I just read a poorly-written article from the Washington Post desperately attempting to disentangle Hillary Clinton from Saul Alinsky and Lucifer.
While I personally doubt she will ever be able to divorce herself from Satan, there seems to be little reason for Mrs. Clinton to distance herself from Alinsky. He was a bit of a badass, sloppy theology notwithstanding.
Jesus (the original anti-Lucifer) told a parable about two brothers who had opposite responses to their father’s request that they both go work in the fields.
One said sure then did nothing; the other said naw then went to work.
Mr. Alinsky seemed to have been the second guy. He went to the poorest, least powerful communities in this country during a time when the people in those communities were genuinely oppressed and disenfranchised and gave them power and a voice.
When asked why he focused on African American “ghettos” he spoke of pervasive oppression of African Americans through lynchings, the Klan, and systematic disenfranchisement.
He chose to go to the people who had the least reason to refuse any offer of hope.
Saul Alinsky was a do-gooder. He refused labels, especially political labels.
He was wrong about metaphysical hell–there are few have-nots there. But right about the hells on earth that men engender through systemic avarice and racism.
I don’t know Alinsky well. In fact after Carson and the bedraggled WP article I plan on getting to know him better.
But I leave you with a fact and a suggestion–
Alinsky once suggested a fart-in at a concert to combat social injustice.
And I bet you a pork-pie hat that Alinsky’s version of the Fox TV show Lucifer would actually be worth watching.