Glenn delivers a 'truly horrifying' look at the origins of the Russian threat

All this week, Glenn is taking viewers on a journey to explore one of the biggest geopolitical threats to America: Russia and Vladimir Putin. In addition to the research for each segment, Glenn is also making the transcripts and key highlights from the episode available on GlennBeck.com.

15645036294_23611127e6_k

Tonight, I’m going to show you what’s coming in the next 12 or 15, 24 months, what’s over the horizon. This one is truly, truly horrifying. The information that is fed to you by politicians or the mainstream media or, God forbid, the think tanks never take us beyond the surface view. I believe it is critical to attack an issue on a much deeper level, pull it up from the roots like a weed. If you don’t, if you don’t get at the roots, the problems will continue to resurface time and time again, and you will see that what I’m going to show you tonight has repeated itself.

History is repeating itself right now. It was Aristotle that said it, and then history repeated itself, and Edmund Burke said it. And then history repeated itself, and then Winston Churchill. And depending on what time period you were born in, everybody always says…my generation, it’s Winston Churchill. It started with Aristotle. Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it. If you don’t know history, you certainly won’t know the future.

The next three episodes we are going to show you what is going on with Russia, and I’m going to show you tonight, history. I’m going to try to answer these three things and show you these three things, that Russia is awake and rising and not to be messed with. Two, is it communist? Is it fascist? Is it religious? What is it? And three, when did this all start?

And this really kind of goes back to history. It’s a disturbing driving force behind their aggressive geopolitical aims and how it relates directly to you, because it does. But let me go into short-term history, because really it all goes back to this chalkboard which was the last year of my show on FOX, this chalkboard which caused me probably to lose more credibility than anything I’ve ever done. People said this was madness.

This was the caliphate. Did you notice that it was the cyber caliphate that hacked into the president’s speech and into our global systems today? It was the cyber caliphate. That’s this chalkboard. Well, we’re past the caliphate now. We are now to this point: radicals, Islamists, Communists, Socialists will work together against Israel…past it. Work together against capitalism…we’re there now. Work together to overturn stability…we’re there.

The protests become contagious. They cascade. They sweep the Middle East…past this. Begin to destabilize Europe…you’re now seeing this. And the rest of the world…this is where we are at tonight. We are going to show you this part. We’re going to show you in the next three days. Episode two, you’re going to meet Putin’s idea man, the architect designing maneuvers that we’re currently seeing play out in the international stage, and it is incredible once you know what he’s doing to see it all laid out on a table and what the signs point to, a rising red storm, the likes of which we haven’t seen in decades, and this time they’re playing for keeps.

But for it to all really crystallize, you have to take Edmund Burke’s advice. We have to learn the history first, the impetus of Russia’s recent international escalations. They go much deeper than merely a maniacal shirtless dictator who hunts sharks with his bare hands. I mean, that makes for good click bait, you know, and Putin’s machismo may be a, you know, good enough storyline to satisfy the casual observer, but I will tell you, as I talked about this show on my Facebook page, I actually had people in our audience say well, I like Putin better than I like President Obama. I like him because at least he’s doing something.

Oh, be careful. Putin is not just the self-absorbed thug the media portrays. His tactics are far more calculated than the average wannabe dictator, and his goals are far, far reaching. The brash military overreaches from the annexing of the Crimea to the pro-Russian militants who shot down MH-17, that’s just about Putin flexing his biceps for the rest of the world to see, but there is a deeply historical and deeply disturbing pattern that is playing out that reveals the endgame and opens Pandora’s Box almost quite literally of biblical proportions.

Tonight, we begin a three-day episode on the root of Russia’s coming red storm which went from 0 to 60 since Putin’s reelection in just the past year. Watch.

So the question is why? Why Ukraine? Why is this happening? What is his end goal? There’s also some disturbing news that came out last weekend about the anti-homosexual agenda in Russia that we will touch on here in just a few minutes and also what’s happening in France.

Now, prior to these aggressions, even the mere mention of Russia as a geopolitical foe or a geopolitical force was met with mockery. Remember?

VIDEO

President Obama: Governor Romney, I’m glad that you recognize that Al Qaeda is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what’s the biggest geopolitical threat facing America, you said Russia, not Al Qaeda. You said Russia, and the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back, because, you know, the Cold War has been over for 20 years.

Okay, this might have been amusing. The audience laughed. The line about the 1980s made people laugh but really only those people whose knowledge of Russia begins and ends with Rocky IV. The plain reality is and has been there is no humor in such a stunning display of ignorance. Dismissing the ambitions of what Putin has declared the new Russia without carefully examining what does he mean by “that could have disastrous consequences”?

