Every so often I will stumble across a book which I feel is so relevant and important, that I must unrelentingly try to get others to pick it up. And, although this does not happen often, as many books come and go as quickly as pop stars from stardom to bust-- I have managed to come up on two of he most important books that I have certainly read in the last two years. 

    Rules for Radicals, the first  book, is actually not a recent publication, as it was put out in 1971. The title was written by Saul Alinsky, a community organizer from the civil rights era. And, although the title could seem conspicuous to some of our more moderate brothers and sisters, the book itself is indispensable for anyone that seeks social and political change.

    Something that I feel strongly about has always been social change through the empowerment of people. Furthermore, I do feel that charity, although a noble act, does not solve anything except for perhaps an application of temporary fix. Within the book, Alinsky argues within the same realm; that if we are to further any social change, we cannot rely on charitable organizations. Alinsky supports the creation of more broad based civic groups that actually lend power to the people that it is created of. Now, I do realize that such an idea is not revolutionary in nature, and may even seem irrelevant, as interest groups on all sides of the political spectrum exist today: but the organizations which Alinsky elaborates upon within the book are different.

    They are not simply lobbyist groups which funnel money into political campaigns. They are direct action groups, which take political and social matters in their own hands on a more localized level that lobbying in DC. Direct action groups target local and state level officials, and use power as a means to budge them in either which direction. I feel that this is an essential element which has gone missing in our communities, even with national groups like the Public Interest Research Group which fund campaigns and organizers on all sorts of levels. After reading the title, I had to ask myself: What happened to the community organizer? I do hope that he/she has not almost entirely come out of existence, but that this new generation will spawn a plethora of new organizers.

    The Second book, which happens to be my favorite of the two, is called Nation of Rebels: Why Counterculture Became Consumer Culture. The title was co-authored by Joseph Heath and Andrew Potter. This book contains by far the most important information for our generations political and philosophical activists. For myself, the book spun my conception of social change entirely and left me to rethink the social justice paradigm. 

    The authors argue, that the counter cultural trends which were popularized, and perhaps conceived in the sixties are in fact to blame for our current widespread consumerist plague. Interestingly enough, this was an idea that even I was reluctant to accept. However, after more consideration and reading, it seems evident that it is so. One example is a simple analysis of the fifties and what the sixties revolution was all about.

    The cultural revolution of the sixties denounced the uniformity and conformity of the fifties. However, along with this deviation from the fifties conformity came a new brand of cool-- the distinction of goods. This clearly and logically can be traced all the way to modern times, where distinction is the basis of positional goods. Within the fifties people all looked more or less alike, and thus less companies existed, less waste existed, and therefore less consumerism existed as well. This is just striking to think about-- as the reader is forced to examine the following question: With consumerism and capitalism in mind, is society better off actually looking the same as opposed to looking different? Another interesting fact is that within the fifties, garment companies relentlessly attempted to get office workers and salesmen to purchase different suits for each day of the week. Instead, most men had one suit which they used all week, then washed on the weekend. Think about how thrilled the garment industry was post-sixties, where it became fashionable to have an assortment of suits and ties as a means of distinction.

    Also, according to the text, the sixties idea of cultural revolution went much farther than simply contributing to contemporary consumerism. The sixties cultural revolution meant just that: a revolution from within, or to be better understood, a revolution of cultural self-change. Many cultural revolutionaries of that time, and of this one, despise the traditional leftist theory of social justice through organizing and institutional change. The authors point out nicely that the influence of the sixties is still prominent in progressive thought currently, and uses Bowling for Columbine as an example, as Michael Moore professes that the United States has a cultural problem instead of an institutional problem when compared to Canada. The reoccurring idea that Canada has a complete and thorough gun control policy is totally cast aside, as institutional change is deemed irrelevant to the countercultural idea of cultural change. Within the countercultural world, this idea of cultural change has influenced many popularized so-called political uprisings in recent times, such as Adbusters, the author Naomi Klein, the punk movement, anarchist movement, and more. 

    Furthermore, the authors essentially argue that this idea of putting aside pragmatic institutional fixes for problems is a huge burden on the progressive movement. As liberal people, we should not encourage rebels to not pay taxes, to practice self-change over community wide change. The book was a striking blow to the longstanding countercultural critique of mass society which has dominated leftist politics for years.