  Making them
> the point only benefited the right opposition (which was stronger to
> begin with than the left opposition even in countries where there's a
> left opposition like Tunisia, Egypt, etc.).
>
> On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 7:56 AM, lfcscally at hotmail.com
> <lfcscally at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> No ur rite yoshie Egypt has been an unmitigated disaster ps the  post was
>> ye
>> idea of  April fools post wasn't it?
>>
>> Sent from my HTC
>>
>>
>> ----- Reply message -----
>> From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" <critical.montages at gmail.com>
>> To: "Debate is a listserve that attempts to promote information and
>> analyses
>> of interest to the independent left in South and Southern Africa"
>> <debate-list at fahamu.org>
>> Subject: [Debate] (Fwd) Strategic toolkit: Naming the moment; Rules for
>> radicals
>> Date: Sun, Apr 1, 2012 10:07
>>
>>
>> "Naming the Moment" seems more helpful than "Rules for Radicals."
>>
>> BTW, "Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than
>> institutions" kind of sums up what a lot of activists did in the Arab
>> Revolts.  Didn't help them, did it?
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Patrick Bond <pbond at mail.ngo.za> wrote:
>>> (Have any debaters utilised two old-fashioned strategic tools that still
>>> seem to me to have relevance today? 'Naming the Moment' and 'Rules for
>>> Radicals' are books summarised below. Let me know if you want .pdfs of
>>> these
>>> long 1960s and 1990s riffs. Dated but compelling.)
>>>
>>>
>>> Naming the Moment
>>>
>>> The process of political analysis for action, or naming the moment moves
>>> through four phases:
>>>
>>> PHASE 1 -Identifying Ourselves And Our Interests
>>>
>>> Who are 'we' and how do we see the world?
>>>
>>> How has our view been shaped by our race, gender, class, age, sector,
>>> religion, etc.?
>>>
>>> How do we define Our constituency? Are we of, with, or for the people
>>> most
>>> affected by the issue(s) we work on?
>>>
>>> What do we believe about the current structure of power? about what it
>>> could
>>> be? about how we get there?
>>>
>>> PHASE 2 -Naming The Issues/Struggles
>>>
>>> What current issue/struggle is most critical to the interests of our
>>> group?
>>>
>>> What are the opposing interests (contradictions) around the issue?
>>>
>>> What are we fighting for in working on this issue -in the short-term and
>>> in
>>> the long-term?
>>>
>>> What's the history of struggle on this issue? What have been the critical
>>> moments of the past?
>>>
>>> PHASE 3 -Assessing the Forces
>>>
>>> Who's with us and against us on this issue (in economic, political, and
>>> ideological terms)?
>>>
>>> What are their short-term and long-term interests?
>>>
>>> What are their expressed and their real interests?
>>>
>>> What are the strengths and weaknesses of both sides?
>>>
>>> What about the uncommitted?
>>>
>>> What actors do we need more information about?
>>>
>>> What's the overall balance of forces?
>>>
>>> Who's winning and who's losing and why?
>>>
>>> PHASE 4 -Planning For Action
>>>
>>> How have the forces shifted from the past to the present? What future
>>> shifts
>>> can we anticipate?
>>>
>>> What 'free space' do we have to move in?
>>>
>>> How do we build on our strengths and our weaknesses?
>>>
>>> Whom should we be forming alliances with?
>>>
>>> In the short-term and in the long-term?
>>>
>>> What actions could we take?
>>>
>>> What are the constraints and possibilities of each?
>>>
>>> Who will do what and when?
>>>
>>> ***
>>>
>>> Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals
>>>
>>> RULE 1: "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you
>>> have." Power is derived from 2 main sources - money and people.
>>> "Have-Nots"
>>> must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which
>>> there
>>> is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a
>>> difficult
>>> time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with
>>> economic
>>> arguments.)
>>>
>>> RULE 2: "Never go outside the expertise of your people." It results in
>>> confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of
>>> anyone.
>>> (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don't address the "real"
>>> issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no
>>> knowledge..)
>
>>>
>>> RULE 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.)
>>>
>>> RULE 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." If the rule is
>>> that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them
>>> with
>>> this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a
>>> serious rule. The besieged entity's very credibility and reputation is at
>>> stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its
>>> commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)
>>>
>>> RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." There is no defense. It's
>>> irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to
>>> force
>>> the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want
>>> to
>>> create anger and fear.)
>>>
>>> RULE 6: "A good tactic is one your people enjoy." They'll keep doing it
>>> without urging and come back to do more. They're doing their thing, and
>>> will
>>> even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no
>>> different that any other human being. We all avoid "un-fun" activities,
>>> and
>>> but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)
>>>
>>> RULE 7: "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag." Don't become
>>> old
>>> news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and
>>> involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)
>>>
>>> RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to
>>> keep
>>> the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit
>>> them
>>> from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all
>>> sides,
>>> never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover
>>> and
>>> re-strategize.)
>>>
>>> RULE 9: "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."
>>> Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any
>>> activist.
>>> (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case
>>> scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists' minds. The
>>> upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy,
>>> creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The
>>> possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)
>>>
>>> RULE 10: "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and
>>> become a positive." Violence from the other side can win the public to
>>> your
>>> side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this
>>> tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions
>>> in
>>> the early to mid-20th Century incurred management's wrath, often in the
>>> form
>>> of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)
>>>
>>> RULE 11: "The price of a successful attack is a constructive
>>> alternative.."
>
>>> Never let the enemy score points because you're caught without a solution
>>> to
>>> the problem. (Old saw: If you're not part of the solution, you're part of
>>> the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is
>>> to
>>> hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So,
>>> they have to have a compromise solution.)
>>>
>>> RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."
>>> Cut
>>> off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after
>>> people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This
>>> is
>>> cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule
>>> works.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Debate-list mailing list
>>> Debate-list at fahamu.org
>>> http://lists.fahamu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debate-list
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Yoshie Furuhashi
>> <http://mrzine.org/>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Debate-list mailing list
>> Debate-list at fahamu.org
>> http://lists.fahamu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debate-list
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Debate-list mailing list
>> Debate-list at fahamu.org
>> http://lists.fahamu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debate-list
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Yoshie Furuhashi
> <http://mrzine.org/>
> _______________________________________________
> Debate-list mailing list
> Debate-list at fahamu.org
> http://lists.fahamu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debate-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Debate-list mailing list
> Debate-list at fahamu.org
> http://lists.fahamu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debate-list
>

-- 
Yoshie Furuhashi
<http://mrzine.org/>