The #1 Journalist Targeted for Anti-Semitism on the Internet Talks With Glenn

Ben Shapiro holds many titles, awards and distinctions --- editor-in-chief, author, attorney --- but perhaps his latest is the most compelling. Shapiro was recently named the number one journalistic target of anti-Semitism on the internet.

"I was always of the opinion that the vast, you know, anti-Semitic left was a much bigger threat, with regard to anti-Semitism, than the right," Shapiro said. "Virtually all of the anti-Semitism I received this year was from the alt-right. You know, that came as a shock to me."

According to an Anti-Defamation League survey, about 20,000 anti-Semitic tweets were directed at American journalists since March of 2016. Eight thousand of those were at Shapiro.

Unswayed by the hatred, Shapiro remains as focused and committed as ever to conservative principles. His new book --- True Allegiance --- is available now for pre-order and at bookstores everywhere next week.

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

• What gives Ben hope in millennials?

• Why could Ben's new book be a history book very soon?

• What's Steve Bannon's scam?

• Does Trump even care about being president?

• What does Ben wake up every morning thinking about?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: Ben Shapiro. Welcome to the program, sir. How are you?

BEN: Hey, doing pretty well. How are you?

GLENN: Pretty good.

So we find out now that it is indeed a Jew, Ben Shapiro, that has been torching Donald Trump. They were right all along. They were right all along, Ben.

BEN: Yeah. If only they had known I was an international banker, this would have changed everything.

GLENN: That's right.

BEN: It is amazing how all of the people who foisted Donald Trump on us in the primaries are now insisting that anyone who says that Donald Trump was a bad candidate from the beginning is at fault here. If only we had jumped on the Trump train sooner, then he would be losing by presumably by six points, instead of by eight.

GLENN: Right.

BEN: Everybody is preparing for the post-election fallout. The people who timed themselves to this electrical fire, more than anybody else. They're already prepping Trump TV. And I look forward to the lineup, including, you know, some of our good friends who will presumably be appearing shortly.

I mean, Trump debuted Trump TV in the middle of the debate last night. And it's clear that's what this rigging talk is about, by the way. This whole routine is not designed to win any votes. No, independent voter across the country is going, "Well, you know, if Trump says it's rigged, that means I'm going to vote for that guy." This is just all about the coalition of the dispossessed. It's about creating a grievance culture where people think that the real reason Trump lost wasn't because he's the worst major candidate in presidential history. That the real reason he lost is because there are all these media people and evil pollsters and evil voting fraud gurus and the Never Trumpers who combine to stop him. And the only way that you're going to be able to fight back against those people is by paying 10.99 a month to watch Laura Ingram talk to Sean Hannity about the wonders of Donald Trump.

GLENN: So, Ben, how does this actually shape up at the end? Because he is not going away. As you said, during the debate two nights ago, he was debuting Trump TV. The BBC even tweeted that. Are we watching the beginning of Trump TV? It was clear that was the prototype broadcast of what was coming.

And he's not going away. And the reason why he hit Hillary as hard as he did was -- was not to expand his base, which he had to do. It was to make sure that his base was die-hard for him. They are going to say that it was rigged. They're going to blame it on the G.O.P. They're going to blame it on the media. They're going to blame it on people like you, people like me. And a good portion of those people are going to believe that from -- from now until the end of time.

BEN: Yeah, and that's a scam. That was Steve Bannon's scam, you know, when he moved over from Breitbart. I said it immediately. I'm admiring him. That Bannon is too smart not to have a backup plan. His backup plan is if Trump loses, they convert, you know, a million or 2 million of the big Trump fans into the a subscriber base for some sort of TV network. That was always the plan here.

I mean, Trump is not a great businessman. He's a great branding magnate. His brand is ruined internationally because of all the things he's done inside of this election cycle. But that doesn't mean he can't make a lot of money off of the die-hards. They're attempting to increase the number of die-hards here by suddenly narrowing all the Tea Party language that Trump despised at the time, but suddenly he's a Tea Partier, because they're trying to grab on to that audience, hold them tight, and then claim the real reason that people have moved away from him is not because he's not conservative enough, not because he has no values. The reason that people moved away from him is of course because he's just too tough and we're too wimpy to really take the fight to the enemy.

