Could this man could be more dangerous than Woodrow Wilson?

It's hard to think there could be a man more dangerous than Woodrow Wilson. After all, Wilson is attached to the root of the progressivism infecting modern American politics. But after doing some digging, Glenn found a figure whose influence could have an equally greater - and imminently more destructive - effect on the Western way of life. Glenn wants views to learn this information and share it with friends, which is why we are making the transcripts of Tuesday's monologues available on GlennBeck.com

Below is a transcript of tonight's show

16089086087_84b570b8ef_k

The series is called The Root, and it is designed to go beyond the reactionary surface information that you’re going to get from mainstream media and actually go to the root of the problem, and this is episode two of three episodes. Tomorrow night we close it off, and it focuses on the coming red storm and the implications of Russia’s dangerous international escalations that no one is addressing. What are the real reasons behind what’s happening in the world? More importantly, what does it mean for the future, not just of Russia or Europe, but America as well?

Last night, in episode number one, in episode number one, we showed you Russia’s deep historical roots and how Putin is following in the footsteps of Ivan the Great and others who have successfully used nationalism to unite Russians and in turn increase power and control in their region. Vladimir Putin understands Russia’s past and is tapping into something deeply ingrained in the Russian people’s DNA, and that is the Russian Orthodox Church.

This episode will provide an up-close-and-personal look at what Putin has planned for Russia and more importantly, the people he is using to get it done. In episode one you saw the history. Now, we will show you the roadmap, and it all begins with the architect whose plan is already unfolding before your very eyes. His influential voice is the foundation of Russia’s policies and actions. His views are beyond radical, beyond understanding, some of them, beyond dangerous, and openly fascistic. They are closely patterned after another certain notorious fascist leader that we have seen in the 20th century.

You may have wondered, why is Russia suddenly overtly anti-gay? What’s happening? Just recently, they deemed transgendered people and others with sexual disorders as unfit to drive. You can’t get a driver’s license. They also declared gay propaganda illegal. Teachers are now being systematically outed and then fired as anti-gay activist groups claim it is a crime to allow gays to teach children, because it won’t give kids the ability to respect the family and the Russian tradition.

I want you to know, I’m a conservative, and I find it deeply perplexing and disturbing that we are the source on this. Everyone should be very well aware of what is going on in the former Soviet Union. This is not about a gay agenda. This is about human beings, and it always starts with the Jews and the gays, and it has begun.

You may have wondered if you pay attention to the news, why is Russia, the former communist state, standing with the neo-Nazis in Greece and in Germany and in French, the extreme European right, these groups in France, just after the shooting in France, that are pushing xenophobic, outright anti-Islamic hatred…not hey, we’ve got to all live together, but hatred for anyone or anything that is Islamic?

Seeing the history and then seeing the motive, suddenly things are going to start to become clear to you and disturbing. The fundamental transformation of Russia is on, from a relatively nonideological, corrupt, soft authoritarian nation into a regressive, ideological, outright dictatorship, that fast. This episode reveals the political platform to accomplish that transformation, but for perspective, let’s go back now to 1991.

The Soviet Union, their economy had come to a screeching halt. Everything was about to change. The people were psychologically demoralized. Their country had fallen apart. It looked increasingly like the Soviet Union was going to collapse. Could you imagine what it would feel like with our country collapsing? How would you feel?

Mikhail Gorbachev, their leader, proposed reforms, but the 16 republics in the Soviet Union didn’t want reforms. They wanted independence from the Soviet Union. It’s unlike the United States of America. They were separate countries with their separate identities. They were forced into that pact. They wanted freedom.

Well, Gorbachev came up with an agreement and set a deadline to sign it. It was clear what would happen if it was adopted. The old Soviet Union would be finished. The old guard, hardline Communists desperately wanted to keep the Soviet Union together. The Communists decided maybe it’s time to change our uniforms. It’s time to go from a Communist to a Social Democrat. Maybe it’s time to act.

Meeting in secret KGB safe houses, they hatched a plan. It was August 1991. Hardliners attempted to overthrow Gorbachev in a coup. It lasted two days. Then it completely fell apart.

