these tactics gave them the political territory of their RNC rivals... the american industrial north... it gave them the cities... it gave them the media... it gave them academia...

They held the US congress for 60 years just about straight.

You can't argue with the effectiveness.

And power begets power, go on...

You ask why they do this... this is why they do it. They lost, changed their perspective, and have been doing well for a long time using these tactics.

They won't stop until it stops working.

Ok, so here's my opinion/perspective: The DNC can't win using the tactics they are using. Everything they have done is sorted and archived on the internet. Videos of attacks, of statements, and the like. This is why Hillary lost. Her own base did her in because lack of care on their actions in combination with the internet and social media. All those asshole Tweets and Youtube videos add up.

The RNC can't compete here because to do so would tarnish there own credibility by being the punching bag of the left. What they can do is provide a better vision of the future than what the DNC is currently building.

And capitalizing on that involves recognizing that there is a marked interest in traditional values on the internet, amongst there own base that is stifled from being public and active on social media.

No one likes seeing kids in drag being sexualized in front of very, very older people, sensitivity of LGBT issues aside. Lines have been very clearly crossed by the DNC and the RNC should know this. Because their younger population certainly does.

I understand this "the internet will make lying not work anymore" argument... I just don't believe it can over come the concept of deceit itself. I have a lot of respect for the internet's healing powers... but its not THAT powerful.

Idealism is geat... I'm not saying having them is bad. But see things from the perspective of the father and grand father... you're trying to protect those you love from the harsh insanity of the world. Would you sacrifice your children for an ideal? Or would you do the bad thing, save your family, and then teach your children as best as possible to be good people?

Pragmaticism tempers idealism. You need both. I'm not arguing for pragmaticism without idealism. I'm saying the one is temperered by the other.

I am 31 years old. I will likely be a father by 38. The millennials are growing up under sharply divided lines concerning issues of censorship, forced diversity, and false accusations of sexism/racism/bigotry. The liberal ideals that I grew up with are the new normal and today's progressivism is worrisome in that it is change for change's sake.

No wisdom, just full speed to the left. No looking back. That is what the RNC should be capitalizing on.

Most in the RNC are pretty liberal compared to 10/20/30/40 years ago. Most of the younger crowd accepts homosexuals and racial demographics of all types.

What they don't like being told is that they are inherently bigoted due to the color of their skin, the party they hold to, and that they bring facts to an argument full of thin-skinned feelings.

But that said, idealism has its place. And the RNC should be building on that.

the line between the ideologies is controversial... every subset of either faction is likely to have their own perspective on it.

My own, for what that is worth, is that it a conflict between quasi religious marxism on the left vs everything that opposes it... which is all relegated to the "right" even though there is much less in common between the non-left groups as they're a grab bag of not-marxism.

Many people don't like the "m" word getting dropped... But if the "m" word isn't their core then why is the extreme left always marxist? It is logically pretty hard to get around that.

And that is a pretty uniform bunch really. Looking at the extreme "right" you find a zillion very different moral and ideological positions.

That said, I don't like the left/right dichotomy... I don't think it is productive. But it is hard to discuss political tribalism without talking about that because everyone is so familiar with that paradigm.

My two cents.

I can get behind that.

I firmly believe that its the control of the information that we use in our day-to-day is at the center of our current problems.

The RNC doesn't understand the internet... yet. They are learning though, and learning quickly. The DNC is firmly on the policing aspect of it. The RNC seems to just want things to be neutral. Steady-state.

It is money and control over institutions as well... if you control the schools you can indoctrinate the children... if you control the welfare then you can get poor people to roll over and do tricks like pets... it is really pretty gross.

That too

It took a long time for it to get this bad.

And because the primary battle is over information control, the DNC and RNC are talking past each other, assuming correctly that both are speaking different languages.

Generations of losing is what led a tiny ideological minority to take over. And it happened because we let them in. We didn't respond to their games. We took the high road... for about a hundred years. And this is what it has gotten us.

I'm tired of losing. I want to give a better world to the next generation than the one given to me.

The DNC is worried about systems, the RNC about individuals. The presentation of the battle is public perception and the war is information control.

As far as I can tell, man, we're cool. And individual connections are the base upon which the DNC falls.

We either have to start winning or accept ultimate assimilation by the what I believe is brave new worldish religious marxism.

So long as you can win... I'm fine with whatever you're doing. If you're losing and happy to lose then I'm not interested in a suicide pact.

I can dig it. But what I'm saying is that how we win this is just as important as the endgame. Alinskist tactics are written from the perspective that the victor gets to condition the next generation of THEIR perspective and views in how the war is won. That cannot hold nowadays because of the internet.

I wonder if new technology can claw back some government control.

Everything is archived

@Undead Mockingbird Yes. New tech acts as a check against partisan "memory loss." Likewise, if drastic steps are taken, new tech can also deplatform any and all detractors, or lead to their removal a la China's "Social credit" system.

FYI Alinsky is a bogeyman. The framework of Alinsky tactics is not partial to any particular ideology, nor does it necessarily have to undermine any of your principles

Oh, I was actually thinking more along the lines of cryptocurrency and such.

Technology has had a democratizing influence in some regards.

If information is power and information is available to all, that will reduce power differentials, in general.

@Beemann Truth, but I disagree on the latter point. Alinsky's Rules for Radicals provides a firm threat of what can occur if your convictions, virtues, and morals are not ironclad. Because they can and will be used against you... if the detractors have no sense of building a public support for their actions.

And technology is no longer just the material worth. It is increasingly very intangible things.

Information. And how to acquire said information.

No aspect of RfR has to work against your principles

having the illusion of more power, sticking to what you know, making your opposition live by their own rules, ridicule, enjoyable tactics, keeping on pressure, etc are all things you can participate in from nearly any ideological standpoint

"RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”