Apollo and I are back this week, following an amazing celebration of the greatest event in history: The death and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah!
Several times on Culture of Change, we’ve asserted that the 22 principles of change management enshrined in High Velocity Culture Change (1993) read like Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals (1971). Today, we’re going to back it up and examine the two change management schools of thought side by side.
How to Change the World
As we discussed in the first episode of Culture of Change, Pritchett & Pound’s 22 guidelines for culture change are designed to achieve dramatic cultural shifts in record time. On the first page of their short book, the authors confirm that those dramatic cultural shifts are not without pain:
“Some that recognize the need to change deceive themselves, thinking that they can achieve a cultural transformation without pain and chaos…overhauling the culture is an agonizing process.”
The reason this text is foundational to Culture of Change is that, in our current global corporate communist nightmare, these tactics are being deployed on us regularly. Corporate change methodologies are plentiful, but they all directionally align to these 22 principles.
As we see a greater and greater convergence of corporations and governments, there is little doubt about the use of corporate change tactics to radically reshape American culture and our way of life.
But as we’ve discussed many times, it’s not just corporations and governments that have converged for the Great Reset to the New World Order. It’s also NGOs, pseudo-governmental entities, and other charitable organizations.
And they have their own change methodologies.
Radical Rules for Destabilizing Culture & Communities
Saul David Alinsky was born on January 30, 1909 in Chicago, Illinois. Alinsky attended the University of Chicago, and he allegedly spent his early years “helping poor communities organize to press demands upon landlords, politicians, economists, bankers and businesses.”
In the mainstream official record, Alinsky is referred to as an American community organizer and political theorist. In Rules for Radicals, Alinsky promotes confrontation and societal subversion as critical tactics in the struggle for social justice.
A community organizer from Chicago focused on subverting America to bring about social justice? If Alinsky and Obama had not been alive at the same time – allegedly and albeit only for 11 years – I might start questioning reincarnation.
Alinsky’s rules are subversive and, like most communist revolutionary approaches, a central theme of his work was empowerment of the poor. Alinsky’s approach to empowering the poor to drive a specific change agenda focuses heavily on the use of symbols to destabilize and create division. Sound familiar?
For example, in Alinsky in the 1980s: Two Contemporary Chicago Community Organizations (1987), authors Donald and Dietrich Reitzes discuss how Alinsky would co-opt established organizations – churches or other entities that were well established and active in the community – and exploit their symbols and structures to drive his social change agenda.
Alinsky’s simple logic was that structured organizations with recognizable and unifying symbols are easier to mobilize into action. Once the community is united behind a common symbol, the community organizers introduce the common enemy.
An empowered community that is unified against a common enemy is a powerful formula for change.
While Pritchett and Pound’s 22 Principles focus on rapidly transforming an organization, Alinsky’s 13 Rules use organizations to rapidly transform communities. And as we compare the two change methodologies, we will show that those are not competing, but rather complementary, approaches.
Respectably Rhyming with Radicals
Saul Alinsky crafted his 13 rules in 1971. These are:
"Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
"Never go outside the expertise of your people."
"Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
"Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."
"A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
"A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
"Keep the pressure on."
"The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself. "
"The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
"If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."
"The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."
As we were preparing this comparison for discussion today, we were struck by how much both change methodologies mirror another major work – The Art of War, Sun Tzu (5th century BC). To attempt a comparison of all three texts would really be more of a book than a podcast episode or substack article, but if you’ve read Sun Tzu, you will see it. It’s also an interesting data point that President Trump is an enthusiastic student of The Art of War.
Devolution anyone?
Back to the comparison, let’s discuss the similarities between the cultural change methodologies of the corporations and community organizers.
Situational & Narrative Control
We are at war, and all war is deception. The first three radical rules tell us that, in culture change, power is largely a matter of perception. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have."
What you have in addition to hard resources and assets is the expertise of your team. The sweet spot to destabilizing your target and increasing their perception of your power is when the expertise of your people is outside the expertise of your target. The second and third rules: "Never go outside the expertise of your people," and "Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
This is the sweet spot not just because of the strategic advantage of asymmetrical resources, but because of the narrative deception you can leverage as a result of that asymmetry.