VIDEO

Dan Rather: The Kremlin coup is over, the failed coup makers in disgrace and apparently on the run. Mikhail Gorbachev is back in charge, back as president, but not yet back in Moscow. His troubles and those of the Soviet Union are far from over.

Okay, the failed coup had done severe damage. It caused enough disruption that just four months after the coup attempt, Gorbachev was on television. He was addressing the nation. It was Christmas Day 1991.

VIDEO

Gorbachev: Due to the situation with the formation of the Commonwealth of Independent Governments, I must end my duty as President of the USSR.

The Soviet flag was taken down from the Kremlin and replaced with the new flag of the Russian Federation. The Soviet Union had officially dissolved. We all cheered, but put yourself in the place of the Russian people. Russians, all of a sudden their national pride was gone.

At the height of its power, the Soviet Union had reestablished the Russian empire. It had influence all across Eurasia. It was huge, 12 different time zones, all the way to East Berlin, and then overnight it was over. They lost it, a crushing defeat for the soul of the country. The old Byzantine era line was still the de facto border, but the Warsaw Pact of 1955 which had provided the Russians with a long reach into Western Europe had also come to an end that year.

Under the Warsaw Pact, if any of the countries in the red were attacked by an outside force, those countries were obligated—Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia—they had to defend that state militarily. The unified military would be commanded by the Soviet Union. Russian influence was fading really fast because those countries were lost.

16087522118_3f67c401d3_k

In 1991, the once glorious empire had been fractured into seemingly a million pieces. Now, here’s what people really don’t understand that you need to understand. If you look at the old Soviet empire, it was something along the lines of this. All of these states didn’t want to be a part of it. None of these states wanted—here’s Russia, the old Russia line. All of these states were forced into the Soviet Union.

Again, it’s not like the United States. They were forced to be a part of this. So when the Soviet Union fell apart, all these people cheered, but there was a problem, because when Russia forced them…you remember, they were starving people to death. They took over these countries by force. They executed. They shipped people out into Siberia, but they also did something else, they took Russians and reassigned them and said you’re now living here, you’re living here, you’re living here, and so they planted Russians all the way through all of these countries.

So, now what happened? These foreign nationalists that were part of Russia originally, they loved the mother country, Russia. They then moved here and planted, and their families grew up here, but they were Mother Russia people. They now found themselves behind foreign borders. They were no longer in Russia. The language changed. The schools changed. The military changed. Everything changes.

We will show you later in this episode how these ethnic Russians became pawns, but their spiritual and cultural heart of the nation was Kiev, Kiev in the Ukraine and Crimea, and it was now separated by this line on the map—the Ukraine, all of this, really important. This, we told you in episode one, this is the spiritual center. Those people longed for the glory of restoring the Russian empire and claiming the mantle of the third Rome.

It was crushing to lose all of this, especially to a KGB colonel called Vladimir Putin. In his 2005 annual state of the union address, Russian President Vladimir Putin said, and I quote, “The collapse of the Soviet Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century. As for the Russian nation, it became a genuine drama. Tens of millions of our co-citizens and compatriots found themselves outside Russian territory.” This will play a huge role. These people that the Soviets planted in here are outside. He views this as a major catastrophe that the USSR dissolved, so he wants to be the one to restore it or at least a modern version of it.

When Putin came to power in 2000, he inherited a crippled economy and a nation that lacked direction. In the first eight years of his reign, the Russian GDP grew by over 70%. Can you imagine a president comes in, and everything 70% growth? Individual Russian wages tripled. This made him mighty popular, but there was something missing, influence. They were no longer the Soviet Union.

Putin was so laser focused on the economy for so many years, attention to politics and posturing on the international stage had been an afterthought. He realizes because of Gorbachev, Gorbachev himself now admits if he would’ve spent more time and more money addressing the bread lines instead of weapons, things probably would have turned out differently for him.

16274205572_2b2c9d79bd_k

We look at Gorbachev as a hero…not so much over there, because that was the end of the Empire.