GLENN: So with -- with Steve Bannon who is -- and you worked for him for years, or worked with him for years. One of the more despicable men alive. Would you agree?

BEN: Yeah. I'm not a Steve Bannon fan.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay.

BEN: Yeah, he's a bad guy.

GLENN: Right. A really bad guy. He is -- he is -- he will use -- I don't know if he believes in the alt-right, but he is certainly willing to use the alt-right for fuel.

This is going to be a very bad chemistry lab experiment that that could blow the conservative movement sky-high. How do we navigate around this? How do we -- how do you expose what's coming and what they're going to be doing?

BEN: I mean, the only thing that we can do is, of course, tell the truth about what is going on. And this is sort of the final con in what has been a con of a campaign.

But beyond that, I think that we also have to make clear, some of the stuff that you've been saying, Glenn, I think has been useful in this respect. And I've been trying to say the same thing.

My hard feelings are not with the people who feel like they have to vote for Donald Trump in order to stop Hillary Clinton. I totally understand that logic.

GLENN: Correct. I do too.

BEN: You know, I wake up every morning trying to figure out for myself on a personal level, is that logic that predominates over other logic that suggests you can't vote for this guy.

GLENN: Hang on. Before you say anymore. Was there a time -- any time at all in the first ten minutes a couple of nights ago on the debate when you heard her talk about the Constitution, the Supreme Court, the Second Amendment, and abortion, that before he started talking, that you said, "I've -- I have to consider voting for Donald Trump. She is awful."

BEN: Yeah. Pretty much every time she opens her mouth, I have to consider voting for Trump. And I think that that's true for virtually everybody who considers themselves Never Trump.

GLENN: Correct. I agree. And I think that's why both of us -- all of us, we do not condemn anyone who is voting for Donald Trump. We get it -- we totally get it.

BEN: Right. Exactly.

GLENN: Unless you're part of the alt-right -- you know, when you had 16 candidates in front of you, I don't understand that.

BEN: Right. Even if you had 16 others in front of you, but you weren't following the news that closely, and all you saw was sort of the headlines that he's going to be a fighter.

GLENN: Yeah. I agree.

BEN: But somebody who backed him because you're sort of a nationalist/populist and you want that sort of constitutional conservatism that's always driven the Republican Party or has since the Reagan era, then that's the part that I don't understand.

I think that what you're seeing is sort of a preemptive strike from a lot of the Trumpkins, the Bannons of the world, saying, "Look, we know we're going to go down in flames here, but we have to make it seem as though people like Beck and Shapiro and people who aren't going to vote for Trump are sneering at you, like they're looking down their nose at you for voting Trump. I'm not looking down my nose at anybody. I've made a personal calculation. I've never said to anybody, "I'm encouraging you not to vote for Donald Trump."

I have said that, "Here's my -- you know, here's calculation, why I'm not voting for Donald Trump." I think that Washington takes the heart out of the Republican Party over the last year alone is good evidence that he's going to do much worse over the next eight years and pervert the Republican Party into the Steve Bannon alt-right, and that is something that I'm not going to stand around for. But, you know, that said, I understand the differing risk assessments that people have.

GLENN: Sure.

BEN: The civil war is entirely a creation of the Bannon/Trump brigade. They want the civil war. Neither you nor I want the civil war. We would like to see us come together and actually fight the left. Listen, the reason that I opposed Trump in the primaries because I thought he's an agent of the left. I still think that he's leftist in his heart.

GLENN: Yeah. I do too. You know, I don't think you meant that literally. But there are some -- and I think you could make a pretty strong case that Bill Clinton, you know, called him up a week before and was like, "Hey, Don, I know you're thinking about it. You should do it because, you know, it will be good for your brand. And you'll be able to have fun. And, you know, you'll be able to clean up those crazies on the right."

BEN: Look, I don't think Trump is the plan. But if he were, I'm not sure he would be acting much differently than he has been for the past few months.

