'Globalist': You Keep Using That Word. I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means

September 22, 2016

Writer

Redefining words is a very dangerous thing. It's happened on the radical left for years through political correctness, impacting both society and politics. Old school Blue Dog Democrats didn't see it coming until it was too late, and the entire Democratic Party was taken over by radicals.

The same thing is now happening on the conservative side, with words like "nationalism" and "globalism" being morphed into new meanings.

"I want to show you the first example of me finding it on my own social media," Glenn said Thursday on his radio program. "I contend so many people will agree with a quick reading of this that it seems harmless, but it is absolutely the alt-right. This is the earmark of everything changing in language, and so suddenly that you will not even notice you've been sold into slavery."

It's time to pay attention and read between the lines.

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to these definitive questions:

• Is "nationalism" tied to improving the lives of Americans or neo-Nazis and racism?

• What does Bob in Pocatello say about the rejection of the virus that is globalization?

• Are iDentists online practitioners of dentistry?

• Do you think the alt-right should produce films on faith for your church?

• Would Thomas Jefferson have been for or against tariffs?

• Is American exceptionalism the same thing as American nationalism?

Listen to this segment, beginning at mark 1:20:50, from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: I want to show you a post on my social media. And let me just -- let me read it to you. And don't overthink it. Just tell me if you are kind of comfortable with it.

We/me is a crackpot theory, saying the we generation and the me generation. It's clearly not a crackpot theory. It is very well researched. But this is somebody who happened to be watching the show from The Vault last night, where I mentioned it.

And the we/me is a crackpot theory. Don't accept a binary choice, America.

STU: Hmm. I thought we were supposed to -- isn't that we've been told for months?

GLENN: Listen to this: American nationalism isn't racial or ethnic-oriented, nor is it rooted in expansionist foreign policy like Bush conservatism. Keeping people out is not invading their country, occupying their land and trying to bring democracy to them. Modern nationalism and populism in America is a refocusing on improving the lives and well-being of Americans who are being crushed under the weight of globalization, which is rooted in social Darwinism.

(chuckling)

American nationalism and populism is a wholesale rejection of the virus that is globalization.

PAT: This is just written by Bob in Pocatello. Right?

JEFFY: Right.

(chuckling)

PAT: Bob just happened to be watching, and he thought, "You know what, I'm going to pop off something to Glenn."

GLENN: With no followers. No pictures. No friends.

STU: He wanted to sign up to social networks, just to post that particular paragraph and then never post again.

GLENN: And then never post again.

PAT: It's interesting though because you can be okay with all of that, mostly. Almost all of it, you can say, yeah --

JEFFY: Oh, on the surface, absolutely.

GLENN: On the surface.

PAT: I agree with that. On the surface, I agree with that.

GLENN: If you read it again, you're like, "Okay. Wait a minute. American nationalism. No, I'm not for nationalism. That's not good."

STU: Right. But patriotism. People conflate those two terms. Those are very different.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. They're very different.

STU: And we've seen nationalism rise and what it does. But this is trying to save that term, right?

GLENN: Yes. To reintroduce this term.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Okay? To reintroduce it.

STU: Yep.

GLENN: Listen to this again.

American nationalism -- it's not racial or ethnic-oriented. Why would you say that? Because nationalism is tied directly to neo-Nazis.

PAT: And racism.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And also, by the way, very specifically the people who are the intellectual heads of this particular movement have very specifically talked in overt terms about race and ethnicity being vitally important to this. I mean, this is --

GLENN: No, they're not racists. No, no. They're identists.

STU: Right. But, I mean, they've said, "We need an ethno-nationalist --

PAT: They're dentists on the internet?

GLENN: No, they're identists. They're identists --

JEFFY: ID.

GLENN: No -- yes, they recognize the identity of people, but that's not judging people on race. It is looking at the identity of people.

PAT: I see.

GLENN: So if you want to call it racist, that's an old term. That's -- that describes old things. I do believe that we all have an identity that is unique from where all of us originally came from. And there's nothing wrong with pointing out someone's identity. You're black. I'm white. But I do believe there are specific things that are different in each culture. And perhaps we shouldn't live together.

STU: This is --

PAT: Perhaps we shouldn't live together.

