Glenn Raves About His New Favorite Book

Glenn is something of an aficionado when it comes to books on Adolf Hitler. That's why he was surprised to learn about one originally written in the 1930s, but published in 2002 after the manuscript was discovered by the author's family. The book --- Defying Hitler: A Memoir --- was written as a warning to the world by a young man who witnessed Hitler's rise to power.

"You name it, and I've read it on Hitler. I have gotten all the way down to I Was Hitler's Chauffeur, which isn't worth the read," Glenn said jokingly. "You will learn more important things about what happened and what allowed Hitler to take place than any other book I've ever read about the Second World War."

Not to be outdone, co-host Jeff Fisher mentioned that he's currently "reading" a picture book about Hitler.

Enjoy this complimentary clip from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Have I told you guys about Defying Hitler? Did I tell you guys about it yesterday?

STU: No.

GLENN: Stu is fresh meat. Fresh meat.

JEFFY: Yeah, Stu has been gone.

GLENN: Stu, remember when I said, you need to read Garden of Beasts?

STU: Yes.

GLENN: And remember you guys heard it for about six months, until you couldn't take it anymore?

STU: Oh, my gosh. Yes. I finally had to read it.

GLENN: Right.

And then you read it, and you came back, and you were like...

STU: It was awesome.

GLENN: Right. And the reason I wanted you to read it was because it was a different perspective on Germany than you had ever read before, right?

STU: Uh-huh. Great book. By the way, supposedly going to be a movie at some point.

GLENN: I'm telling you, this one, A, it's a lot shorter. This book that I've recently found is 100 times Garden of Beasts.

And what it is, is a guy who was German, was growing up in Germany, came of age about 1920. So he was a teenager during the first world war. He started writing it in the '30s, but he's going after all his recollections, starting at 1914. So he remembers what Germany was.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Okay? Then he remembers the war. And he talks about the war and what happened. Then the 1920s. The Weimar Republic. Hyperinflation. He talks about that.

And then the coming of Hitler. And then Hitler and who he was and what happened.

This book was written in the '30s as a warning to the world. He escaped Germany and came to the United States. Became a professor. He became a huge author of historic books. He's -- he wrote the quintessential book on who Adolf Hitler really was, his character and his personality, back in like 1972. He dies.

His family finds on a shelf this manuscript in 2003 or 2006, something like that. It's published, becomes a big best-seller during the Bush years. I had never heard of it. Saw somebody reading it the other day. And I was like, what is that? Defying Hitler. And I said, "Ooh, that sounds good." And they started talking to me about it. You name it, and I've read on Hitler. I have gotten all the way down to I Was Hitler's Chauffeur, which isn't worth the read. But, anyway, I started reading this book. You will learn more important things about what happened and what allowed Hitler to take place than any other book I've ever read about the Second World War. It has a completely different point of view because he's not writing it from the point of view of the Nazis and what they were doing it. He's writing it from the point of view of the youth of the day.

And he was -- he was young. Okay? So he was in his teens when America -- or, when Germany was a certain way. And that 9/11 event, if you will, that changed them, was the first world war. Then they came back, and they were at each other's throats politically. And the churches were at each other's throats.

And then jobs were hard to find. And then they started printing money. And then money became -- you couldn't -- you know, we've read a million times that when you got paid, you stopped working, cashed your check, went in and bought anything you could in the store. Right?

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Because a week from now, by the end of your workday, it would be -- your paycheck would be worthless.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: What he talks about is -- and I've never heard this. It was the stock market that anybody -- anybody who didn't have a family, they took their money and they immediately poured it into the stock market. And they got wildly wealthy.

Now, think of this. Why don't we have hyperinflation? Why isn't our meat and milk and everything else -- why isn't that reflective of the $4 trillion that we have just pumped into the system, right?

If I said, ten years ago, you put $2 trillion into this system and you're going to start to see massive inflation. Okay? We're 4 trillion. Where's the inflation? You know this. I know you know this. You're going to go, of course, yes, when I say it.

The stock market. He need says, "Well, there's no -- the fundamentals are gone." What they should be saying is, "The stock market is reflective of hyperinflation." Because the stock market is a reflection of who has the money.

PAT: That and velocity.

GLENN: Right.

PAT: I mean, there's a couple of --

GLENN: So they don't -- so the people who got the money are the big corporations, the big banks. They're not giving it to you and me.

So we don't have too many dollars chasing too far goods. They do. And so that's why big elaborate houses are still going through the roof. The rich are starting to feel that inflation. And it's concentrated in the stock market. Okay?

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Well, that's the same thing that happened in Germany. They started constantly -- but everybody was doing it. I'm sorry, the youth without children were taking -- they were buying a little bit of food to last them the week to the next paycheck. Then they were taking all that money and putting it into the stock market. And the stock market did what it's doing now.

And now here's what happened: Now, think of this. I've never heard this point of view before. And I think this is accurate.

He says in reading -- remember, he's writing in the mid-'30s as a warning to the West. You don't know who this guy is, and you don't know what happened to Germany.