GLENN: Correct. Correct.

BEN: I think he's -- I think Trump is an ad hoc guy who has never really thought about politics very much. What he does think is about (inaudible). He has no ties to the Constitution. He has no ties to conservatism. And so he's this sort of reactionary who doesn't like some of the stuff that he saw from Barack Obama. That's all.

GLENN: So let's just assume that the polls don't change -- because he didn't have a game-changing debate. And so let's say the polls are accurate, which is still an if. And Donald Trump loses. We know what he'll do. He'll start Trump TV. There will be an alt-right party that grows out of this. Let's talk about, how do we come together enough to stop Hillary Clinton? Because that's -- that's going to be the important part. And I will tell you, because some show hosts have said, "I will never come together with you. I will condemn you for you, you know, losing the vote for Donald Trump." So how do we get together and stand together as a bloc to block Hillary if she wins?

BEN: You know, I think that we're going to have to ignore the flames and arrows. Unfortunately, this capitulation -- there's a phrase in the Jewish prayers -- (cutting out) I let my soul (cutting out) -- I think there's going to be have to be some of that. (cutting out)

GLENN: Hang. Hang on. Ben, I don't know if you just walked into another room or something, but you broke up. Can you tell us -- we lost you at the -- at the Jewish prayer.

BEN: No.

Yeah. Can you hear me now? Is that better?

GLENN: Yes, yes.

BEN: Okay. So there's a part of the Jewish prayer service where it talks about, you know, let my soul be as dust to people who criticize me. And I think that we're going to have to adopt that, that idea. Because we're going to get hit with blame for Hillary, because everybody who selected Trump in the primaries and backed him so ardently, they have to shift the blame somewhere. We're just going to have to keep the focus. We're going to have to ignore it. We're just going to have to keep the focus, where it ought to be, which is on attacking the left, attacking Hillary Clinton.

And, look, I think that the recriminations are going to last longer than they did after 2012.

GLENN: Right.

BEN: It is amazing. I don't remember after 2012, the whole Republican -- a large swath of the Republican Party turning on the Trump people, who didn't show up for Romney. And saying, "It's your fault Romney wasn't elected." But the Trump people, some of them, are going to do it to us this time. But, you know, I think that -- people have short memories. And the only thing that's going to matter is, how do we stop Hillary's agenda? So alliances of conveniences to the Republican Party -- has shown are not foreign to the Republican Party or a lot of people who are in it.

STU: Ben, this is Stu, and it's very rare that we have award-winning journalists on the program. You have won the award for the number one journalistic target of anti-Semitism on the internet. Congratulations.

BEN: Thank you. I thank God. I thank my neighbor --

(laughter)

STU: Did you want to give -- I -- you have to look at this -- I mean, A, it must be just a nightmare to even sign on to Twitter or any of these places these days with this stuff going on. Not only were you the number one target of anti-Semitism. It was by a really, really large margin.

GLENN: I know what it's like, Ben, to sign on for me. The things that they say -- my wife blew a gasket the other day. I just got an email, and she said, you are never talking to another person in the press ever, ever again. I don't care what it is. I don't care what happens. You're never talking to another member of the press.

And I can't imagine what it's like to be you, with the anti-Semitism that is going on. How are you dealing with it?

BEN: You know, at a certain point, you start to tune it out because you have to. But on the day of your baby's birth and you're getting notes from, you know, people who write for Breitbart, you know, that are essentially racists. And then you get other notes from people that are -- just pictures of gas chambers and talk about cockroaches. And I hope the four of you die in a gas chamber. That kind of stuff. At a certain point, it moves from the mildly irritating to the actually upsetting.

I mean, I've received -- according to that ADL survey, there were something like 20,000 anti-Semitic tweets directed at American journalists since March. And I was the recipient of nearly 8,000 of those.

So, you know, at a certain point it's kind of amazing that there are that many people that think they're that important in their lives that they're going to do that. And my feeling has always been that if you're pissing off the mouth-breathing Jew hater, then you're doing something right.