(laughter)

GLENN: Okay. Did you hear what I just said?

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: And if you're hearing this from a friend and somebody who you think is a conservative -- and you will. I'm telling you, this is coming. You're going to start hearing this from your church friends, people you trusted, and they're going to make a great case because they're changing the language.

STU: This is Candle In the Wind and Candle In the Wind 1997, where like Princess Diana died, and we're going to release the same exact song with like three different lyrics.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: That is what this is. It's the same pitch. It's the same thing that you think it is.

GLENN: Same song.

STU: It's just using new terms and trying to overtake old ones.

GLENN: And using emotions to push it to the top of the chart.

STU: Yeah, yeah, yeah. One of the terms that is attempting -- and it's an interesting, somewhat subtle thing that's happened over the past year or two, which is the term globalist -- now, the term --

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: I would not consider myself a globalist at all. I mean, for example, we've been doing this show for how long.

PAT: Why are we globalists?

STU: Right.

GLENN: Hang on just a second. Hang on. Before you get into this, I just want to set this up. Globalism is a tripwire of nationalism. Okay?

Once you hear your friend, who -- why are you hearing the word "globalist" all the time now about people? Where is that coming from?

STU: Yeah, all the time.

GLENN: That's coming from people like Breitbart, who are into the alt-right, and they are poisoning the well. And globalist is your first sign of warning. Hang on just a second. What do you mean by globalist, exactly? And I'll bet that's what you were going to make the point on.

STU: That's exactly what I want to go into because we've been doing this show for a long time. There's been things that have, you know, leaned towards globalism, that the talk radio audience, generally speaking, rejects, as do I. Things like the United Nations making our decisions on our military.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And, you know, global climate treaties that --

GLENN: IPCC. Yeah. The IPP --

STU: The Kyoto treaties -- yeah, Protocol.

PAT: Nobody has been more anti-globalist than we have.

JEFFY: Right.

STU: Exactly. Having global entities control what we do in our country.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: Even some global trade agreements. We need to have trade agreements. But are they about -- for instance, the T- -- what is it? The TPP?

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: The TPP is an Asian global look at things. And it is an Asian pact that supersedes our law.

STU: And there's elements of many of these agreements that we've fought against.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: And so the idea that we would look towards global entities to influence our policy and the way we deal with our things here, we reject and have rejected for a long time. And the talk radio audience, with that definition of globalist, has always been against that.

PAT: But they've changed it now. Right?

STU: But now you notice -- and you say Breitbart. But really, Alex Jones. Breitbart and Alex Jones are one and the same at this point.

GLENN: Absolutely. Alex Jones is who he is, and everybody knew it. And now one step closer to the media is Breitbart. So one step closer to the average person as --

PAT: And Drudge.

GLENN: And Drudge. Anyone want to talk about the new movie Torch Bearer? Torch Bearer is a new movie, when man stops believing in God, he'll believe in anything. Sounds really good. Phil Robertson is in it, everything else. You know who the producer is? You know who the executive producer of this film is?

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: Who?

PAT: It's Bannon.

GLENN: Bannon.

PAT: Bannon. What's-his-face, Bannon.

GLENN: So Bannon, who is Trump's campaign manager, who is, yes, we're providing a platform for the alt-right --

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: -- is now producing films on faith for your church.

PAT: Unbelievable.

GLENN: Congratulations, America. Congratulations.

PAT: Wow. Unbelievable.

GLENN: You are sliding into a cesspool that you have no idea what is coming your way.

STU: On the globalist thing, to finish that, the old definition was, you know, international agreements and things that we were skeptical of. We don't want to be controlled by international bureaucracy.

PAT: Anything. We want our sovereignty.

STU: We want our sovereignty.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And a lot of times that has gone along with having borders and border security.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: And we are for Brexit. I'm for Brexit.

STU: Yeah. I believe in sovereignty. I don't like the European Union.

GLENN: Yep. Don't like it.

STU: What it's now turning into is, do you believe in free trade? Are you against tariffs? Are you for or against legal immigration? Do you think we should have any interaction with -- with our allies? Do we have any role in the rest of the world?

If you believe any of those things, all of a sudden now you're a globalist.

PAT: Globalist.