What is Putin’s new Russia? What does it look like? Well, the best place to help make sense of what’s happening now, again, is history. Most people would trace the Western and Russia conflict back to the mid-1940s. World War II had concluded, and most nations were now focusing on how to reconcile, reconcile with this guy, Stalin.

I love this. This is actually a model of a very famous sculpture for Stalin from the Soviet Union after he died, and I love this because it looks like he was in a straitjacket, and that’s where this crazy man belonged, a straitjacket. Stalin’s Soviet Union, that was a scary place. One of the highest profile points of the dispute in the creation of the World Bank and the IMF is where we really started to see this conflict.

The U.S. played a leading role because leaders believed at the time the IMF, the institutions, the banking institutions would help prevent another Great Depression from happening and another great world war. Those things were on the high priority list, but Stalin refused to go along with it. Well, this confused so many people, because FDR had openly spoken of the spirit of friendliness and cooperation with Stalin.

16266621802_274ca65b0c_k

FDR admired Stalin. People thought Communism was neat and affectionately referred to Stalin as Uncle Joe. That’s what FDR used to call him. Stalin’s refusal to help prompted U.S. officials to start digging around and find out what is the deal with Stalin? Why isn’t he our partner? Why won’t he help on this? This is important. This is good for both of us.

Well, officials reached out to a U.S. diplomat named George Kennan. He was the head of the mission in Moscow. Kennan didn’t share FDR’s rosy view of the communist leadership and the Soviet Union. He knew what killers they were. He believed FDR’s fondness for Stalin was wildly misplaced. His response to Stalin’s request was stunning. He wrote it on February 22, 1946, and instead of a simple reply, Kennan unleashed a five-part, 8,000 word missive that would later be known as the Long Telegram.

In it, he pulled no punches. He explained, “I cannot compress answers into single brief message without yielding to what I feel would be dangerous degree of oversimplification.” Stalin’s unwillingness to help over some random policy hang-up was bothersome to people, but there were serious problems. It wasn’t just bothersome. It was serious, and Kennan explained in an article published in Foreign Affairs in 1947.

He called it the Sources of the Soviet Conflict, and here’s what he said: “The main element of any United States policy toward the Soviet Union must be that of a long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies.” Got it? “Soviet pressure against the free institutions of the Western world is something that can be contained by the…application of counterforce at a series of constantly shifting geographical and political points; corresponding to the shifts and maneuvers of Soviet policy, but which cannot be charmed or talked out of existence.”

What does that mean? It means you’re going to have to contain them, and they’re going to continue to try to get out of that box, and you’re going to have to continue to move. The solution? Take steps; block him at his expansion anywhere possible. So, who is Kennan? Kennan is now known as the father of containment. His message was the cornerstone of our Cold War policy against the Soviet Union, contain them at all costs.

Now, that’s when it’s commonly believed that it all started, competition born out of the ashes of World War II because of this guy. That is ridiculous. It doesn’t. It goes much, much deeper than that, and our researchers have now worked for four months on this program to try to show you. And this is going to be a lot of really heavy stuff to try to jam down in a, you know, an hour-long show, but all of these notes will be up at GlennBeck.com. You’ll be able to see this. You can watch it at will, but this is critical that you understand this, because this is the root.

Gotta take you back over 1,000 years to the split of the Roman Empire. Split of the Roman Empire in the late 1700s, the government power structure was in Constantinople, here. The religious center remained in Rome. Now, here’s how the power structure was divided at the time. There was the Eastern Roman Empire. The government was run, Constantinople, which was famous for its defense and large number of soldiers there.

Culture was heavily influenced by the Greeks, connected to the Byzantine Empire, the language, the customs, and everything else, and that’s all Hellenization comes from here. Gradually they move away from the Latin language, and they’re increasingly alienating themselves to Western Rome and the pope. The pope was based in Rome. That brings us to Western Rome.

The Christian pope based there in Rome became more and more alienated as they maintained allegiance to the pope. In the time of conquer or be conquered, Rome was a sitting duck because all of the troops were Byzantine. All of the troops were in Constantinople, and they were there to protect the pope, but the pope was in Rome. All of the defenses in Eastern, all of the spiritual in Western…that’s the way it was in the beginning and only a matter of time before somebody took advantage of the opportunity and attempted to take down Western Rome, because the pope was like a king at the time.