So it didn't bother me on any moral level. But I will tell you that it's pretty clear that it's coordinated. I mean, there are certain spike points where people did it based on the news cycle. There were a couple of accounts that were taken off of Twitter. By the way, I'm not an advocate of taking people off Twitter for anti-Semitism. I retweet these people because I think it's important to expose them.

But there are a couple who were taken off of Twitter when Milo Yiannopoulos was booted off of Twitter, which I didn't advocate for. When that happened, the amount of anti-Semitism in my feed dropped by at least 50 percent.

So, you know, when people ask why are you concerned about the Breitbart/alt-right movement, why are you worried Trump, you know, being kind of confused with that, well, it's because the major players in that movement are a problem. I mean, they believe some pretty terrible things. And our fellow travelers (phonetic) are people who believe even worse things.

GLENN: Ben, I -- I have to tell you, we've been a fan of yours for a very long time. But this -- this last year has really shown people's colors. And I don't know if the -- the people who read you or listen to you on the radio understand the difficulty that you have put up. And anybody who has taken this stand. It's a very, very brave thing to do.

And we've been watching you for the last year. And we are -- we're really impressed. Really impressed. Can I switch topics? Go ahead.

BEN: Yeah, that's high praise come from you obviously. Because of the people who have taken a lot of hits in this election cycle, you're definitely number one on that list. So it's been brutal, and I'm just hoping that after this election cycle, we can move into a period where people actually go back to principle instead of sort of the tribal fight that they've wanted to engage in.

GLENN: Yeah. Can you hang for a minute. Because you also have started another project that I think is really interesting. And I'd love for you to share with the audience. Do you have time to stay?

BEN: Sure. That would be great.

GLENN: Okay. Great.

[break]

GLENN: Ben Shapiro is with us. Ben, you've written a novel. You want to tell us about it?

BEN: Sure. That would be great. The novel is called True Allegiance. And it sort of takes all of the political crises we're facing in the country and ratcheting them up by a factor of about 50 percent. And it talks about what the dissolution of the country would look like.

And the reason that I wrote it as fiction as opposed to writing a sort of nonfiction book as to what the future looks like, is mainly because -- and, Glenn, I know you've been a proponent of this for a long time, Andrew Breitbart, my mentor, or my former mentor, was promoting this as well, the idea that culture is upstream of politics.

And if you tell it in a story, what you can't necessarily say in nonfiction, you know, here's one possible future, here's how bad things are on everything from the border to government's encroachment on land rights to race relations in the inner city, then people are more likely to read it and take it seriously, oddly enough, than they are to take a non-fiction book about the same topic seriously. Plus, you end up with more readers.

Ayn Rand did more for capitalism probably than Milton Friedman did, just because there are so many more people who read Atlas Shrugged. So the idea was to take all of these crises, stack them up one on another, and say, "Okay. How close are we really to everything collapsing?" And I have to say, I wrote the thing maybe a year and a half ago I started writing it. I completed it probably a year ago. And since then, half of the stuff in the book came true. So it turns out that I thought it was all 30 years away, and it may only be about 15 years away, which is a little scary.

GLENN: I did -- I'll tell you, I did the same thing.

We published -- what was it? Eye of Moloch. I don't remember what it was. Oh, it was the NSA stuff. The Eye of Moloch was a novel that I wrote. And it was about the spying on American citizens and how the NSA was going to do this and everything else. And I wrote it. It took about a year and a half to write.

And we put it out. And the day it came out was the day that I think the WikiLeaks story broke. We were like, "Good heavens, man. This is supposed to be in the future." It's amazing.

BEN: Oh, yeah. It is incredible how the future has accelerated. I mean, all of the worst fictional things that I talk about in True Allegiance, again, a lot of them came true. I wrote about major race riots in an American city and the attempt by the race rioters to kind of mainstream their politics into the politics of the upper echelon of the city. And obviously that's now been happening in pretty much every major Democrat-controlled city in America.

GLENN: Hang on. Hang on. Hang on. I have to take a quick break. Come back and just tell us the things that are in the book. And what the solutions are, if there are any. I'd like to hear your version of what's coming in America. Next, Ben Shapiro.

