Saul Alinsky’s radicalism was expressed in his 1971 book, “Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals.” In that book, Alinsky said, “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- Lucifer.” Alinsky never saw himself as the devil, but as some radical angel who could bedevil “the Establishment” and force it to change to assuage pressures from community organizations.
Two points to make here...
First, anytime Lucifer is your hero, you're serioulsy messed-up. And anyone who follows you is the same, no matter how 'christian' they want us to think they are.
Second, it's pretty plain that Alinsky wasn't really anti-establishment. Since he thought that Lucifer was so effective because he had his own kingdom, we can assume that the end of Alinsky's shenanigans was similar. He, and those like him, are only anti-establishment when they don't like the establishment. When they are the establishment, well, everyone better toe the line.