Hmmm, a 22% tax that is paid by the retail customer at the time of purchase. You know, that sounds a lot like a sales tax to me–a hidden sales tax.

With all of the hollering and screaming over Herman Cain’s proposition to implement a sales tax, we fail to take into account we already have a hidden sales tax. All of the objections being thrown at Cain’s 9% sales tax–every single one–also apply to the current hidden sales tax embedded in the retail price of every product.

“There’s nothing to stop congress from raising the 999 sales tax rate. The 9% rate will soon be 12% or even 20%!” That’s the first objection you hear. But ask yourself, what’s to stop congress from rasing the current hidden sales tax?

Nothing. Not only is there nothing stopping them, they are in the process of doing it right now! Obama’s calls to raise the business taxes so corporations “pay their fair share” will have only one result: increasing the hidden sales tax embedded in every retail product.

Higher taxes on business are passed onto consumers in the form of higher product prices. This is economics 101; only the ignorant argue otherwise. I’m starting to wonder though, if they still teach economics in college. The Occupy Wall Street college students seem oblivious to the fact that their calls to raise taxes on “evil corporations” will raise the price of every retail item purchased–milk, bread, clothing, protest signs, megaphones, lice killer–everything.

The current sales tax is a hidden tax; maybe they don’t realize what will happen, because they can’t see it happen. Or, maybe they don’t care; they know they can get away with raising taxes, because hidden taxes are always easy to raise.

This is the advantage of Cain’s proposal. It ends the hidden sales tax, and replaces it with a visible, in-your-face sales tax. Unlike the current hidden sales tax (which is easy, easy, easy to raise), Cain’s tax would be difficult to increase. A rate increase would immediately be recognized by every single person in the country.

“Cain’s sales tax could turn into a VAT” is the second objection you often hear. First, what is a VAT?

A VAT (value added tax) is a tax that is applied to a product at each stage of the production process.

• The dairy farmer pays a tax on the milk he sells to the processor, which he passes on in the form of higher prices.
• The milk processor pays a tax on the milk he sells to the wholesaler, which he passes on in the form of higher prices.
• The milk wholesaler pays a tax on the milk he sells to the grocery, which he passes on in the form of higher prices.
• The grocery pays a tax on the milk they sell to the customer, which they pass on in the form of higher prices.

Conservatives rightly hate the idea of a VAT, because it results in a hidden tax embedded in the retail price of every product.

Wait, huh, what? Hidden tax embedded in the retail price of every product! Didn’t we just finish talking about the fact that there is a 22% hidden tax embedded in the price of every retail product now? Let’s look at how the current system works.

• The dairy farmer pays income taxes on the milk he sells to the processor, which he passes on in the form of higher prices.
• The milk processor pays income taxes on the milk he sells to the wholesaler, which he passes on in the form of higher prices.
• The milk wholesaler pays income taxes on the milk he sells to the grocery, which he passes on in the form of higher prices.
• The grocery pays income taxes on the milk they sell to the customer, which they pass on in the form of higher prices.

The result is an average 22% hidden tax embedded in the retail price of every product.

That’s right, the current hidden sales tax meets every definition of a VAT–added at each stage of production, and hidden from the consumer by embedding it in the retail product price. It’s a VAT.

Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan eliminates the taxes that result in the current 22% hidden sales tax and replaces it them a 9% fully transparent, in-you-face sales tax. And unlike the current 22% hidden tax, it is not a VAT.

not found
The 22% number is based on research done by the FairTax organization. You can find more about how Federal taxes impact the retail prices of products at fairtax.org.

Since 1984, there has been a steady rise in the number of people that pay no income taxes at all—from 18% to 47%. Over that time we’ve had Democratic and Republican presidents; the Democrats have controlled congress, and the Republicans have controlled congress; the trend continues no matter who is in power.

Why does the number of non-taxpayers always rise? The nature of a progressive tax system is that those on the lower end of the scale have a lower tax rate than those at the top. Because most voters are not at the upper end of the scale, the pressure on politicians is to make the tax system “more progressive” by shifting the tax burden up the ladder (and dropping more and more people into the non-taxpayer bucket). The left thinks this is a great idea, but why does the number of non-taxpayers go up even under Republicans? Four words: middle class tax cut.