At the time, it was common for barbarian tribes to attack various targets. There was a tribe called the Lombards. They saw the Byzantine troops were spread too thin. They were all around Constantinople, and where they were, there was no real army, so they decided to take a chance, and they invaded what is now known as modern-day Italy with the intention of conquering and ruling Rome.

Well, the Byzantines were tied up in various other battles. They didn’t have the resources to protect them. Desperate, the pope turned to somebody else, to Charlemagne. Charlemagne was the new king of the Frankish Empire. He agreed to help the pope, so Charlemagne comes in, and he swoops down, and he crushes the Lombards. He liberates Rome but in turn also ended up uniting most of Western Europe.

Word During Charlemagne

Christmas day, year 800, Pope Leo III is sitting on his throne. He crowns Charlemagne emperor, and his empire would stretch as far east as the Slavic lands, and this is really important, Charlemagne all the way over here. Let me show you a look. This is Charlemagne’s Europe. If you see, the Slavics to Charlemagne, that is the orange up here. The gray or the brown down here, that’s the caliphate. I’m telling you, this is all playing out now, the caliphate at the bottom, the Byzantine Empire, the Slavic Empire, and then the West.

Now, let me show you another map, the Cold War. Do you notice the division of power in Charlemagne’s Europe and Cold War Europe is nearly identical? After Charlemagne’s death, his empire was split among his sons. France and Germany’s beginnings stem from this moment, and from here on out, Rome is the spiritual center, and Carolingian Christianity would dominate Western Europe. The way the region is constructed today stems from this, this ancient division.

Understanding this helps make sense of what is happening there today, because…do we have the new map? The world today…Ukraine, what’s happening in Ukraine? Some of Russia’s seemingly strange actions that had most Americans and most people around the world going what the heck? What does he care about that? If you know the past, you will know the future.

[break]

All right, so how does Charlemagne and his rescuing of Western Rome over 1,000 years ago matter to anybody today? It’s all about values or the stated values. I want you to look closely at what Putin values in his new Russia. There has been a trend now of events that indicate Russia is attempting to be one of the highest profile international defenders of global Orthodox Christianity.

Religion is playing a role, and pay attention here. It’s all about religion, just as it was in Hitler’s Germany at the very beginning before he really seized power. He cloaked himself as a defender of all that is good and decent and Christian.

You’ll recall that it was Vladimir Putin who beat Obama to the national stage when denouncing the violence against Christians in the Middle East. Remember? We looked like we were cowards. All of a sudden he was defending, and he said, “This pressing problem should be a subject of close attention for the entire international community. It is especially important today to make efforts to prevent intercultural and interreligious conflicts, which are fraught with the most serious upheavals.”

Well, everybody loves that, right? Except that’s a little strange, considering that the guy kills journalists. Journalists in Russia who pen a negative word about politicians, especially Putin, find themselves victims of freak accidents like falling out of a nine-story window, falling into an elevator shaft, suddenly being stabbed and thrown off a roof, consuming poison-laced drinks. That doesn’t exactly square with good Christian tenets, does it?

Nevertheless, the pattern is now here. Putin himself was baptized in the Russian Orthodox Church. He had a high-profile meeting with Pope Francis at the Vatican in 2002. I want you to know, I am not claiming that he is a religious guy at all, but I am telling you that he has made strong religious allies, such as one powerful bishop in the Russian Orthodox Church in Moscow.

Leading up to the Olympics, Russia championed the fight against what they deemed as the West’s slide into immorality and greed, critical to pay attention to, most notably taking an overzealous opposition to the pro-gay activist movement. I talked about this two years ago on CNN because I found this abhorrent at the time, and it has only gotten worse. Watch.

VIDEO

Glenn: I said on the air this week I will stand with GLAAD. I will stand with any, anybody who will stand up and say that’s crazy, that’s dangerous, that’s hetero-Fascism. That’s what that is. And we’re talking about Duck Dynasty? Really? Really?

Really important…he banned gay propaganda, and here he is defending this law. Watch.

VIDEO

Vladimir Putin: Two is that I’d like to ask our colleagues, my colleagues and friends, that as they try to criticize us, they would do well to set their own house in order first. I did say, after all, and this is public knowledge, that in some of the states in the U.S., homosexuality remains a felony.

Okay, this is not actual Christianity. Putin is attempting to appeal to his Orthodox core of the country. Why? Because he knows trouble is coming, and he’s got to cobble together an army, and it appears to be working. Russia has aggressively sought far right allies wherever he can get them, and if you don’t pay attention to what the history is and what he’s really doing, you might think I’ve looked into pooty-Put’s eyes, he’s a good guy.

