Glenn to Make Closing Remarks at CPAC 2016

It's turning out to be the year of unprecedented announcements for Glenn. First, the endorsement of Ted Cruz, his first ever political endorsement in 40 years of broadcasting, and now something he never thought would happen — a return visit to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) where he will be making closing remarks this year.

Eight years ago, Glenn spoke at CPAC — and he took his chalkboard along to talk about progressivism.

"So eight years ago, I was asked to speak at CPAC, and I did," Glenn explained Friday on The Glenn Beck Program. "I took out my chalkboard and I said, 'You know, I have to tell you, I've been talking about progressives because progressivism is the disease, but that disease is here in this very room. That disease started with the Republican Party. And it's time for the Republican Party to recognize this.'"

Needless to say, that didn't go over too well, and he hasn't been invited back since. Until now.

Under new leadership, CPAC is heading back to its conservative roots. Matt Schlapp, the new Chairman of the American Conservative Union which runs CPAC, recently reached out to Glenn, inviting him to speak at the 2016 conference.

"So I gladly accepted, and I'm going to be giving I think --- I don't know --- one of the last speeches, if not the last speech at CPAC," Glenn said.

Matt Schlapp joined Glenn on the program Friday to confirm.

"As in most things, you get it right, Glenn," Schlapp said. "And you are going to close out the conference, which is going to be on March 5th . . . right near Ronald Reagan Airport. And you got the theme right too — Our Time Is Now," which is based off of Reagan's very first public event after he was elected president."

A curious Glenn wanted to know what prompted CPAC, one of the oldest conservative groups in Washington, D.C., to change its course from progressivism back to its conservative roots. Schlapp explained how over time, just like old corporations, organizations lose their relevance --- and Schlapp aims to change that.

"I think what we have decided to do is to say, 'Look, we have to be true to our original mission, and we have to be authentically conservative.' And I think if we do that, the market, which are voters and activists across the country, will respond," Schlapp said. "You know, we're not going to be nasty about it, but we're going to stand up for our principles, and we're going to stand up for our country. And CPAC has to reflect that because, you know, we're watching our country transform before our eyes."

Glenn and Matt went on to have a fascinating conversation about how Cuban-Americans, informed by their experience with communism, are playing a vital role at this time in America's history, perhaps being the catalyst to waking up American voters to the reality of socialism and communism. Similar to Ted Cruz being influenced by his father's experience with Castro, Schlapp has heard firsthand accounts from his father-in-law, a Cuban-American who also fled to America to escape Castro's Cuba.

"My father-in-law is a hero of mine," Schlapp said. "He didn't have a lot of wealth, but there was a entrepreneurial class in Cuba at that time before Castro. He started up little businesses. He was an accountant. They had a pawn shop. And one by one, there was a knock on the door and the keys were literally taken from his hands, each one of his businesses, and finally his home. And when that happened, he said to himself and he said to his family, 'Enough is enough.'"

For more of Glenn's conversation with Matt Schlapp, listen below. Get details about CPAC 2016 online.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: You know, Ronald Reagan said in the 1980s, he said, "Our time is now. Fellow citizens, fellow conservatives, our time is right now. Our moment has arrived to stand shoulder to shoulder in the thickest of the fight. If we carry the day and turn the tide, we can hope that as long as men speak of freedom and those who have protected it, they will remember us. And they will say, 'Here were the brave, and here their place of honor.'"

It is that time again, as I've been saying for a while, that George Washington talked about, "Let us raise a standard that the wise and the honest can repair," what he was talking about was the Constitution: Let's raise that standard up.

So when things get tough, this is the place where people will run for shelter and they will return to it and they will remember what we did and they'll restore America. Now is our time.

In the first time in my lifetime, we have a chance to have somebody, I think, even possibly greater than Ronald Reagan on principles. Ronald Reagan was really, truly remarkable, but the president that the progressive left wants to hide is Calvin Coolidge. And he's the guy who cut the government in half. 50 percent. And we had a deeper depression in 1920 than we did in 1933.

1933, progressives took a hold of it, and we had the Great Depression. But in 1920, we had a greater depression, and a real constitutional conservative took the helm, cut the size of government, cut the spending of government, and we were out of that depression within 18 months. We have a chance of restoring our principles and getting back on -- on point.