Every politician over the last quarter century has run on the promise of a middle class tax cut. Obama did, and it’s the the centerpiece of Mitt Romney’s economic plan. But because of the progressive nature of our tax system, every individual middle class tax cut, exemption, or tax break moves more voters into the non-taxpayer column.

10-15 percent of voters paying zero in taxes is one thing, but what will happen when over 60 percent of voters pay nothing in taxes; when over 60 percent of voters can enjoy the benefits of government without having to worry about where the money comes from?  Two hundred years ago Alexis de Tocqueville had this to say about America’s long term chances for survival:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

Don’t think we’ll ever get there? Well, who in 1984 predicted:

• 40 cents of every dollar spent by the government would be borrowed money
• The number of illegal immigrants would grow to 12 million
• The number of non-taxpayers would grow to 47%

We’ll get there, the only question is when.

The chart below shows where we’ll be in 25 years. This isn’t a chart of where Obama would take us. This chart is based on the pre-Obama pace—the pace from 1984 to 2008; this is a chart of where Republican tax policy will take us.

Examine the plans of the leading GOP candidates. They’re all based on tweaking the current progressive tax system, and they all include a middle class tax cut, which will shift additional voters out of the taxpayer column and into the non-taxpayer column. Not only do they not have a solution to the problem, their plans actually worsen the situation.

Tweaking, modifying, or improving the current tax code won’t work, because the current tax system is the problem. Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan is the only one that addresses the problem. It’s the only one that changes the status quo and gets us off the road of Alexis de Tocqueville’s prediction.

Cain’s 9-9-9 plan involves a flat 9% income tax and a 9% sales tax for everyone. That makes the maximum effective tax rate for everyone 17.19%. Considering the payroll tax (which Cain’s plan eliminates) takes 15.3% off the top of every working person’s pay (even the pay of the poor) that means the maxim anyone’s taxes might go up under the 9-9-9 plan is a mere 1.89%.

If you want to play around with the numbers, there’s a 9-9-9 plan calculator on the Nerds4Cain site at: http://www.nerds4cain.com/Blog/archives/723.

The primary criticism of the 9-9-9 plan is along the lines of “Do you want to be the person to introduce a national sales tax?” I’d answer that with another question: do you want to be the person that makes Alexis de Tocqueville’s prediction come true?

Is Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan perfect as is? No, it’s a starting point, but it’s a good starting point. It’s a workable solution that stands a reasonable chance of getting passed into law. And right now, it’s the only game in town.

• If you get a paycheck from an employer, then your employer pays half of your payroll taxes behind the scenes. It’s part of your pay that’s hidden from you in the current system. This tax goes away under the 9-9-9 plan, so the money will start showing up in your paycheck (yes, your paycheck amount will go up under the 9-9-9 plan by 7.65%). If you check yes, it will be added to the adjusted base income number (which is why it is more than the number you base income box).
• Amount not spent is the amount you don’t spend out of your income, so there is no sales tax on it. If you put $1,000 into a savings account each year, then put 1000 in this field.
• The maximum effective tax rate under Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan is 16.5%. This only occurs if you don’t put any money into savings and spend every dime you earn.
• When doing your calculations for your current income, don’t forget that the payroll tax (which is 15.3%) will be eliminated under the 9-9-9 plan. Everyone, every one that works pays the 15.3% payroll tax. Consequently, the maximum tax increase anyone at the low end of the income scale might see under the 9-9-9 plan is a mere 1.2%.
• This plan is still a proposal; it is not written in stone. If you think you have a suggestion or can improve upon it, then you should suggest it.

PS

I have tried my best to make this accurate, but I haven’t tested this script fully. If anyone finds any problems please notify via twitter @Nerds4Cain.

Thanks to darkjart for pointing out I had an error in my original calculation. I was applying the sales tax to 100% of the money I had to spend. But of course, if you are paying the sales tax out of the same pool of money, you can’t spend all of your money and pay the sales tax with it. The formula has been corrected. This also means the maximum effective tax rate under 999 is 16.5%, not the 17.19% as I had earlier.

Herman Cain was raised in the segregated south—Atlanta, Georgia.

Barack Obama was raised in Hawaii and Indonesia.