The older people in Germany are not with him. The youth are with him. And here's why: Because they were too young to really understand the real German society. The German ethics and being kind to each other because they went -- they came of age during the war. And then they came to age during the war. And then right after the war, then the people turned on themselves, were arguing politics, demonizing each other. The Weimar Republic came in, delegitimized the money. All morals went out the window.

So if you're 25, you have no kids, you're going out to the cabaret every night, you are with -- you have a ton of money because you put it all in the stock market. You're living large. You're a titan. You're getting all of the girls. Your life is absolutely sweet.

Then what happens? At the end of the Weimar Republic, a sensible guy comes in, an older statesman comes in and says, "I can fix the hyperinflation." He fixes the hyperinflation. He fixes the fact that -- he says, "For two years, during this guys' rule, we're not even talking about politics anymore."

No one is arguing politics. We're on the road back to the way we were.

But all those youth who were bank presidents -- they were 25-year-old bank presidents, they're not bank presidents anymore. Because they were all discredited because it was a game of -- it was a shell game. It was like Wall Street, you know, the movie. Just a shell game. So those guys don't -- they have to go now into other jobs and work hard for their money. And those days are over for them. Those glory days. They want the glory days. So when Hitler comes in and says, "We're going to set the rules. We're going to privatize business with us -- and if you're in with the Nazi party, you're going to be able to make it." They recognize this game of -- just do -- the ends justify the means.

And I could have that life back. So the youth throw their lot in with Hitler. And that's why it worked. I had never heard of that before.

STU: It's really interesting.

GLENN: That's like the first third of the book. It's really good. Called Defying Hitler.

STU: I'm in. I'm in. I just finished Hitler: Ascent.

GLENN: I have not read that one.

STU: It's the new like -- the ascent is till 1939. So it's a two-part series. The 1,000 books per edition. A dozen pages per edition. You know, one of those types of books. But, I mean, fascinating.

Just the chapter on Hitler and the churches is so worth your time. If you've ever had the argument with someone on Facebook where they say, "These mass murders are fueled by religion." Hitler? He was. Look at this quote by Hitler. He says --

GLENN: All prior to 1933.

STU: All of it happened really early on, in the first few weeks of his reign as chancellor. But, I mean, the behind-the-scenes quotes they have from this guy, his entire mission was to discredit the churches afterwards.

It was like, living space, get rid of the Jews, then let's get rid of the churches.

GLENN: Shocking.

STU: That was his plan. And he used those relationships, tried to destroy the churches, and the quotes they have from him and Goebbels, and -- it's amazing.

GLENN: Hitler's Ascent?

STU: Hitler: Assent. It's -- Volker Ullrich is the guy who wrote it. It's the new sort of --

GLENN: Oh, Volker? Yeah.

STU: Oh, yeah.

I mean, it's amazing.

It's the new, like, biography on Hitler. The new one. Every ten to 15 years a new one gets written.

GLENN: Yeah. And that's the problem too because the farther we get away from these guys --

STU: It's a double-edged sword.

GLENN: Yeah, it's a double-edged sword. You want to be -- the time to write it is when some of the people are still alive, but they're not powerful. So at the end of their life. So they can still -- you can still check and say, right? Right? Right?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And if you use original sources, you're good. So the first ones that are written in the first 30 years are probably a little skewed. Probably. Unless they're attached entirely to original first person sources.

STU: Right. And so you had -- you've had this where -- Joachim Fest had one, which was influenced by a lot of the people who were alive, but a lot of the people who wanted to rehabilitate their reputations.

Albert Speer, being the main one. And that one came later.

Kershaw's in 2000, I think, was seen as the standard. And this one I think -- because while you're right, a lot of these guys aren't around anymore to tell the stories, more and more documentation has come out.

And really, I mean, the fuel for the industry, if you want to say the Hitler -- you know, the Goebbels diaries. Those changed the world on how much we understand. The guy was writing a diary entry about every meeting he was having during the era.

GLENN: That's the great thing -- and the Founders too.

But with Founders, they stopped using those diaries. They stopped using the original sources because it didn't give them the narrative they were looking for.

The narrative on the Nazis is, they were bad guys. And so their diaries back all of that stuff up. So as long as you're pegged to original sources, you're good.

STU: This has been Hitler book corner.

PAT: I just finished Hitler's Mailman's Neighbor.

GLENN: Did you? Wow.

STU: Oh, wow.

PAT: Yeah. He died in 1934. So he doesn't have a lot of perspective. But he talked about the junk mail he heard Adolf got early in his chancellorship.

GLENN: Original sources and footnoted?

PAT: All footnoted.

STU: Can I get your copy? Do you mind if I borrow it?

PAT: 823 pages of footnotes.

GLENN: So the three books -- the three books -- one I'm talking about is Defying Hitler. Hitler Ascent is Stu's. And Hitler's Mailman's Next-door Neighbor.

PAT: Mailman Next-door Neighbor is the third one.

GLENN: Thank you very much.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: It's a long read. Pat's, I will say is a little bit academic.

GLENN: There's no pictures even of the mailbox.

PAT: It's 2400 pages.

GLENN: And he dies before 33.

PAT: He dies --

JEFFY: My Hitler book has pictures.

GLENN: Amazing.

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.