Trending
Over the years we have written editorials bemoaning the loss of civility in public discourse. Sadly, we concluded it is more than just boorishness -- it is a political tactic. Our last presidential election and the first six weeks of a new administration have re-enforced that conclusion.
There is indeed a new set of rules with its own code of ethics. While the man considered to be the father of these new rules was a strident leftist, his tactics have also been adopted by a new group: the alt-right. Why? Because they work and they are easy to use.
Here is part of what we said previously about the way the game is played:
In 1971, Saul Alinsky wrote the book "Rules for Radicals," a guidebook for grass-roots organizations to get the better of government and corporations. Known as the "father of modern American radicalism," Alinsky was not bothered by using any means to attain his ends. He referred to people who were overly bothered by means-ends justification as "non-doers."
Among the rules you may recognize in general political use today are these:
RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."
RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up."
RULE 10: "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive." (We'd say that has now been refined to include "counter criticism with brazen lies.")
RULE 12: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."
As Craig Miyamoto pointed out in an article in the 2000 third-quarter issue of "Public Relations Strategies," corporations and governments are hamstrung by their own sets of rules and are sitting ducks for organizations (or individuals) using Alinsky's tactics.
Of RULE 5 about ridicule, Miyamoto writes, "There is no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions."
Of RULE 12, Miyamoto summarizes it by saying it means to "Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions." Cruel, but effective.
It is easier to ridicule an opponent than debate him; far simpler to demonize someone on the other side than to defend your ideas.
In fact, a simple summary of the new rules of our politics is that the winner is the one who stays on the attack.
(Portions of this editorial have appeared previously in The Maui News.)
* Editorials reflect the opinion of the publisher.