Herman Cain grew up poor. His father worked three jobs to make ends meet (chauffeur, barber,  and janitor) and his mother was a maid. His family was so poor growing up that he didn’t even have his own bed or room. He slept on a cot in the kitchen.

Barack Obama grew up in a privileged environment. His grandmother (who raised him in Hawaii) was vice-president of the Bank of Hawaii. In Indonesia, as the adopted son of a high level oil company executive, his family enjoyed servants—cooks, maids, chauffeurs, and gardeners—to take care of their needs.

There is a note of irony in the fact that growing up Cain had a chauffeur as a father and Obama had a chauffeur as a servant.

Herman Cain attended public school.

Barack Obama attended elitist private schools. In Indonesia (1969-1971) he attended The Baskuki School—a private institution that catered to the children of foreign nationals. While living in Hawaii, he attended The Punahou School (a K-12 private academy), which has a current annual tuition cost of $18,450.00.

Herman Cain attended Morehouse (a historic black college in Atlanta that was the alma mater of Martin Luther King Jr.) and Purdue University.

Barack Obama attended Columbia and Harvard—elite, ivy league institutions of privilege.

Herman Cain majored in math and computer science, and minored in physics.

Barack Obama majored in law. It cannot be confirmed if he minored in any subject, because his college records are sealed.

Herman Cain started out as a rocket scientist for the Navy.

Barack Obama started out as a junior associate for a Chicago law firm (and never advanced beyond this level).

Herman Cain advanced to the top of three separate industries: information systems (VP of corporate data systems—Pillsbury), business management (CEO and later owner Godfather’s Pizza), and banking (Chairman of the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank).

Barack Obama never advanced beyond the entry level of any of his chosen professions (unless you count politician as a profession).

• In his four year law career, he never advanced beyond his entry level position—junior associate.
• As a college instructor Obama was officially a lecturer—never a professor. Lecturer is the title given to graduate students that teach 101 classes to pick up extra money—it’s an entry level position. In 12 years of teaching, Obama never advanced beyond his original entry level position as a lecturer.

Herman Cain has written books on success, public speaking, and leadership.

Barack Obama has written a children’s book and two books about himself.

I heard it all over the morning talk shows: “Herman Cain is just a great salesman.” That was their explanation for why Herman Cain is doing so well in the polls.

This is the new meme (or should I say smear tactic) from the left. The implication being that there is no way he has attracted this much support because of his positions on the issues, or because people actually believe he would make a good president.

I posted a biography of Herman Cain here: Herman Cain is just a pizza guy – long response. Herman can has been lot of things in his life:

• Mathematician
• Rocket Scientist
• Computer Expert
• Business Manager
• Banker
• Radio Host
• Author

There’s one word that doesn’t appear anywhere in his resume: salesman.

Why is the left trying to define Herman Cain as a salesman? They’re trying to belittle him and his supporters. We need to watch out for this and cut it off before it goes too far. Herman Cain isn’t some slick sales man taking advantage of a bunch of gullible voters.

Herman Cain is a serious candidate.  He has presented a set of legitimate solutions to the problems facing our country. He is gaining support, because Americans agree with his positions on the issues.

I love Herman Cain, but…

You hear it a lot—a whole lot. I’d dare say Herman Cain would be the #1 choice of 80% of GOP voters, except for the but… I’m asking you to take a moment to reconsider your position and instead ask yourself: why not Herman Cain?

I love Herman Cain, but he can’t win.

Like Mitt Romney? He’s won one (and only one) political election, and that with only 49% of the vote. Did you ever wonder why Mitt Romney didn’t run for a second term as governor of Massachusetts (he could have)? He would have been creamed, after four years as governor he was so unpopular he was polling in the teens. In the 2008 presidential primaries, Romney pulled in only 22% of the vote. In this election cycle, his support remains in the 20-30% range. Mitt Romney has never pulled in more than 50% of the vote in any political race—ever. Does that sound like a winner?

Herman Cain is drawing voters to him seemingly out of nowhere. The stories are countless of people that went to a straw poll event intent on voting for someone else, hearing Herman Cain speak, and immediately changing their vote. Once people hear Herman Cain, they love Herman Cain. His clear and powerful speaking ability draws supporters to him. The highest voter intensity rating, charisma, a powerful speaker—that’s the formula for a winner. If a winner is what you’re looking for, why not Herman Cain?