Now, I want to -- I want to tell you that as I've always said, the progressive party was started by the Republicans. Not the Democrats. The Republican Party under Theodore Roosevelt started it. The cancer started in the Republican Party. And so when you see people like Mitt Romney, when you see people -- Lindsey Graham, John McCain, they all might be fine people. But they are progressives. And just a touch of progressivism takes us away from the Constitution. And takes us away -- many of our so-called conservative friends are not constitutional. Many of our conservative friends are not conservatives.

Donald Trump is a very good example of this. The guy is not a conservative. Tell me one thing where he's lived his life in a conservative way. I got a very special Bible. A Bible before it my mom. I've never opened it. But I keep it in a very special place. He's not a conservative.

So eight years ago, I was asked to speak at CPAC. And I did. And I took out my chalkboard. And I said, "You know, I have to tell you, I've been talking about progressives because progressivism is the disease, but that disease is here in this very room. That disease started with the Republican Party. And it's time for the Republican Party to recognize this." Well, I haven't been invited back at CPAC. And it's been an interesting -- it's been an interesting thing to watch CPAC battle for its place, battle for its soul.

Are they going to be a progressive establishment organization, or are they going to be a true conservative organization?

I was reading an article just a couple of days ago: Under new leadership, CPAC heads in a more conservative direction. There is new leadership at CPAC.

And Matt Schlapp, who is now the -- I think he's the chairman of ACU, which runs CPAC, he called me the other day. And he said, "We would like to let you know that CPAC is changing. We found our conservative footing, and we want everyone to know that now is the time. Now is our time as conservatives. And we would like you to close CPAC."

So I gladly accepted. And I'm going to be giving I think -- I don't know -- one of the last speeches, if not the last speech, at CPAC, closing it out this coming CPAC, which I don't have the dates.

But I do happen to have Matt Schlapp on the phone, who is the new chairman of ACU.

Did I get this right, Matt, I mean, about the change of CPAC?

MATT: As in most things, you get it right, Glenn. And you are going to close out the conference, which is going to be on March 5th. Saturday, March 5th, right near Ronald Reagan Airport. And you got the theme right too: Our time is now. Which is based off of Reagan's very first public event after he was elected president.

GLENN: So tell me, Matt, why the change? Because CPAC was headed in a very progressive, less conservative kind of direction. And it was really disappointing to watch.

Why the change? What's happened?

MATT: You know, sometimes people have disagreements, and sometimes there are people that make bad choices. But one thing that's happened is the conservative world with conservative organizations in Washington, Glenn, is that we're really old. A lot of times we start off by saying, "We're the oldest conservative group." And we are. We were started by William F. Buckley, right after Barry Goldwater lost the presidential election of 1964.

And over time, it gets hard for organizations to find relevance. And I think there are times for those -- just like old corporations, we see them, you know, making mistakes as well. And I think what we have decided to do is to say, "Look, we have to be true to our original mission, and we have to be authentically conservative." And I think if we do that, the market, which are voters and activists across the country, will respond.

And that's what we're seeing. They're responding to the fact that we're saying -- you know, we're not we're not going to be nasty about it. But we're going to stand up for our principles, and we're going to stand up for our country. And CPAC has to reflect that because, you know, we're watching our country transform before our eyes.

GLENN: Let me ask you this: Usually I don't know -- usually I know pretty much the answer before I would ask, but I have no idea how you're going to answer this one. How much of a role does your father-in-law play in your conservative views?

MATT: Oh, that's a really kind question. My father-in-law is a hero of mine. My father-in-law grew up in Cuba. He was like a lot of people. He didn't have a lot of -- he didn't have a lot of wealth. But there was a entrepreneurial class in Cuba at that time before Castro. He started up little businesses. He was an accountant. They had a pawn shop. And one by one, there was a knock on the door and the keys were literally taken from his hands, each one of his businesses, and finally his home. And when that happened, he said to himself and he said to his family, "Enough is enough." And he was a young man at this point. And he said, "We have to do something to stop Castro." And he actually organized with friends and associates a -- you know, they were freedom fighters. And they pulled together. And they actually tried to HEP effasinate Castro with a bazooka.

And, Glenn, they actually got the bazooka, because in freedom-loving places, there were always firearms available for good purposes. They got the bazooka, but they had an insurgent inside them who tattled on them. And many of them were assassinated. Many of them died in prison. His cellmate was assassinated in prison. And this feisty guy got out of prison, took on Castro, and is still alive to this day and is absolutely disgusted and appalled at Washington -- what the country he now loves, America, is doing in embracing the Castros. It's just another example of what Obama is doing to try -- to try to destroy the underpinnings of our country.