16266633002_1f3a7d4fe6_k

There is one disturbing partnership with a group called the World Congress of Families. I know very little about this group. I don’t think they’re a bad group. They are very pro-family, but they are not doing what Putin is doing. And this group has a lot of well-known Christian organizations among its partners. Again, seems to be a good group.

They were set to have a conference in Moscow until the military conflicts with Ukraine forced cancellation, and sanctions by the U.S. then forced the WFC to suspend their partnership, but it seems to me, and this is only one group, that there are groups around the world that have bought Russia’s salesmanship that they are the new global champion of Christianity.

I warn you, be careful. Let me give you a quote. “Now Christian Russia can help liberate the West from the new liberal anti-Christian totalitarianism of political correctness, gender ideology, mass-media censorship and neo-Marxist dogma.” That one comes from Putin’s favorite businessman, a 40-year-old multimillionaire who recently started the Charitable Foundation of St. Basil the Great, $42 million. The charity became one of WCF’s official partners at a similar conference.

He did a talk on traditional values, the future of the European principles, and said “Civilization is on the verge of deconstruction, and only Russia can become a center of consolidation of all the healthy forces and resistance to the sodomization of the world, that is why the whole Europe is looking at it with hope.” I am telling you that our multiculturalism, our lack of any values, is leading us to exactly the same place Western Europe was in in the 1930s.

Examples of Putin attempting to appeal to the Orthodox Church: Moscow State University received the largest scientific grant ever, $19 million, to fund a project called Noah’s Ark, the case against an all-female punk rock band, Pussy Riot, who was charged with the severe crime of doing a performance at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior. It was wildly, wildly inappropriate. It was vile, yes, but these women got seven years in prison, and people cheered Putin on.

The pattern is very clear, and it begs the question why? This is not a religious guy. Why is he doing this? Why is Russia attempting to become the so-called voice of the Orthodox Church? The disturbing answer comes from history when we come back.

[break]

The world is on a collision course, and we have to find out what the root of this is and what comes next. When Vladimir Putin first got into office, he described himself, and he was described by everybody as a pragmatist. He was a secular nationalist whose religious stances were separate from how he governed. He didn’t really care.

We just showed you he’s going at 180 degrees in the opposite direction. Why? Well, let’s start where it really started to happen with him, the economic crash of ’08. It caused major economic pain, and Putin’s popularity began to slip. So, what did he do? He had to appeal to the nationalism of his people and also to the religious aspect to garner popularity. It worked in his first term, but the downturn has taken that option off the table now, and the Kremlin’s new plan is a dangerous concoction of anti-Western sentiment, Islamic xenophobia which you’re going to see play out in the West, and we’ll tell you about that tomorrow, and Orthodox Christianity.

So, all of a sudden this guy is becoming a religious leader. Well, has he had a come-to-Jesus moment? No, not in his faith, but he has come to Jesus as the best weapon at his disposal to keep people in the palm of his hand. It’s the oldest trick in the book. Now, what makes him think that will work? History, again…that’s what tonight’s episode is about, but you have to go further back than Rome. You have to go all the way back to the Roman Empire, passed that to the days with Jesus and his disciples.

The Apostle Paul, we know he went west towards Rome to preach, but meanwhile, Ukrainian historical accounts claim the Apostle Andrew had preaching that took him north over the Black Sea and even further north along the Dnieper River, all the way making converts to Christ. The name of the cities he visited, you have become reacquainted with in the news lately thanks to Vladimir Putin, Crimea and Kiev. As you will see, Crimea plays a very important role.

It was in Kiev where Andrew first predicted a great Christian city would someday arise. Some 800 years later, the prediction would appear to come true when Prince Oleg of the Rus arrived. He landed precisely where Andrew made his prediction, and today in that exact spot stands this, St. Andrews Church.

Now, for the Kievan Rus, the new location proved fruitful, made them incredibly powerful, even more powerful or powerful enough to attack Constantinople on multiple occasions. So, now it was the Byzantines. The Byzantines with all their power and their troops, they were sitting ducks and outgunned and out of options. The Byzantines found a different way. They thought we will fight a different way. We’ll fight by culture.

A Byzantine monk named Cyril developed a written language and translated the Bible and other Byzantine prayers. The Christianization of the Slavs had begun. By the way, Cyril, Cyrillic language, if you see above on our set, that is the language of Russia. They’re still using it today.

In 988, Vladimir the Great…Vladimir Putin? No, Vladimir the Great, in 988 was baptized in Crimea, and Kievan Rus became a Christian state. Just as Rome was the spiritual center of the Western Europeans, this became the Christian center. Is Ukraine and why he is paying so much attention to it, why he wants Ukraine and Crimea so important to him? Why does he want it? Because it is the center of Christianity for the Rus.