I love Herman Cain, but we need someone with political experience.

Like Rick Perry? He definitely has political experience, perhaps a little too much political experience. When asked about illegal immigration, he said people that opposed his stance “had no heart”; on social security he does well to call it a “ponzi scheme”, but he doesn’t offer any solutions. Demonizing your critics by calling them “heartless” and demagoging a problem without offering concrete solutions (which would open yourself up to criticism) are old-school, political-hack tactics. The problems facing our country are real and serious, do we need to be playing politics?

On top of that, Perry’s political efforts so far (in debates, interviews, etc…) have been—to put it kindly—less than stellar. If someone’s claim to fame is that they are a great politician, shouldn’t they actually perform like a great politician? Maybe there’s something unique about Texas that makes Perry a great Texas politician, but a poor national one. Whatever the reason, Perry isn’t getting it done.

Politics is the art of drawing people to you. Herman Cain is getting it done. In the Tea Party era, the political rules have been turned upside down and inside out. Herman Cain understands the current political environment. Voters don’t want politicians, they want problem solvers. They are demanding honest talk and concrete solutions, and their tolerance for political gamesmanship is zero. If you’re looking for someone that understands politics—today’s politics—why not Herman Cain?

I love Herman Cain, but I want someone that is strong on social issues.

Herman Cain is rock solid on conservative social issues, and has been long before he decided to enter politics. But it’s not enough to just advocate these issues; you must be able to engage the opposition, keep their attention, and pull them over to our side. Call it charisma if you want, but the ability to talk to people (people that disagree with you) about tough social issues without pushing them away is vital if we’re ever going to get a majority of Americans over to our side. Ronald Reagan had the ability to do it and so does Herman Cain. If you’re looking for someone that is solid on conservative social issues, why not someone that can expand the base of support? Why not Herman Cain?

I love Herman Cain, but I want to support an evangelical.

Herman Cain is an ordained Baptist minister. Did you know that? When he retired after his business career he wanted to get more involved in his local church. He was so serious about it that he took the time to go through the process of becoming an ordained minister. He’s soft spoken about his faith because he is humble before God and takes his faith seriously. Unlike other candidates, you won’t find Herman Cain “trumpeting his faith” (Mat 6:2) for personal gain. But when asked about his faith, he is open, straightforward, and unapologetic. He has his priorities right. If you’re looking for an evangelical to support, why not Herman Cain?

I love Herman Cain, but I want someone with more business experience than running a pizza chain.

Herman Cain is more than just a pizza guy. A full bio is here.  The short story is: Herman Cain started out as a rocket scientist (literally a rocket scientist); became head of Corporate Data Systems for a major, multinational company (Pillsbury); later became CEO and then owner of a restaurant chain (Godfather’s Pizza); and then was the chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (this was not a ceremonial position, he ran the thing). Dick Morris said Herman Cain has the most credentials of any candidate in the race (yes, even more than Mitt Romney). If you really want to support a candidate with a superb business background, why not support the candidate with the broadest and deepest business background? Why not Herman Cain?

I happen to like the field of GOP candidates. I believe though, that Herman Cain is unique. He brings a potential none of the other candidates possess. Herman Cain could be a special president—special as in Ronald Reagan special. Why not support the candidate that has the potential to not just be a good president, but a great president?

Why not Herman Cain?

The hare strategy is to get off to a fast start and become the hot candidate in the eyes of the media, pull in a big; quick infusion of cash, create an aura of in inevitability, and drive the other candidates out of the race by depressing their supporters. Hares are constantly looking for that one issue, event, or sound byte that will rocket them back into the top.

Hares though, rarely win the nomination. From Fred Thompson to John Connally, history has shown that typically the support for hares is a mile wide and an inch deep. Voters fall in love with them quickly, and fall out of love with them just as quickly. Bachmann—the Iowa straw poll winner—is now polling in the low single digits. Perry—who was anointed by the press—has gone down in the polls after the last two debates (and lost his air of inevitability). When hares fall, they tend to fall hard.

Tortoises just keep plodding away, slowly building up support, so that when the actual primary day arrives they are viewed as one of the few still viable candidates by voters going to the polls.