[break]

GLENN: Ben Shapiro, the biggest target for anti-Semitism in America today. He's an amazingly brave man. And a -- a brilliant, brilliant mind. And I'm glad he's on our side because I'd hate him to see him use his power for evil. Ben Shapiro is with us. He has a new book -- is it out this week?

BEN: Yeah. It's coming out next week.

GLENN: Okay.

BEN: So you can preorder it now.

JEFFY: True Allegiance.

GLENN: True Allegiance. Tell me the scenarios that you put in the book that you thought were 30 years away.

BEN: So one I talk about at length is a major race riot breaking out in a major American city and the government, led by presidents of the United States, essentially pushing the notion that the -- that the government -- the local government should give into the race rioters and allow them to take leadership of the local government.

And obviously, we've seen things along those lines from the presidents of the United States. I talk about precipitous pullout from a country. In this case, Afghanistan, that leads to the rise of a major terrorist group that hooks up with Iran to start pursuing nuclear terrorism.

And, you know, it turned out, I had the wrong country. The precipitous pullout from Iraq is what caused the rise in ISIS. But the idea that precipitous pullout causing rise in a major terrorist group, I wrote that before the rise of ISIS.

I talked about the idea of raids across the southern border from Mexican drug cartels, causing tensions on the border such that the government of Texas has to start disobeying the federal government in attempts to enforce the border, causing serious conflict between the state of Texas and the president of the United States. Obviously, you can see that beginning to materialize now.

GLENN: Ben, this isn't 30 years in the future. This was Wednesday.

(laughter)

BEN: Exactly. That's why I have to tell it now because it will be history --

GLENN: Right. It's a history book very soon. So how do -- how do -- I mean, I don't want you to tell me the whole story. But is there a solution to these problems that you see? Are you in this novel, are you proposing solutions?

BEN: Well, there are some solutions. And I think the number one solution that I sort of propose is that everybody start relying on basic human decency, which I know sounds ridiculous. But that's what we've come down to in this country. Is, are we going to have a country founded on individual decency, or are we going to have a country founded on everybody taking advantage of the situation at hand?

But the book does -- you know, I don't want to give away the ending of the book. But I will say that not everything is resolved peachy keen. Because I'm not sure that everything is resolved so peachy keen easily. I think these are deep abiding conflicts. And I think things are going to get a lot worse before they get better. But people of principle are going to have to ban together because tough times are coming.

If we do that, then I think we're going to be able to rebuild from some pretty bad things that are about to happen. But I think that it may be -- I mean, not to be a pessimist. I think it's late to forestall some of the worst things that are already happening from taking further material effect.

GLENN: Ben, I was talking to a guy -- yesterday I was having a meeting. And a pretty famous commentator -- and he just stopped by the studios to say hi. And we were having a private conversation. And he said to me, "I no longer believe people are good." He said, "I used to." He said, "I used to believe" -- he said, "I've heard you a million times, you know, you put good against evil, side by side, and Americans will always pick good." He said, "I don't think so."

Do you?

BEN: I think that unless there's a serious revival of morality in the country, I agree with your friend. And I think, by the way, our Founders didn't believe that people were naturally good.

I think our Founders, they said in Federalist 51, they believe that people are capable of good. They're capable of evil. That's why you can't have a government that's overpowering because the people who run it could be evil. And the only way that you're actually going to protect liberty is with a decent citizenry.

Obviously, the Republican Party -- conservatives have done a very poor job of maintaining the culture, maintaining the educational system, maintaining the media. And a lot of these values have dripped down all the way into -- you know, what was shocking to me about this election was, is that I didn't realize how far a lot of this had dripped down into our own party.

GLENN: Yeah.

BEN: You always like to think of yourself as sort of you're on the side of the angels and people on your own team aren't part of the tribal problem. And then you look around and you realize, some of the people on your own team are not really on your team.