In the mid-1400s, Ivan the Great began a campaign once again to unite all of the Rus under one banner. Ivan may have been the first Russian ruler to realize the power and influence of Orthodox Christianity and what it had on the Rus. Knowing that this had real power, he commissioned the building of the Kremlin, and in the middle of the fortress, he placed the Assumption Cathedral of Moscow.

It was the grandest Orthodox Church in all of Rus’ lands at the time, and it still stands there right in the middle of the Kremlin. In fact, you go to the Kremlin for a tour today, they pretty much bypass all of the Cold War stuff. They take you right here, the United Rus. Ivan the Great, he united the Rus, and he conquered the mongrels and forged a Russian Empire. With him, the entire way was Orthodox Church.

Ivan declared Russia the third Rome. He adopted the Byzantine double-headed eagle as the official symbol of Russia, and it still is the coat of arms in Russia, a constant reminder to all Russians of their responsibility as a successor to the Byzantines. Eastern Orthodox Church, Eastern Orthodoxy would become fused into the DNA of every single Russia, deep in their roots, and places such as Kiev and Crimea peninsula, they are considered the holy sites. In fact, we just heard a speech from Putin just a couple of months ago where he said that that is as important to the Russian people as Jerusalem is to the Jewish people.

The legitimacy of that place traces all the way back to the apostle of Jesus. When the Byzantine Empire effectively collapsed, the Russians saw it as their holy succession to establish the third Rome. The Russian Orthodox Church provided divine legitimacy for Russia. The medieval Iron Curtain line was drawn.

The Roman Catholic Church officially split from the Eastern Orthodox Church. Western Europe continued to look to Charlemagne and France as their protector and leader. Eastern Europe looked to Russia as their champion and preserver of the Eastern Orthodox tradition. That’s what’s happening. He is now saying that West and the Western Christianity has failed the world. We need to restart Eastern orthodoxy, and it will save the world.

16081328709_09e6157e43_k

Russian nationalism, it has always centered on the Orthodox Christian Church, and this is the power that Putin is after. It’s the Holy Grail. This fracture in history is critical to understand, because an ongoing dispute in the region is not about anything other than who’s going to be the third Rome, the modern-day successor of ancient Rome. Putin is talking about it in speeches now.

The offspring of this divide, both believe they are the rightful successor. Putin is appealing to the historic roots of the Russian people when he aligns himself with Russian orthodoxy. He is rallying them to a greater call than just his power, just his ego, just to oil or anything else. He’s calling them back to God. And it wasn’t until the dawn of the 20th century that a certain leader there tried to change the Russian struggle from cultural to class, but the root of this conflict began over 1,000 years ago, and now the bare-chested Putin is posed to claim the mantle of orthodoxy, the centuries-old, tried-and-true way to stoke nationalism.

Why is it that the media is so afraid of people like me or people, anybody on the right? Because they will always say anybody who calls for nationalism and religion you should run from. No, do your own homework. This should send a chill down the spine of every living human being on planet Earth, because the red storm is just beginning to rise.

Trump v. Slaughter: The Deep State on trial

JIM WATSON / Contributor | Getty Images

The administrative state has long operated as an unelected super-government. Trump v. Slaughter may be the moment voters reclaim authority over their own institutions.

Washington is watching and worrying about a U.S. Supreme Court case that could very well define the future of American self-government. And I don’t say that lightly. At the center of Trump v. Slaughter is a deceptively simple question: Can the president — the one official chosen by the entire nation — remove the administrators and “experts” who wield enormous, unaccountable power inside the executive branch?

This isn’t a technical fight. It’s not a paperwork dispute. It’s a turning point. Because if the answer is no, then the American people no longer control their own government. Elections become ceremonial. The bureaucracy becomes permanent. And the Constitution becomes a suggestion rather than the law of the land.

A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.

That simply cannot be. Justice Neil Gorsuch summed it up perfectly during oral arguments on Monday: “There is no such thing in our constitutional order as a fourth branch of government that’s quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative.”

Yet for more than a century, the administrative state has grown like kudzu — quietly, relentlessly, and always in one direction. Today we have a fourth branch of government: unelected, unaccountable, insulated from consequence. Congress hands off lawmaking to agencies. Presidents arrive with agendas, but the bureaucrats remain, and they decide what actually gets done.