If history is any guide, the candidates still standing come primary day will be the four tortoises in the race: Romney, Cain, Gingrich, and Paul. Here is where the door is still open for Herman Cain. The conventional wisdom would be that Romney would easily win a contest between these four candidates. Certainly the entire GOP establishment would be behind Romney. The problem that theory is that for everyone that isn’t part of the GOP establishment, Romney is unacceptable as a candidate—literally unacceptable. Under these circumstances, the base (conservatives, tea partiers, libertarians) will go into “anybody but Romney” mode and look to coalesce around a single candidate.

Paul, while he impresses people when he talks about economics, makes people angry when he talks about social and foreign policy (conservatives are not going to vote for someone that says America was to blame for 9/11—period). Newt, who is doing great in the debates, still carries so much baggage that I’m not sure conservatives trust him that much more than they do Romney. Which leaves Herman Cain.

It’s amazing how often I see this statement: “I love Herman Cain; if I thought he had a chance to win, he’d be my candidate”. There is a huge, deep well of support for Herman Cain already out there, it’s just needs the right circumstances to come to the surface. It won’t emerge early in the race. It will happen close to the first primary, when the field has been weeded out. Voters will look at the field of remaining candidates, realize Herman Cain is the one candidate still standing they can feel good about voting for, and ask themselves “Why not Herman Cain?”

Why not Herman Cain?

Straw polls reflect the opinion of people that are intensely interested in politics. People Who not only know all the candidates, but also know their positions and backgrounds. Among these informed voters, Herman Cain is winning a lot of support. Why?

1. His background is more extensive than any other candidate running. I made the case here that based on both of their resumes Herman Cain is actually more qualified to be president than Mitt Romeny.
2. Washington isn’t working, because career politicians are simply incapable of making the tough choices required to solve our problems (as was once again highlighted by the recent debt-limit debate).

Those uninformed voters won’t stay uninformed forever. As the election nears they’ll take a closer look at the candidates and discover that Herman Cain is the right man for the moment: a non-politician with a solid background who has the backbone to make the tough choices ahead.

I’m a pretty typical married with kids, two dogs, middle class guy. I have a bachelor’s degree in business and am a member of Mensa. I’ve worked in IT for about a quarter century in various capacities. I’m currently a quality assurance automation engineer (I write computer programs that test other computer programs). Prior to that I had a business management career in both the dry cleaning and restaurant industries. I became interested in computers when my older brother let my play around with his Osborne computer. I switched careers, and the rest is history.

I’m also the author of the book The Conservative Hand, which is available at amazon.com (the post Why We’re Not Using Alinsky Tactics is from that book). The book was born out of the frustration of watching conservatives doing the same things over and over again and acting as though “this time” they were going to get different results. How hard it is to grasp the concept that if something doesn’t work, you should stop doing it? I’ve always been told I was an imaginative thinker (and accused of having a strange way of looking at things). I admit the ideas in my book are way outside normal political strategy, but normal political strategy isn’t working for conservatives. We need to try something different.

I built this site around a couple of ideas from the book: (1) use a free market approach, and (2) be creative when supporting a candidate (just don’t think outside the box, throw the box away). That’s why the members here are expected to act as political-entrepreneurs, and why at times it will seem chaotic to the point of lunacy here. That’s fine. The point isn’t to have a smooth running, uneventful site. The site is not an end in itself, it is just a tool to get things done.

Here’s his bio:

• Bachelor’s degree in Mathematics.
• Master’s degree in Computer Science.
• Mathematician for the Navy, where he worked on missile ballistics (making him a rocket scientist).
• Computer systems analyst for Coca-Cola.
• VP of Corporate Data Systems and Services for Pillsbury (this is the top of the ladder in the computer world, being in charge of information systems for a major corporation).

All achieved before reaching the age of 35. Since he reached the top of the information systems world, he changed careers!

