Why Barack Obama REALLY Needs His Base

"The first step in Community Organization is community disorganization....Present arrangements must be disorganized if they are to be displaced by new patterns that provide the opportunities and means for citizen participation.  All change means disorganization of the old and organization of the new.....The organizer must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression."

- Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, p. 116

"There is nothing more draining, nothing more fatal, than this classical politics, with its dried up rituals, its thinking without thought, its little closed world....As the welfare state collapses, we see the emergence of brute conflict between those who desire order and those who don't....To the point that any return to normal is no longer desirable or even imaginable....It is now publicly understood that crisis situations are so many opportunities for the restructuring of domination....How does a situation of generalized rioting become an insurrectionary situation?!?

- The Invisible Committee, The Coming Insurrection, pp. 11-19

"[W]e decided to declare May 1st, 2012 a People’s General Strike. Instead of calling upon unionized Labor to make a specific demand (illegal under Taft-Hartley), we are calling upon the people of the world to take this day away from school and the workplace, so that their absence makes their displeasure with this corrupt system be known."

- OccupyMay1st.org

Barack Obama cannot win this election.  He knows it.  That's why he's deliberately sowing chaos.

For months, people have been accusing President Obama of ginning up his base to help his re-election effort.  They miss Obama's purpose by a country mile.  Barack Obama isn't ginning up his base to show up at the polls, Obama is ginning up his base to riot.

The dirty little secret is that Obama's base isn't big enough to win an election.  That is why Democrats have to lie and pretend to be conservatives in order to win elections.  Furthermore, Obama's base doesn't reliably vote.  But people who don't vote will still riot.

Barack Obama's base consists of certain minorities (mainly blacks), Jon Stewart's audience, and the Unions.  If you look at who is fomenting chaos, it's these three groups.  The New Black Panthers are the Black element.  Occupy Wall St. is Jon Stewart's audience.  Unions are notorious commie thugs.  I expect La Raza to get into the action soon.

 The purpose of riots is to disrupt daily life, which confuses and frightens the broad apolitical middle.  This has three potential benefits for the left:

1) Overwhelming the New Administration - I think this is the real objective; as I wrote in February:

Barack Obama's allies in the #Occupy movement have clearly stated their intention to "Recreate [the chaos of 19]68" in 2012.  To understand why recreating 1968 benefits the hard left, one needs to properly understand the events of 1969.  In 1969, Richard Nixon assumed the Presidency following the Biggest Expansion of Government (prior to Obama) in American History.  Nixon's inauguration was followed shortly thereafter by Leftist Campus Takeovers, the Emergence of the Weathermen, Homosexual Attacks on the NYPD, the Manson Murders, and the Marxist-inspired 'Days of Rage.'  Against this backdrop, and a continuing War in Vietnam, conservative efforts to unwind Medicare and the War on Poverty floundered.  From the perspective of the Hard Left, which seeks to expand government and does not particularly care who holds elected office at any given time, 1969 (and Richard Nixon's entire Presidency) was an unqualified victory.

2) Bullying the Broad Apolitical Middle so they 'volutarily' Give The Left What They Want -  If the situation gets stressful enough, people who don't follow politics closely may decide that the path of least resistence is to give the rioters what they want.

3) Instigate a Massive Crackdown - This is what Glenn Beck thinks is the end-game.  George Soros has expressed similar sentiments.  I'm skeptical; as Alinsky says:

As an organizer I start where the world is, as it is, not as I would like it to be. That we accept the world as it is does not in any sense weaken our desire to change it into what we believe it should be — it is necessary to begin where the world is if we are going to change it to what we think it should be.

I don't think the American people are far enough gone, yet, to accept a massive crackdown.  A crackdown could wake up the broad apolical middle to the point where they wise-up to the left.  To me, instigating a massive crackdown seems too big a risk to the broader Marxist project.  On the other hand, if they could instigate a massive crack-down several years down the road, under a Republican, then they could demonize it.

If Barack Obama's base is angry, they'll create chaos, which is Obama's real objective. Historically, authority figures cave to this sort of thuggery, or tragedy ensues.  The possible difference, this time, is that there might be a critical mass of citizens who understand the game being played.

Conservatives need to wrap their heads around this reality.  We are going to win this election, then we're going to assume power amidst massive chaos.  When that happens we need to understand the game the left is really playing.  As the Invisible Committee said:

The Goal of any insurrection is to become irreversable. (130)

Forewarned is forearmed.