And that was -- that came as a rude awakening to me. You mentioned the anti-Semitism thing a little bit earlier. I was always of the opinion that the vast, you know, anti-Semitic left was a much bigger threat, with regard to anti-Semitism, than the right. I really had never -- I'm a guy who wears the Yamaka every day. I had never seen anti-Semitism from the right. Virtually all of the anti-Semitism I received this year was from the alt-right. You know, that came as a shock to me.

I think that we're going to need to re-inculcate values from the most basic level with our kids because people just don't know anything about, not only basic economics and basic politics, but basic decency. Because in the end, politics is just a reflection of values. When you have an entire generation of voters who are looking at Bernie Sanders as some sort of savior and socialism is a good, moral thing. And that's -- that's our fault. I mean, that's because we haven't done enough. Because my parents' generation hasn't done enough. I have to do a better job as a father in order to rectify the breach. And that's going to be a long process. That's not something that happens overnight. I don't think that we're one election away from restoring the country. I think we're one generation away from restoring the country. The idea that Reagan said, we're -- liberty is always one generation away from disappearing. You know, I think that liberty is always one generation from restoration, but it's going to be a hard generation (inaudible).

GLENN: How old are you, Ben?

BEN: I'm 32.

GLENN: So you're a millennial. How much faith do you have in the millennials?

BEN: I'm hoping for the millennials. I think the millennials are bored. I think the millennials don't pay a lot of attention to politics. I think they're dispossessed. They don't like all of the institutions. So there's not the same faith in the government and the same faith in the media that you see with the Boomers.

So there's an opening there. I think they're susceptible to basic reason, but they have to be -- they have to be pushed off the moral superiority they feel. And I speak at probably 30 colleges a year. And when I speak at these colleges, the first thing that I do is I immediately take the feelings question off the table, by basically saying, "You think you're a good person because you believe these things politically. Here's why what you believe politically is actually immoral and it hurts people."

And it's an argument who are young have never heard before. Because they've grown up in a millennia that's told them that the way to assure your ascent to political heaven is just by voting Democrat or by saying socialism is a great system of redistribution or by talking about white privilege.

When you say, look, the real way to be a good person is to actually be a good person. I agree with you. When young people are presented with the argument for good, then they will become more good. But if they're never presented with the argument for good and they're just told that politics is politics and everybody is corrupt and the whole system is rigged and nobody is good in the end and it's get yours at the table before somebody takes it away from you -- or (cuts out) the ultimate sacrifice that you can make is voting somebody else's money away, then you're going to go with the side that gives you a feeling of moral superiority. And failing to recognize that on the part of the right has been a mistake.

GLENN: Do you think that -- do you see when you're speaking out in universities, when you really start to teach some of these things, do you see the millennials at all get a little pissed that they've kind of been robbed by -- by people who have been teaching them garbage? Are they ticked at all?

BEN: Yeah, there's definitely a backlash that's building. I mean, I get probably somewhere between 50 to 100 emails every day. And all from millennials. People who are my age or younger. Who are excited that -- who have watched -- there are these videos on YouTube that have started to go viral, called Ben Shapiro thug life videos. Where somebody took like my kind of destroying somebody in the debate. Then they put sunglasses on me and an Obey hat on me.

It's really ridiculous stuff. But it's become very popular with young folks. And I get a lot of emails from young people saying, I was never even exposed to basic arguments or moral arguments. And if you speak dispassionately about what is good and true, then I think the young people resonate to that. It's actually one of the areas where I do have hope.

I speak on enough college campuses that I have hope for young people. I actually have less hope for some of the Baby Boomers than I do for people who are my own age and younger. I think a lot of the people, my own age and younger, are still malleable. They don't know a lot. They haven't been taught a lot. And when they're made aware of arguments they've never heard before, they're kind of shocked by it. They're actually vulnerable in that way because they're being blind-sided by the truth.

GLENN: Ben Shapiro. Always good to talk to you, sir. Thank you so much. And thanks for all your hard work and taking such a hard stand. Ben Shapiro, editor-in-chief of dailywire.com. Thank you so much, Ben.

BEN: Really appreciate it, Glenn.

Featured Image: Ben Shapiro on radio

'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 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 critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

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?

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?