The complement to High Velocity Culture Change here is also in the first few principles. “Don’t let the existing culture dictate your approach,” and “Focus on the future,” essentially means situational and narrative control.
In organizational change, the resources of each side – the change agents vs. the resisters – is really only understood by the change agents.
Resistors in corporate change efforts rarely understand that they are a target being manipulated, in large part because of the existing power dynamic.
As a result, because compliance is effectively a condition of corporate employment, it’s more reliable than voluntary compliance in a social change effort.
But it’s still a matter of perception. Corporations need their employees — especially those with institutional knowledge and deep expertise — much more than individual employees need a specific corporation. Just google “the war for talent,” and you will find our favorite narrative controllers like McKinsey and Harvard Business Review laying it out plainly — while drawing conclusions that favor the existing power dynamic and globalist agenda.
Diminishing and neutralizing the people’s power within the existing culture, through deception, is critical to both corporate and social change efforts.
“All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.”
Sun tzu, The Art of War
Rules for Thee
The asymmetry becomes even clearer as Alinsky continues:
“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” Saul D. Alinsky
This should feel very familiar to conservatives who daily experience two sets of rules, whether for speech, violence, justice, or any other domain.
Conservatives, driven by the Republican establishment wing of the uniparty, understand and follow the law. The second a conservative colors outside those arbitrary lines, the full weight of the regime comes down like a hammer.
But those whose ideology aligns to that of the regime are shown empathy, leniency and, often mercy, regardless of the offense.
“The right” plays by “the left’s” rules while “the left” plays by no rules.
In both corporate and social change efforts, this asymmetry destabilizes — intentionally. Deliberately destabilizing is key to disarming the old culture of its power. That’s what Pritchett and Pound tell us. Alinsky agrees:
“The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." Saul D. Alinsky
“The clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy’s will to be imposed on him.”
Sun tzu, The Art of War
Make Mockery Great Again
There are so many similarities between these works that we could fill a book — and we might — but our final comparison for this episode is the strategic use of mockery.
"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage." Saul D. Alinsky
In High Velocity Culture Change, three principles — consecutive in Pritchett and Pound’s list — hammer this point gone:
Nine: Free the people. “A cultural revolution calls for liberation of the people. You must free them from the system, the rules of the establishment, the old habits of the status quo. If you can break the chains of this bureaucracy, you break the back of the old culture.”
Ten: Crank up the communication effort. “You need to sell people on the purpose, preach hope…with the zeal of a crusading evangelist.”
Eleven: Expect casualties. “Casualties cause fear. But that’s better than complacency. At least at fear, ratchets up the emotional energy, and you can use that to fuel the change effort. Be willing to sacrifice those people whose attitude and behavior could sabotage the cultural change.”
Sacrifice “those people” and make examples of them. Think about J.K. Rowling or the January 6 Political Hostages. In addition to societal sanctions and real world damages, the regime megaphones heavily leveraged mockery in their attacks.
Now this is an area where President Trump excelled, and he taught us much about the power of mockery and ridicule. As the establishment pushes for fake decorum and return to the pre-Trump niceties that neutralized Americans’ outrage, we’d be wise to follow our President’s lead, lean into the power of ridicule, and make mockery great again.
The opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
Sun tzu, The Art of War
So What Do We Do Now?
Our defense against the global corporate communists is to understand what is going on, to recognize these tactics as they are being deployed upon us and, as a result of our understanding, to neutralize the regime’s best efforts.
That means employing many of these tactics ourselves.
Again, there are hundreds of change management methodologies used in corporations and governments and in our communities by the regime’s NGOs and their community organizers.
Change management methods are not inherently bad or good but, like everything else, tools in the hands of people with motives.
We are people with motives.
Study these principles and use them in this war to secure freedom for future generations of Americans.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, your victory will not stand in doubt; if you know Heaven and know Earth, you may make your victory complete.”
Sun tzu, The Art of War
Watch Culture of Change on Badlands Media, Sundays at 6PM ET. Show notes and references are available on my substack following each show. Follow me on all the socials @asheinamerica.