GLENN: If you don't believe in tariffs -- tariffs are the most destructive thing to the free market, which is what we are based on as conservatives --

STU: Right.

GLENN: If you're against tariffs, you're now a globalist. Well, tell that to our Founders.

PAT: If you're against Donald Trump, you're supposedly now a globalist.

STU: Right. And that's certainly where a lot of this comes from.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: And a lot of the passion behind it, obviously, because we're in the middle of an election season.

GLENN: It goes way beyond him.

STU: But, I mean, look at -- I can't remember -- was it Cruz or maybe Pat Toomey, when they were running, they were running ads against them, saying, "Hey, did you know that -- I can't remember which one it was. But they were talking about free trade and how it's helped us. But it's also helped lift billions of people out of poverty.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And the fact that we've lifted Chinese people, for example -- a billion Chinese have come out of poverty because they've started to embrace a little bit of capitalism and free trade.

GLENN: Bono just said this.

STU: It's a great commercial for what we believe. Rooting for the success of people in other nations, wanting people to not starve to death all of a sudden is some weird definition of globalist. I mean, these things do help the rest of the world. I think free trade has been one of the most positive things that has ever happened to this planet, but it's also helped us.

GLENN: Here's why nationalism is so wrong, and here's why saying that we are a unique country is right, but it is not the people. American exceptionalism is not the people. We're no different than anybody else.

Yes, do we have different work ethics? Did we have different ethics than other countries? Yes.

Do we now? Not so much. Do the Chinese or do the Saudis understand American exceptionalism? No. Does that make them different people? No. It means they don't buy into the idea of America.

America is not a country. It's an idea. It is also a country. And nationalism glorifies the country and its people. What patriotism should be is the -- the glorification of the idea that we aspire to. The idea that we all men could be free, that all -- that all men can pursue their own happiness. And it's a very subtle difference. But if you don't get it, you are on the train to hell in these times.

I want to end this segment real quick just by reading this again, and I want to you listen because this is going to become -- I don't know how many people in this audience -- but I am still convinced that this audience is going to be the audience that will be remembered for pulling the republic out of the fire. I'm convinced of it. And I don't know when that happens. And I don't even know if it's because of what you do, other than teaching your children these things. Maybe it is because of what we do collectively that teaches our children and our children save the nation or bring it back. I don't know.

But for those with eyes and ears, please hear me. Let me read this again. American nationalism isn't racial or ethnic oriented.

Yes, it is.

Nor is it rooted in expansionist foreign policy like Bush conservatism.

That is true. That goes to the point on globalists.

Keeping people out is not invading their country, occupying their land and trying to bring democracy to them.

So what they're saying is: We can keep foreigners out of here, and that's better than -- well, you're giving a binary choice here.

Modern nationalism -- modern nationalism, let me tell you, is exactly the same as old-timey nationalism. Modern nationalism and populism.

What is populism? Populism is nothing but tyranny of the majority.

Modern nationalism and populism in America is just a refocusing on improving the lives and well-being of Americans who are being crushed under the weight of globalization, which is rooted in social Darwinism.

Oh, my gosh. Hello, Germany, 1930.

American nationalism and populism is a whole scale (sic) rejection of the virus -- hello, Goebbels -- of globalism.

Please, please, know the tripwires. Please know, national -- nationalism is suicide. Populism is suicide. That the tripwire of globalism doesn't mean what you think it means. To them, it means anything other than America, first and foremost, and nothing else.

STU: It's okay to prioritize America.

GLENN: Right. It's fine to prioritize.

STU: That's what you should do. But it does not mean --

GLENN: It means a complete withdrawal and enemy outside -- it is complete isolationist, protectionist, and no trade deals. Even our Founders made trade deals. And we protested tariffs. What do you think the Tea Party was about? It was a rejection of tariffs. And that's what nationalism is doing. And it is coming. And it is coming beyond this election. And it will only gain strength after this election, no matter who wins, because this is not about Donald Trump.

Featured Image: Screenshot of Inigo Montoya (played by Mandy Patinkin) from The Princess Bride.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep

'Globalist': You Keep Using That Word. I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Picking up his torch

Two turning points, decades apart

A time for courage

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

From Muhammad to Marx

Gifts from God, not the state

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?