Putin didn’t want to make the same mistake, so as a result, Russia faded into the background and eventually off the international stage. NATO influence advanced further eastward. We started saying yes, you know what, Georgia, Poland, we’ll put missiles in here. Ukraine, yes, we’ll protect you. The United States and Western Europe practically ignored Russia on the world stage, and we know this to be true, because when presidential candidate Mitt Romney said the biggest geopolitical foe to the world is Russia, the world laughed.

Enter phase two. Putin needed a geopolitical and a foreign policy, one that would return Russia and the Russian empire to its previous glory. Well, they had a policy under development. It’s been there for a long time, and it was put into effect in 2008, and Putin has been following it like a playbook ever since.

I believe the architect of Russia’s geopolitical strategy is this man, the most frightening man we have come across in all of the years that I have been doing this show. His name is Aleksandr Dugin. Most Americans have never heard of this man, but he is an advisor for the Kremlin. He is the thinking man behind the kill-large-animals-with-my-bare-hands dictator of a guy.

If he were a lone crazy man talking to himself between naps under bridges, he’d be harmless, but his policy ideas had the fast track to the Kremlin and all of the universities in the former Soviet Union, and because of that, his ideas are truly terrifying, because they are now in play, not just for the people of Russia, but for all of civilization. You will see him. You will meet him, and I will show you the roadmap he has laid out for Putin to restore the Soviet Union or something worse to its rightful, and he would say divine glory, next.

[break]

All right, the world is in real danger. Behind me is a piano that was sitting in the main square of Kiev. This was a piano that the Ukrainians came, long live the Ukraine, and they played this at night. What were they fighting? They were fighting their president selling out to Putin and selling out and making it Russia.

16248975146_6637c38390_k

That is coming, and I want you to know that the canary in the coal mine is always the Jew. Whenever there’s persecution, rise in Marxism, rise in anti-Semitism, you will see the inhumanity to man and collective spirit take hold, and it becomes truly dangerous. As you will see in the next few minutes, it’s not just the Jews. Homosexuals are in dire trouble, real trouble because of who I’m going to introduce you to.

To get an idea of the Russian pride and their traditional belief that Russia is the divine heir to the throne of Rome, all you really have to do is take a guided tour to the Kremlin. It is a massive fortress. They describe it as the Russian version of Times Square, Pennsylvania Avenue, and the Washington Mall all rolled up into one—so many things to see.

It’s the official residence of the Russian Federation President, the Kremlin Palace. The Armory Museum is there. All of the Cold War happened here, but they rush you through all of those government buildings in just a few minutes, and then you’ll spend hours on the second part of the tour, and it takes you here, and then it takes you here, and then it takes you here, Orthodox Church, one right after another, church after church after church after church. During the Olympic Games, NBC took a tour of the churches of the Kremlin.

Really, really important, Ivan the Terrible did this. The Russian Orthodox revival in full swing now…this is not Billy Graham tent revival. This is revival that more resembles the Nazi church propaganda. Nazi imagery was glorified in the German church. In fact, within just a few months, Hitler had taken off any picture of Christ and put his picture on the altars of the churches. The same kind of focus is happening in Russia.

It’s slightly different. Russia itself is at the center. Let me give you a quote, “The meaning of Russia is that through the Russian people will be realized the last thought of God, the thought of the End of the World. Death is the way to immortality. Love will begin when the world ends. We must long for it, like true Christians.” Does any of this sound familiar?

“We are uprooting the accursed Tree of Knowledge. With it will perish the Universe.” This sounds very much like jihadists. These are the words of a guy I need to introduce you to called Aleksandr Dugin, somebody who’s known to have great influence on Russian politics. He has been referred to as the brain behind many of Putin’s policies, and I want to introduce him now to you. Watch.

Dugin believes that Russia is a supreme society, and America is standing in the way. He also believes chaos is in fact divine. In fact, Dugin’s political symbol, when we looked at it originally, my first question was what the heck is that? What does that even mean? We did our homework. It is the eight-pointed star. It is an ancient pagan magic symbol for chaos.

