He wasn't a 'mentor' rather the subject of her the

He wasn't a 'mentor' rather the subject of her thesis. She disagreed with him in significant ways.

If you'd ever attended college you would understand that witting a paper about a person does not make you a disciple of that person or of their views in their entirety.

Quote:

---

Rodham researched the thesis by interviewing Alinsky and others, and by conducting visits to low-income areas of Chicago (nearby to her hometown, Park Ridge, Illinois) and observing Community Action Programs in those areas.[2] Her thesis adviser was Wellesley professor of political science Alan Schechter.[3]

The thesis was sympathetic to Alinsky's critiques of government antipoverty programs, but criticized Alinsky's methods as largely ineffective, all the while describing Alinsky's personality as appealing.[4] The thesis sought to fit Alinsky into a line of American social activists, including Eugene V. Debs, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Walt Whitman. Written in formal academic language, the thesis concluded that "[Alinsky's] power/conflict model is rendered inapplicable by existing social conflicts" and that Alinsky's model had not expanded nationally due to "the anachronistic nature of small autonomous conflict."[4]

A 2007 New York Times review of Rodham's thesis summarized her views as follows: "Ms. Rodham endorsed Mr. Alinsky's central critique of government antipoverty programs — that they tended to be too top-down and removed from the wishes of individuals. But the student leader split with Mr. Alinsky over a central point. He vowed to 'rub raw the sores of discontent' and compel action through agitation. This, she believed, ran counter to the notion of change within the system."[5] In 2016, reporter Michael Kruse quotes the thesis and describes a centrist theme:


"Alinsky's conclusion that the 'ventilation' of hostilities is healthy in certain situations is valid, but across-the-board 'social catharsis' cannot be prescribed," she wrote. "Catharsis has a way of perpetuating itself so that it becomes an end in itself." She continued: "Interestingly, this society seems to be in a transition period, caught between conflict and consensus." It was clear where this 21-year-old stood: "... as our 'two societies'—the establishment, the anti-establishment—"move further apart contrived conflict serves to exacerbate the polarization.[1]

In the acknowledgements and end notes of the thesis, Rodham thanked Alinsky for two interviews and a job offer. She declined the latter, saying that "after spending a year trying to make sense out of [Alinsky's] inconsistency, I need three years of legal rigor." The thesis was praised by all four of its reviewers[6] and Rodham, an honors student at Wellesley, received an A grade on it.[4]

---