Alinsky goes on to say that “It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign. It should be remembered not only that the action is in the reaction but that action is itself the consequence of reaction and of reaction to the reaction, ad infinitum. The pressure produces the reaction, and constant pressure sustains action.”
If this all sounds oddly familiar to you, that’s because it is nearly identical to rule 8. Rule 8 states, “Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. ‘The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage’.”
Was Alinsky running out of ideas? Was this a clever way to keep the pressure on the reader in order to demonstrate the importance of keeping the pressure on one’s opponent?
There are subtle differences. Rule 8 instructs the radical to try out different tactics and use current events to get the upper hand. Rule 11 focuses more on eliciting a reaction. Certainly this is not a big enough difference to warrant separate rules, is it?
Come on, Alisnky. Did you think we wouldn’t notice?