Garth Heckman

The David Alliance

[email protected] 

The 13 Rules for Radicals

In 1971, community organizer Saul Alinsky published Rules for Radicals, a manual intended for "have-nots" to take power back from the "haves." His tactics focus on pragmatism, psychological warfare, and using an opponent's own rules against them.

Here are the 13 tactical rules Alinsky outlined:

The 13 Tactics

 * "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have." If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark; if it's large, flaunt it in the light.

 * "Never go outside the expertise of your people." If your activists aren't comfortable with a tactic, they will fail or lose morale.

 * "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy." Look for ways to cause confusion and fear by forcing the opposition to deal with something they haven't practiced for.

 * "Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules." If their rule is "every letter must be answered," send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with their own red tape.

 * "Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon." It is almost impossible to counter-attack ridicule. It also infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.

 * "A good tactic is one your people enjoy." If people are having fun, they will keep doing it and come up with better ideas.

 * "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag." Don't let your movement become boring. Commitment has a shelf life.

 * "Keep the pressure on." Never let the opposition rest or regroup. Use different tactics to keep the pressure constant.

 * "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself." Imagination and anticipation of what might happen often cause more damage than the actual action.

 * "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive." Every move by the opposition can be flipped into a rallying cry for your side.

 * "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative." Never let the enemy score a point by asking, "Okay, what would you do?" Have a plan ready.

 * "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Don't attack "the system." Attack a specific person (a CEO, a politician). It’s harder for people to ignore or defend a single individual than a nameless institution.

 * "The most important requirement for the tactic is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." Action is a series of hits; you must keep the momentum going.

The Philosophy

Alinsky’s core argument was that in a fight for power, the ends often justify the means. He believed that the only way to effect change was through direct, often uncomfortable, confrontation.

> Note: These rules have been used across the entire political spectrum, from labor unions to modern grassroots tea party movements and digital activists.

Comparing the principles in Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals with Biblical teachings reveals a fundamental tension between tactical pragmatism and moral absolutes. While both share a concern for the "have-nots" and the pursuit of justice, they differ sharply on the methods used to achieve those ends.

Here is how a Biblical perspective might respond to the core themes of Alinsky’s work:

1. The Ethics of Means and Ends

Alinsky famously argued that "the ethics of means and ends" are relative to the necessity of the situation—essentially, that the end can justify the means if the cause is just.

2. Ridicule and Polarization (Rules 5 & 13)

Alinsky’s Rule 5 states, "Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon," and Rule 13 advises, "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." These tactics are designed to dehumanize an opponent to make them easier to attack.

3. Truth vs. Perception

Alinsky viewed communication as a tool for power; he suggested that organizers must work within the "experience of the audience," sometimes using exaggeration or strategic deception to maintain momentum.

4. Points of Convergence: Justice for the Oppressed

Where the Bible and Alinsky find common ground is in the diagnosis of social ills. Both recognize that power is often concentrated in the hands of the few at the expense of the many.

Comparison Table

Alinsky’s Rule / Concept

Biblical Counter-Perspective

Tactical Ridicule

"Let your speech always be gracious" (Colossians 4:6).

Polarization

"Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9).

Power-Centric

"Whoever would be great among you must be your servant" (Matthew 20:26).

Social Justice

"He has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty" (Luke 1:53).

In summary, the Bible would likely support Alinsky’s objective of empowering the marginalized but would reject his methodology of using ridicule, deception, and the polarization of individuals as tools for change.

Would you like to explore a specific Biblical case study where a leader successfully challenged an existing power structure?

Summary: Power vs. Transformation

Ultimately, Alinsky’s response to injustice is a struggle for external power. He wants to shift power from the "Haves" to the "Have-Nots."

The Bible’s response to injustice is a transformation of the human heart, which then works its way outward to change society. It suggests that if you use hatred, ridicule, and polarization to win power, you will simply become the new oppressor once you are at the top.