Why do they continue to refer to it as a coup? The coup was the election fraud in my mind and the military take over was the responsibility of the military to defeat the coup. If we are to use Myanmar as a template, then a military remedy here would be labeled the same...a coup.
First, I'd like to thank you for using the search function.
Second, I'd like to state that either
Not one of those people has read the book, Rules for Radicals, but has instead repeated what others have said, or...
My copy of Rules for Radicals is imperfect.
Because I did not recall that phrase in the book, I did a search on my version of the Kindle book.
I did a search on the full term: no results found.
Then I searched for half the term: again, no results found.
Then I searched for "opponent."
3 Results Found
you are doing. It is difficult to see how Gandhi's
methods could be applied in a country where
opponents of the regime disappear in the middle
of the night and are never heard of again.
you have to very carefully and selectively pick
his opponents, knowing full well that certain
defeats would be demoralizing and end his
milk, bread, or basic vegetables, since even
selective buying weakens after a period of time
as the opponent cuts his prices below his
competitors.
Please guys, stop attributing that quote to Rules for Radicals. If Alinsky did say it, he didn't put it in the book.
Interesting, thank you for the correction, ma'am. I haven't read the book myself, and I don't plan to. After doing some more searching, it looks like that might be a Karl Rove idea. There's some articles claiming that Karl Marx said "accuse the victim" but I don't see an actual quote.
Deciphering Karl Rove's Playbook discusses counterstrategies, in particular Ronnie Earl's campaign against Tom Delay, in a Texas campaign, in which tactic 3 (below), preemptive accusation of what they're going to call on you.
...
The playbook tactics:
Take the offensive: establish the agenda, put your opponent on the defensive.
Attack your opponent's strengths: this forces your opponent to back away from their most attractive qualities.
Accuse your opponent of what they are going to accuse you of.
Why do they continue to refer to it as a coup? The coup was the election fraud in my mind and the military take over was the responsibility of the military to defeat the coup. If we are to use Myanmar as a template, then a military remedy here would be labeled the same...a coup.
Same reason they called old people protesting in the capitol a coup. They’re trying to steer the narrative
Yup, always trying to get ahead of the blame,
https://www.google.com/search?q=saul+alinsky+rules+for+radicals+accuse+your+opponent+of+what+you+are+doing
Okay, this is my pet peeve.
First, I'd like to thank you for using the search function.
Second, I'd like to state that either
Because I did not recall that phrase in the book, I did a search on my version of the Kindle book.
I did a search on the full term: no results found.
Then I searched for half the term: again, no results found.
Then I searched for "opponent."
3 Results Found
Please guys, stop attributing that quote to Rules for Radicals. If Alinsky did say it, he didn't put it in the book.
Interesting, thank you for the correction, ma'am. I haven't read the book myself, and I don't plan to. After doing some more searching, it looks like that might be a Karl Rove idea. There's some articles claiming that Karl Marx said "accuse the victim" but I don't see an actual quote.
https://archive.vn/86hQN
"
Deciphering Karl Rove's Playbook discusses counterstrategies, in particular Ronnie Earl's campaign against Tom Delay, in a Texas campaign, in which tactic 3 (below), preemptive accusation of what they're going to call on you.
...
The playbook tactics:
Take the offensive: establish the agenda, put your opponent on the defensive.
Attack your opponent's strengths: this forces your opponent to back away from their most attractive qualities.
Accuse your opponent of what they are going to accuse you of.
"