If the Supreme Court decides that presidents cannot fire the very people who execute federal power, they are not just rearranging an org chart. The justices are rewriting the structure of the republic. They are confirming what we’ve long feared: Here, the experts rule, not the voters.

A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.

The founders warned us

The men who wrote the Constitution saw this temptation coming. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison in the Federalist Papers hammered home the same principle again and again: Power must remain traceable to the people. They understood human nature far too well. They knew that once administrators are protected from accountability, they will accumulate power endlessly. It is what humans do.

That’s why the Constitution vests the executive power in a single president — someone the entire nation elects and can unelect. They did not want a managerial council. They did not want a permanent priesthood of experts. They wanted responsibility and authority to live in one place so the people could reward or replace it.

So this case will answer a simple question: Do the people still govern this country, or does a protected class of bureaucrats now run the show?

Not-so-expert advice

Look around. The experts insisted they could manage the economy — and produced historic debt and inflation.

The experts insisted they could run public health — and left millions of Americans sick, injured, and dead while avoiding accountability.

The experts insisted they could steer foreign policy — and delivered endless conflict with no measurable benefit to our citizens.

And through it all, they stayed. Untouched, unelected, and utterly unapologetic.

If a president cannot fire these people, then you — the voter — have no ability to change the direction of your own government. You can vote for reform, but you will get the same insiders making the same decisions in the same agencies.

That is not self-government. That is inertia disguised as expertise.

A republic no more?

A monarchy can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A dictatorship can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A constitutional republic cannot. Not for long anyway.

We are supposed to live in a system where the people set the course, Congress writes the laws, and the president carries them out. When agencies write their own rules, judges shield them from oversight, and presidents are forbidden from removing them, we no longer live in that system. We live in something else — something the founders warned us about.

And the people become spectators of their own government.

JIM WATSON / Contributor | Getty Images

The path forward

Restoring the separation of powers does not mean rejecting expertise. It means returning expertise to its proper role: advisory, not sovereign.

No expert should hold power that voters cannot revoke. No agency should drift beyond the reach of the executive. No bureaucracy should be allowed to grow branches the Constitution never gave it.

The Supreme Court now faces a choice that will shape American life for a generation. It can reinforce the Constitution, or it can allow the administrative state to wander even farther from democratic control.

This case isn’t about President Trump. It isn’t about Rebecca Slaughter, the former Federal Trade Commission official suing to get her job back. It’s about whether elections still mean anything — whether the American people still hold the reins of their own government.

That is what is at stake: not procedure, not technicalities, but the survival of a system built on the revolutionary idea that the citizens — not the experts — are the ones who rule.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

1 in 20 Canadians die by MAID—Is this 'compassion'?

Vaughn Ridley / Stringer | Getty Images

Medical assistance in dying isn’t health care. It’s the moment a Western democracy decided some lives aren’t worth saving, and it’s a warning sign we can’t ignore.

Canada loves to lecture America about compassion. Every time a shooting makes the headlines, Canadian commentators cannot wait to discuss how the United States has a “culture of death” because we refuse to regulate guns the way enlightened nations supposedly do.

But north of our border, a very different crisis is unfolding — one that is harder to moralize because it exposes a deeper cultural failure.

A society that no longer recognizes the value of life will not long defend freedom, dignity, or moral order.

The Canadian government is not only permitting death, but it’s also administering, expanding, and redefining it as “medical care.” Medical assistance in dying is no longer a rare, tragic exception. It has become one of the country’s leading causes of death, offered to people whose problems are treatable, whose conditions are survivable, and whose value should never have been in question.

In Canada, MAID is now responsible for nearly 5% of all deaths — 1 out of every 20 citizens. And this is happening in a country that claims the moral high ground over American gun violence. Canada now records more deaths per capita from doctors administering lethal drugs than America records from firearms. Their number is 37.9 deaths per 100,000 people. Ours is 13.7. Yet we are the country supposedly drowning in a “culture of death.”

No lecture from abroad can paper over this fact: Canada has built a system where eliminating suffering increasingly means eliminating the sufferer.

Choosing death over care

One example of what Canada now calls “compassion” is the case of Jolene Bond, a woman suffering from a painful but treatable thyroid condition that causes dangerously high calcium levels, bone deterioration, soft-tissue damage, nausea, and unrelenting pain. Her condition is severe, but it is not terminal. Surgery could help her. And in a functioning medical system, she would have it.

But Jolene lives under socialized medicine. The specialists she needs are either unavailable, overrun with patients, or blocked behind bureaucratic requirements she cannot meet. She cannot get a referral. She cannot get an appointment. She cannot reach the doctor in another province who is qualified to perform the operation. Every pathway to treatment is jammed by paperwork, shortages, and waitlists that stretch into the horizon and beyond.