GLENN: I will tell you this: I think -- this is one of the reasons why I trust Ted Cruz so much because I know his dad. And, you know, his dad had a similar story: He was marching to his execution, and thought, "It is all -- it's all over." Got to America and really understood what Castro was doing. And worked against Castro here. And raised his son to be who Ted Cruz is. And I find it interesting that it is the Cuban-Americans that are starting to rise to the top. And I think many of them were raised for this time in particular. Because their fathers or their mothers experienced it and can see it, unlike anybody else.

And I know this is your father-in-law. That's why I asked the question. I mean, how much has he influenced you on where you're headed now and what you see coming our way?

MATT: Well, let me tell you, when I his beautiful daughter, my wife Mercedes, who is named after the Virgin of HEP Mercedes because he prayed to her. He said -- he's not an overly religious man, Glenn. That's actually something my wife and I work on him on.

But, you know, he did believe that if he prayed, maybe he would get released from jail. And he prayed to the Virgin of Mercedes. And when he was released, he named his daughter Mercedes. And, you know, it is -- it's a beautiful story.

I do think that these people are -- these people who fled tyranny understand it better than those of us who have read about it in our history books. And on our first date, we both asked each other questions.

The most thing that I was worried about my future wife might be is a Miami Hurricanes fan because I've been fighting Irishmen from Notre Dame, and I was very worried that I couldn't possibly get through Saturday afternoons if she was a Miami Hurricane fan.

And her question for me, Glenn, was -- this had just happened at the end of the Clinton administration. She said, "Elliot HEP Gonzalez, send them back or keep them?" And I said without a hesitation, "Keep them." And you never return a boy back to the commies. That's one thing that's knit in all of our souls.

And that got that first date off to the right start, I'll tell you that much.

GLENN: You know, you just openly talk about God here. I'm in South Carolina. I got in the car. I just did an event early this morning. And I got into the car and I said to my team, "You know what's really nice, in Texas and in the Carolinas, it's like -- there's a few places in the country it's like this, but it's certainly not like this in the North. And the North, I have to kind of watch my words because you can't speak the language of God. You just can't say, 'Look, read your Scriptures. You know what it says. You know where we are.' Because that just puts you into a freak zone."

MATT: That's right.

GLENN: The culture has decayed. And without organizations -- this is why it was so sad when I just saw CPAC and other organizations kind of saying, "Well, you know, conservatives, we're more establishment." The culture is decaying. And if we don't grab on to the roots of our culture, we're doomed.

MATT: We're doomed. And I drive my four kids to school every morning. My five girls, I drive four of them to school every morning. You know, I'm a news guy, so I'm listening to what's happening on the news. You know, Glenn, when you have young kids, you really can't listen to the news anymore. I have to lower that volume almost every morning because really all the news is concerned with is gender confusion and bathrooms and things that are -- you know, you scratch your head.

With everything that's going on in the world, our focus as a country is really on all the wrong things. And it's a sad thing for kids. And I'm completely where you are, in terms of how dire the situation is, but I continue to be hopeful. And that's why we have this Ronald Reagan quote as our theme for our CPAC conference.

You know, we're in the thickest of the fight. And if we stand shoulder to shoulder, we can save our country. And our country is worth saving still.

And I think it's Biblical. You know, whenever you have good people still, it's worth saving. And there are wonderful people out there, and we need to band together. And we need to grow our numbers. And in a democracy, we need to convince others to stand with us. And CPAC, I think, is a very important moment in this presidential campaign to do that.

GLENN: You don't have a problem with me speaking my mind because I'm going to let it all hang out.

MATT: You know, Glenn, if I did have a problem with that, would I be successful in trying to edit you?

GLENN: Okay. Good. No, you wouldn't. No, you wouldn't.

I'm thrilled and honored that you would ask as you reset CPAC, and I can't wait. So we'll see you there.

MATT: You're going to close us down. But you're going to close us down by lifting us up. And the stakes are high.

GLENN: Thank you very much, I appreciate it, man. There it is. Something that I would never thought would happen, I'm going to be closing down -- in a positive way, I'm going to be closing down CPAC. Because there was a while there, I might want to close down CPAC. But that's a different story.

Featured Images: Courtesy of CPAC

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

  Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

  

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

   USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

   Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

 

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.