Gramsci indeed is a good choice, the Frankfurt School, Saul Alinsky. Personalize, ostracize, frame, shame, and demagogue. No compromises, no surrenders, no parlays. No letting up or letting go. No negotiations - present a list of demands, agitate until they are fulfilled, then, once they are, declare them to be "not enough."
The left instinctually understands this, to their credit[?] Few members of the "right" do, only Lee Atwater clearly did and beyond him Nixon, Pat Buchanan and Joe McCarthy half-understood it. Among classical liberals, the choices are even more bleak, you'd pretty much have to go back to Andrew Jackson or John Hancock in the US.
Goldwater. Someone who stuck to his principles even when it was clearly politically unsafe, and whose policies were always in line with what he believed in. The modern-day "left" certainly could learn a lesson or two from that.
Seeing these two posts back-to-back is really kind of hilarious.
Especially in how they do a good job of illustrating how the content of each other's posts has a lot more to do with the posters' biases than anything approaching objective reality. 
Not necessarily. Social issues and fiscal issues are moving in different directions it seems.