Yet the Canadian government had something else ready for her — something immediate.

They offered her MAID.

Not help, not relief, not a doctor willing to drive across a provincial line and simply examine her. Instead, Canada offered Jolene a state-approved death. A lethal injection is easier to obtain than a medical referral. Killing her would be easier than treating her. And the system calls that compassion.

Bureaucracy replaces medicine

Jolene’s story is not an outlier. It is the logical outcome of a system that cannot keep its promises. When the machinery of socialized medicine breaks down, the state simply replaces care with a final, irreversible “solution.” A bureaucratic checkbox becomes the last decision of a person’s life.

Canada insists its process is rigorous, humane, and safeguarded. Yet the bureaucracy now reviewing Jolene’s case is not asking how she can receive treatment; it is asking whether she has enough signatures to qualify for a lethal injection. And the debate among Canadian officials is not how to preserve life, but whether she has met the paperwork threshold to end it.

This is the dark inversion that always emerges when the state claims the power to decide when life is no longer worth living. Bureaucracy replaces conscience. Eligibility criteria replace compassion. A panel of physicians replaces the family gathered at a bedside. And eventually, the “right” to die becomes an expectation — especially for those who are poor, elderly, or alone.

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

The logical end of a broken system

We ignore this lesson at our own peril. Canada’s health care system is collapsing under demographic pressure, uncontrolled migration, and the unavoidable math of government-run medicine.

When the system breaks, someone must bear the cost. MAID has become the release valve.

The ideology behind this system is already drifting south. In American medical journals and bioethics conferences, you will hear this same rhetoric. The argument is always dressed in compassion. But underneath, it reduces the value of human life to a calculation: Are you useful? Are you affordable? Are you too much of a burden?

The West was built on a conviction that every human life has inherent value. That truth gave us hospitals before it gave us universities. It gave us charity before it gave us science. It is written into the Declaration of Independence.

Canada’s MAID program reveals what happens when a country lets that foundation erode. Life becomes negotiable, and suffering becomes a justification for elimination.

A society that no longer recognizes the value of life will not long defend freedom, dignity, or moral order. If compassion becomes indistinguishable from convenience, and if medicine becomes indistinguishable from euthanasia, the West will have abandoned the very principles that built it. That is the lesson from our northern neighbor — a warning, not a blueprint.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A Sharia enclave is quietly taking root in America. It's time to wake up.

NOVA SAFO / Staff | Getty Images

Sharia-based projects like the Meadow in Texas show how political Islam grows quietly, counting on Americans to stay silent while an incompatible legal system takes root.

Apolitical system completely incompatible with the Constitution is gaining ground in the United States, and we are pretending it is not happening.

Sharia — the legal and political framework of Islam — is being woven into developments, institutions, and neighborhoods, including a massive project in Texas. And the consequences will be enormous if we continue to look the other way.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

Before we can have an honest debate, we’d better understand what Sharia represents. Sharia is not simply a set of religious rules about prayer or diet. It is a comprehensive legal and political structure that governs marriage, finance, criminal penalties, and civic life. It is a parallel system that claims supremacy wherever it takes hold.

This is where the distinction matters. Many Muslims in America want nothing to do with Sharia governance. They came here precisely because they lived under it. But political Islam — the movement that seeks to implement Sharia as law — is not the same as personal religious belief.

It is a political ideology with global ambitions, much like communism. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently warned that Islamist movements do not seek peaceful coexistence with the West. They seek dominance. History backs him up.

How Sharia arrives

Political Islam does not begin with dramatic declarations. It starts quietly, through enclaves that operate by their own rules. That is why the development once called EPIC City — now rebranded as the Meadow — is so concerning. Early plans framed it as a Muslim-only community built around a mega-mosque and governed by Sharia-compliant financing. After state investigations were conducted, the branding changed, but the underlying intent remained the same.

Developers have openly described practices designed to keep non-Muslims out, using fees and ownership structures to create de facto religious exclusivity. This is not assimilation. It is the construction of a parallel society within a constitutional republic.

The warning from those who have lived under it

Years ago, local imams in Texas told me, without hesitation, that certain Sharia punishments “just work.” They spoke about cutting off hands for theft, stoning adulterers, and maintaining separate standards of testimony for men and women. They insisted it was logical and effective while insisting they would never attempt to implement it in Texas.

