Alinsky wasn't a classical economic Marxist but a cultural one in the tradition of Antonio Gramsci. Obama is also a cultural Marxist and a reason he gravitated toward liberation theology which is also Gramscian at heart. Here is good article about Obama and Alinksy:
Revolution you can believe in
http://www.spectator.co.uk/mel...u-can-believe-in.thtml
"But Obama brought a special slant to Alinsky?s radicalism.Far from being ? as he has been painted ? a ?post-racial? politician, Obama?s politics are all about promoting the cause of black people and achieving ?reparations? from white society (a perspective through which his whole welfare redistribution agenda is framed). Accordingly, he saw his three-year role as a community organiser in Chicago as mobilising black people for action against their white oppressors. Finding himself hampered in creating an activist network among black churches, he decided to join such a church to give himself more credibility. That?s why he joined the infamous black-power Trinity Church of Christ ? a move, it seems, that had less to do with any spiritual quest than as a radical tactic for mobilising the black proletariat."
This was written before the tape came out last week describing how the court battles of the 60's failed to enact redistribution of wealth
Barack Obama: "You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the civil-rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it, I?d be okay, but the Supreme Court never entered into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society."
Hes basically talking about reparations. Obama is no unifier except when it suits him to appear that way. Obama is a committed cultural Marxist who sees the world through a racial lens.