• Business Manager. Took charge of Pillsbury’s 400 Burger King restaurants in the Philadelphia area, which were the company’s poorest performers in the country. Spent the first nine months learning the business from the ground up, cooking hamburger and yes, cleaning toilets. After three years he had turned them into the company’s best performers.
• Godfather’s Pizza CEO. Was asked by Pillsbury to take charge of their Godfather’s Pizza chain (which was on the verge of bankruptcy). He made it profitable in 14 months.
• In 1988 he led a buyout of the Godfather’s Pizza chain from Pillsbury. He was now the owner of a restaurant chain. Again he reached the top of the ladder of another industry.
• He was also chairman of the National Restaurant Association during this time. This is a group that interacts with government on behalf of the restaurant industry, and it gave him political experience from the non-politician side.

Having reached the top of a second industry, he changed careers again!

• Adviser to the Federal Reserve System. Herman Cain went to work for the Federal Reserve Banking System advising them on how monetary policy changes would affect American businesses.
• Chairman of the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank. He worked his way up to the chairmanship of a regional Federal Reserve bank. This is only one step below the chairmanship of the entire Federal Reserve System (the top banking position in the country). This position allowed him to see how monetary policy is made from the inside, and understand the political forces that impact the monetary system.

After reaching the top of the banking industry, he changed careers for a fourth time!

• Writer and public speaker. He then started to write and speak on leadership. His books include Speak as a Leader, CEO of Self, Leadership is Common Sense, and They Think You’re Stupid.
• Radio Host. Around 2007—after a remarkable 40 year career—he started hosting a radio show on WSB in Atlanta (the largest talk radio station in the country).

He did all this starting from rock bottom (his father was a chauffeur and his mother was a maid). When you add up his accomplishments in his life—including reaching the top of three unrelated industries: information systems, business management, and banking—Herman Cain may have the most impressive resume of anyone that has run for the presidency in the last half century.

1. The site had lost focus on its primary purpose of being a manufacturing site of political tools.
2. The site had become too busy.
3. It wasn’t obvious when you hit the front page what the site was about.
4. The forum was not being used.

The front page of the site has been simplified to emphasize the site’s mission: manufacturing political tools. When you hit the front page you now see the What is Nerds 4 Cain post and info on the laboratory, factory, and warehouse in the side panels. Everything else has been moved into the menu bar.

The forum (which is Vanilla Forums) was not fully integrated with the front page (which is WordPress). I added some custom code to improve the integration (I had hoped to use a “jigsaw puzzle” approach to building the site and avoid writing any actual code, but couldn’t get around it). These were the changes made:

• Stories on the front page are automatically inserted into the forum (with a link back to the front page story), and a link to the forum occurrence of the post is dynamically inserted at the bottom of the original post. This will (1) allow people to make comments on the front page stories, (2) keep the front page area uncluttered and clean of comments, and (3) get people into the forms, which is a better format for user interaction.
• Forum entries automatically show up in front page stories. Click the “Herman Cain Websites” link under the warehouse in the right sidebar. The list of Herman Cain sites contained in the story are pulled from the forum. If you go to the forum and add a post in the Herman Cain Websites category it will instantly show up in the list on the front page story.

The reason I’m pushing users to comment in the forum instead of the front page WordPress blog is that forums are much better suited for interaction between users. That’s how well get things done; not by Cainiacs coming here to read stuff, but Cainiacs coming here to contribute stuff. Don’t be scared of the forum, it won’t bite. If you really want to contribute to this effort, it is vital you get into the forums and talk to people.

The forum categories have been simplified. There are now only two in both the laboratory and the warehouse.

Front page stories were created for each of the forum categories in each of the three manufacturing areas. These were created to provide a front door for each one that explains fully the purpose of the forum category.

Sidebar list were created for each of the three manufacturing areas. As soon as possible, we want people to get involved in one of these areas—either pulling tools from the warehouse, or helping build tools in the laboratory and factory.

Hopefully these changes will get us back on track, make the site simpler to use, and get more people involved.

Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals has been in the spotlight since Barack Obama became president. It is well known that President Obama immersed himself in Alinsky’s ideas; using and teaching Alinsky’s techniques as a community organizer. Alinsky’s book and ideas have also been adopted by progressives as a blueprint for their political strategy. I’ve heard any number of people suggest we should adopt Alinsky’s tactics so we can fight fire with fire. I believe there are solid reasons why we should not go down that path.