But when pressed, they could not explain why a system they consider divinely mandated would suddenly stop applying once someone crossed a border.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

AASHISH KIPHAYET / Contributor | Getty Images

America is vulnerable

Europe is already showing us where this road leads. No-go zones, parallel courts, political intimidation, and clerics preaching supremacy have taken root across major cities.

America’s strength has always come from its melting pot, but assimilation requires boundaries. It requires insisting that the Constitution, not religious law, is the supreme authority on this soil.

Yet we are becoming complacent, even fearful, about saying so. We mistake silence for tolerance. We mistake avoidance for fairness. Meanwhile, political Islam views this hesitation as weakness.

Religious freedom is one of America’s greatest gifts. Muslims may worship freely here, as they should. But political Islam must not be permitted to plant a flag on American soil. The Constitution cannot coexist with a system that denies equal rights, restricts speech, subordinates women, and places clerical authority above civil law.

Wake up before it is too late

Projects like the Meadow are not isolated. They are test runs, footholds, proofs of concept. Political Islam operates with patience. It advances through demographic growth, legal ambiguity, and cultural hesitation — and it counts on Americans being too polite, too distracted, or too afraid to confront it.

We cannot afford that luxury. If we fail to defend the principles that make this country free, we will one day find ourselves asking how a parallel system gained power right in front of us. The answer will be simple: We looked away.

The time to draw boundaries and to speak honestly is now. The time to defend the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is now. Act while there is still time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why do Americans feel so empty?

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

Anxiety, anger, and chronic dissatisfaction signal a country searching for meaning. Without truth and purpose, politics becomes a dangerous substitute for identity.

We have built a world overflowing with noise, convenience, and endless choice, yet something essential has slipped out of reach. You can sense it in the restless mood of the country, the anxiety among young people who cannot explain why they feel empty, in the angry confusion that dominates our politics.

We have more wealth than any nation in history, but the heart of the culture feels strangely malnourished. Before we can debate debt or elections, we must confront the reality that we created a world of things, but not a world of purpose.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

What we are living through is not just economic or political dysfunction. It is the vacuum that appears when a civilization mistakes abundance for meaning.

Modern life is stuffed with everything except what the human soul actually needs. We built systems to make life faster, easier, and more efficient — and then wondered why those systems cannot teach our children who they are, why they matter, or what is worth living for.

We tell the next generation to chase success, influence, and wealth, turning childhood into branding. We ask kids what they want to do, not who they want to be. We build a world wired for dopamine rather than dignity, and then we wonder why so many people feel unmoored.

When everything is curated, optimized, and delivered at the push of a button, the question “what is my life for?” gets lost in the static.

The crisis beneath the headlines

It is not just the young who feel this crisis. Every part of our society is straining under the weight of meaninglessness.

Look at the debt cycle — the mathematical fate no civilization has ever escaped once it crosses a threshold that we seem to have already blown by. While ordinary families feel the pressure, our leaders respond with distraction, with denial, or by rewriting the very history that could have warned us.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

We have entered a cultural moment where the noise is so loud that it drowns out the simplest truths. We are living in a country that no longer knows how to hear itself think.

So people go searching. Some drift toward the false promise of socialism, some toward the empty thrill of rebellion. Some simply check out. When a culture forgets what gives life meaning, it becomes vulnerable to every ideology that offers a quick answer.

The quiet return of meaning

And yet, quietly, something else is happening. Beneath the frustration and cynicism, many Americans are recognizing that meaning does not come from what we own, but from what we honor. It does not rise from success, but from virtue. It does not emerge from noise, but from the small, sacred things that modern life has pushed to the margins — the home, the table, the duty you fulfill, the person you help when no one is watching.

The danger is assuming that this rediscovery happens on its own. It does not.

Reorientation requires intention. It requires rebuilding the habits and virtues that once held us together. It requires telling the truth about our history instead of rewriting it to fit today’s narratives. And it requires acknowledging what has been erased: that meaning is inseparable from God’s presence in a nation’s life.

Harold M. Lambert / Contributor | Getty Images

Where renewal begins

We have built a world without stillness, and then we wondered why no one can hear the questions that matter. Those questions remain, whether we acknowledge them or not. They do not disappear just because we drown them in entertainment or noise. They wait for us, and the longer we ignore them, the more disoriented we become.

Meaning is still available. It is found in rebuilding the smallest, most human spaces — the places that cannot be digitized, globalized, or automated. The home. The family. The community.

These are the daily virtues that do not trend on social media, but that hold a civilization upright. If we want to repair this country, we begin there, exactly where every durable civilization has always begun: one virtue at a time, one tradition at a time, one generation at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.