This type of philosophy might sound familiar. I just wrote these down in the break—purify the world with fire, die to be able to live, the world starts once it’s all torn down and burned down, chaos, a superior race. That could either be the Nazis or Iran and the 12ers from Islam. In Iran, the 12ers believe it is their job to create chaos to hasten the return of their savior.

If you look at the End Times philosophy of the 12ers, you will see that it is the reverse of our Book of Revelation. Putin’s Russia supports regimes, the Iranian regime, Syria, Hamas, and Dugin’s views and policy ideals are closely aligned. As they are closely examined, the more clear Russia’s actions become and why they are standing with far-right European xenophobes, neo-Nazis, and the 12ers in Iran.

15652569894_45c004507b_k

Why are they standing with anti-gay organizations? Well, let’s listen to Dugin. When asked about gay rights groups fighting alongside neo-Nazis, he said, “We find…very often that the Homosexual-Lobby and the ultranationalist and neo-Nazi groups are allies. Also, the Homosexual lobby has very extremist ideas about how to deform, re-educate and influence the society. We shouldn’t forget this. The gay and lesbian lobby is not less dangerous for any society than neo-Nazis.”

Gays are equally as dangerous as the Nazis, says the Fascist. Welcome to the new Russia, and it won’t stay contained in Russia. They are using these far right groups in Germany, in Greece, and now in France in a proxy cultural battle against neighbors it seeks to diminish. Do you remember when Putin moved into Georgia, Ukraine, and Crimea? When he moved in there, what happened?

[break]

Just after one year after Putin became president of the Russian Federation in 2000, Aleksandr Dugin founded the Eurasia party. Basically what they believe is that America is the prime enemy. Dugin preaches, and I quote, listen to this, “What man is, is derived not from himself as an individual, but from politics. It is politics that defines the man. It is the political system that gives us our shape.”

A popular German historian once said similar things in the late 1800s and pioneered decades of German racism. The end result would be Nazi Germany, so when the color revolutions started to spring up all over the former Soviet Union, all of these countries, when it started to spring up in the early 2000s, it’s no surprise that Dugin blamed who? Us, America.

Putin echoed Dugin’s views. “We see tragic consequences of the wave of so-called ‘color revolutions,’ the turmoil in the countries that have undergone the irresponsible experiments of covert and sometimes blatant interference in their lives. We take this as a lesson and a warning, and we must do everything necessary to ensure this never happens in Russia.”

Do you remember in 2008 when Russia invaded Georgia? They invaded Georgia, and what happened? They said that they were protecting all of these Russian people, the ethnic Russians. Remember, I told you earlier they had moved them in from the former Soviet Union to Russianize all of these? And so Putin goes in, and he says hey, I’m just trying to do it—he just did it with Ukraine—I’m just trying to help those ethnic Russians.

When he did this in Georgia, who did Putin blame? The West. Watch.

VIDEO

Vladimir Putin: I’ve told you that if the facts are confirmed that U.S. citizens were present in the combat zone that it means only one thing, that they could be there only on the direct instruction of their leadership, and if this is so, then it means that American citizens are in the combat zone performing their duties, and they can only do that following a direct order from their leaders and not on their own initiative.

Of course, it’s very clear that it was Russia who was responsible. Later, Dugin would go and visit Georgia and say, “Our troops will occupy the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, the entire country, and perhaps even Ukraine and the Crimean Peninsula, which is historically part of Russia anyway.” Flash forward now to 2014.

16249083916_a9d4f8118b_k

I want to warn you, right now there are hotspots in France and in Germany. He has just annexed this area. He is pushing this direction. I am warning you, Dugin’s playbook has been unleashed. The neo-Nazis here, the far-right Fascists here, and what do they all have in common? What are they all looking to do? This goes all over everything that we ever told you about the coming insurrection. They are all looking for chaos, which is strange, because his friend down here is looking for chaos as well.

We would expect to see more from Dugin in the future. I would urge you to pay attention to him. The problem Putin faces now is he has awakened extremists, and he has made them promises. They feel that Putin hasn’t gone far enough. How far will they go if they feel they’ve been betrayed?