Saul Alinsky has a reputation as an evil genius. When I read the book the evil part was easy to find, but the genius part was another matter. Instead of a sophisticated plan that left me awestruck, I found a juvenile mish-mash of ideas. This isn’t Sun Tzu’s Art of War, this isn’t Machiavelli’s The Prince, this isn’t chess, heck I’m not even sure it’s checkers. I can understand how its original target audience (college students—an immature group by definition) could take it seriously, but it’s unnerving to realize there are mature adults (including some of our most important political leaders such as Hillary Clinton and President Obama) that actually take this seriously.

There are three core ideas contained in the book: deception, manipulation, and intimidation.

Deceiving people isn’t a long-term strategy for success. Trust is like a china plate. When you break it (no matter how skillfully it is repaired) you can always see where it was broken. Governments that use deception to control their citizens go to great lengths to hide the truth from them, but the truth always gets out. When people realize you have deceived them they will never fully trust you again.

The manipulation techniques taught all have one fundamental flaw: they expect you to play along. It’s as though they are putting on a stage play—a bit of political theater—and everyone is an actor in the play. If everyone doesn’t play their assigned part the play is a flop. Someone accused of violating a political-correctness speech code is supposed to react with shame and contrition (their part in the play), not point out that the speech code itself is absurd. Countering these techniques is simple: refuse to play your assigned part, step back, and point out the reality: “Those aren’t protestors, they are people you promised $50.00 and lunch to hold printed signs and act angry. I’m not going to play the part of someone being protested, because that is not what is happening.”

Alinsky’s intimidation techniques really amount to making threats. He even states that threats don’t have to have anything behind them, but if you make the threat loud and long enough it becomes reality in people’s minds (but only in people’s minds). Like the schoolyard bully, when confronted by someone who refuses to back down their “power” evaporates.

Beyond the initial point that Alinsky’s ideas crumble when exposed to the light of day, there is a more fundamental reason we should avoid them. Not just dark and cynical, quite bluntly they are evil. Given Alinsky’s belief that the end (always) justifies the means, what would you expect? To Alinsky nothing is off-limits—absolutely nothing. He spends a great amount of time explaining that moral questions are not only meaningless, but should be ignored. The only questions Alinsky says matters are: (1) if it will work, and (2) is it worth the cost (the cost to you, not to the people you are hurting; hurting others is not only accepted by Alinsky, it is encouraged if that’s what it takes to get what you want).

Violence—Alinsky not only recommends violence, but cynically speaks as though everybody would use violence if they could. He even uses Gandhi as an example of someone who really, really, really wanted to use violence, but only held back because the circumstances didn’t make it a viable option. Did Gandhi (the father of non-violent resistance) deep in his heart yearn to use violence to kill, maim, burn, and destroy? Alinsky says yes. Is it surprising that President Obama, so deeply immersed in Alinsky’s philosophy, can’t bring himself to condemn terrorist (or even use the word terrorism for that matter). As far as Alinsky is concerned terrorism is a perfectly valid political method.

Polarity—Alinsky doesn’t use the specific term, but he describes (and praises) its use extensively: demonize a person or group, create division, and organize the rest of society against the demonized person or group. Anyone that knows even a little history understands the use of this technique in 1930′s Germany directly led to the death of millions of Jews. Alinsky isn’t a case of “those that forget history are doomed to repeat it.” He knows the history, he just doesn’t care. He takes an entire chapter to make the point that the ends always justify the means, or as he puts it: “Does this particular means justify this particular end?” Alinsky’s answer to that question is always—yes it does. If you demonize a group of people to the point that it results in genocide to get your way, according to Alinsky’s rules that would simply be just another “particular means to a particular end.”

Ideas like deception, manipulation, intimidation, violence, and a cynical “the ends always justify the means” attitude are not part of the American design. This country was founded on a higher standard, and Americans deserve better. Progressives have no choice but to use the underhanded tactics found in Alinsky’s books to hide the truth about what they are really trying to do, because when brought into the daylight their true goals and philosophy (just like a vampire) crumble into ash.

Our philosophy is based upon ideas contained in The Declaration of Independence and The United States Constitution—ideas that have stood the test of time. When you expose conservative philosophy and ideas to the daylight they don’t crumble, they shine.

The above is from the book The Conservative Hand by John Chambers. Available here at Amazon.com.

 
 


 
not found

If you have an idea you need to develop, put it here. Let others help you get hammered out.