Dugin is already starting to talk about betrayal. Who wins in that? Would an assassination in Russia add to chaos, and would that be a bad thing for someone like Dugin?

When 'Abolish America' stops being symbolic

Al Drago / Stringer | Getty Images

Prosecutors stopped a New Year’s Eve bombing plot rooted in ideology that treats the US as an enemy to be destroyed.

Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles announced that four members of an anti-capitalist extremist group were arrested on Friday for plotting coordinated bombings in California on New Year’s Eve.

According to the Department of Justice, the suspects planned to detonate explosives concealed in backpacks at various businesses while also targeting ICE agents and vehicles. The attacks were supposed to coincide with midnight celebrations.

Marxists, anarchists, and Islamist movements share a conviction that the United States, like Israel, is a colonial project that must be destroyed.

The plot was disrupted before any lives were lost. The group behind the plot calls itself the Turtle Island Liberation Front. That name matters more than you might think.

When ideology turns operational

For years, the media has told us that radical, violent rhetoric on the left is mostly symbolic. They explained away the angry slogans, destructive language, and calls for “liberation” as performance or hyperbole.

Bombs are not metaphors, however.

Once explosives enter the picture, framing the issue as harmless expression becomes much more difficult. What makes this case different is the ideological ecosystem behind it.

The Turtle Island Liberation Front was not a single-issue group. It was anti-American, anti-capitalist, and explicitly revolutionary. Its members viewed the United States as an illegitimate occupying force rather than a sovereign nation. America, in their view, is not a nation, not a country; it is a structure that must be dismantled at any cost.

What ‘Turtle Island’ really means

“Turtle Island” is not an innocent cultural reference. In modern activist usage, it is shorthand for the claim that the United States has no moral or legal right to exist. It reframes the country as stolen land, permanently occupied by an illegitimate society.

Once people accept that premise, the use of violence against their perceived enemies becomes not only permissible, but virtuous. That framing is not unique to one movement. It appears again and again across radical networks that otherwise disagree on nearly everything.

Marxists, anarchists, and Islamist movements do not share the same vision for the future. They do not even trust one another. But they share a conviction that the United States, like Israel, is a colonial project that must be destroyed. The alignment of radical, hostile ideologies is anything but a coincidence.

The red-green alliance

For decades, analysts have warned about what is often called the red-green alliance: the convergence of far-left revolutionary politics with Islamist movements. The alliance is not based on shared values, but on shared enemies. Capitalism, national sovereignty, Western culture, and constitutional government all fall into that category.

History has shown us how this process works. Revolutionary coalitions form to tear down an existing order, promising liberation and justice. Once power is seized, the alliance fractures, and the most ruthless faction takes control.

Iran’s 1979 revolution followed this exact pattern. Leftist revolutionaries helped topple the shah. Within a few years, tens of thousands of them were imprisoned, executed, or “disappeared” by the Islamist regime they helped install. Those who do not understand history, the saying goes, are doomed to repeat it.

ALEX WROBLEWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

This moment is different

What happened in California was not a foreign conflict bleeding into the United States or a solitary extremist acting on impulse. It was an organized domestic group, steeped in ideological narratives long validated by universities, activist networks, and the media.

The language that once circulated on campuses and social media is now appearing in criminal indictments. “Liberation” has become a justification for explosives. “Resistance” has become a plan with a date and a time. When groups openly call for the destruction of the United States and then prepare bombs to make it happen, the country has entered a new phase. Pretending things have not gotten worse, that we have not crossed a line as a country, is reckless denial.

Every movement like this depends on confusion. Its supporters insist that calls for America’s destruction are symbolic, even as they stockpile weapons. They denounce violence while preparing for it. They cloak criminal intent in the language of justice and morality. That ambiguity is not accidental. It is deliberate.

The California plot should end the debate over whether these red-green alliances exist. They do. The only question left is whether the country will recognize the pattern before more plots advance farther — and succeed.

This is not about one group, one ideology, or one arrest. It is about a growing coalition that has moved past rhetoric and into action. History leaves no doubt where that path leads. The only uncertainty is whether Americans will step in and stop it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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.