Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Signs of Hope: A Millennial Makes Glenn's Day

June 29, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Ready for a spark of hope? Glenn spoke with Carolyn on radio today, an 18-year-old millennial who called from Pennsylvania to talk about her upbringing, interests and plans for the future. Aside from her impressive and exemplary manners, Carolyn calmly and confidently articulated her ideas with thoughtfulness and intelligence.

Speaking about her father, Carolyn had this to say:

"He really is my role model because he always lived a life, he always does live a life of integrity. You know, it's . . . sort of like in Ayn Rand's book Fountainhead, you know, he'll take whatever job necessary as long as he keeps his integrity," she said.

Carolyn also revealed that she began listening to Glenn in the fourth grade.

"She's killing me," Glenn replied.

Having just graduated from high school, Carolyn will attend Hillsdale College in the fall to study politics and history.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: America, I want to introduce you to Carolyn, as we meet for the very first time, calling from Pennsylvania.

Hello, Carolyn.

CALLER: Hi, Mr. Beck.

GLENN: How are you? You can call me Glenn. You're 19 years old?

CALLER: I'm actually 18, sir. I just graduated.

GLENN: Wow, 18. You are so polite. You were homeschooled?

CALLER: Actually no. No, sir. I went to Catholic school.

GLENN: Okay. You were -- you grew up in a military family?

CALLER: No, sir. I grew up --

GLENN: Okay. Wait. Wait. You grew -- I'm just guessing -- you grew up in the South?

CALLER: No, sir. Western PA.

STU: You're doing a good job of cold reading here.

GLENN: I've gone through everything that usually is tied directly to, yes, sir, no, sir. Where did you pick that up? It's refreshing and wonderful.

CALLER: I mean, I grew up with a father who was a small business owner, who taught his sons and daughters from a small age to go in for a strong handshake, look someone in the eye, and say, yes, sir, no, sir.

GLENN: I love your dad.

(chuckling)

CALLER: He's been a very big fan of your show.

GLENN: What does he do? What's his business?

CALLER: Well, for most of my life, my father owned furniture store companies. Though he would sell furniture to people in the local area. But after the crash in '08, you know, things got rough. And he tried and tried again to start something up. But he bit his tongue and just took a kind of different path in life.

GLENN: And what happened? He's selling drugs now?

CALLER: No. He -- he works for the state. He works for -- well, we call it PennDOT. He works for the state as a foreman.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. That must be killing him. That must be killing him.

CALLER: Yes, sir. He's part of a union. And I now kind of see it as a blessing because I now understand, you know, not just the side of the entrepreneur, but the side of the union man. And it's very humbling.

GLENN: Carolyn, I want you to close your eyes right now and put your hand on the radio, and we're going to heal your father from his deep scars. My gosh, I can't imagine what it would be like to join a union after a lifetime of working for yourself. To join a union and then -- and then PennDOT. I used to live in Pennsylvania, so I know.

CALLER: Yeah. Yeah. He really is my role model because he -- he always lived a life -- he always does live a life of integrity. You know, it's not -- sort of like in Ayn Rand's book, Fountainhead, you know, he'll take whatever job necessary as long as he keeps his integrity.

GLENN: Wow, I could talk to you all day. You make me feel good.

So, Carolyn, how can we help you?

CALLER: You posed a question yesterday of how your life has changed since 2006. But I can kind of trace it back a little bit further. I first started talking about politics when I was in kindergarten. I came home -- I came home crying on the bus in kindergarten because in 2004, no one wanted to discuss the Bush versus Gore reelection with me, and I was very, very much so at politics even at that young age. And I actually started watching your show in about fourth grade.

In fourth grade, I had received --

GLENN: She's killing me.

CALLER: Yeah. I had received a B in I think it was my reading class, and so I wasn't allowed to watch TV for the rest of the school year. So every night, my dad would let me sneak in and watch Bill O'Reilly's show, which really got me started. And after that, I would come home after school every day and sit and watch your show at 5 o'clock exactly.

GLENN: Wow. Thank you so much. So that has -- that has damaged you and oppressed you.

CALLER: No. No, sir.

GLENN: Or?

CALLER: It's definitely taught me the importance of principles. You know, I know today in the political climate we live in, especially as a young student, it's hard to -- to be able to see right versus left because it seems as though politics infiltrates not just culture, but the classroom. And what I've learned over time is that, yes, people who are liberals can be friends with conservatives.

The key is that you stand on principles. And not rhetoric. I know after the very -- very scary shooting last week of -- at Capitol Hill, I texted a lot of my -- my more liberal friends, you know, who supported Bernie Sanders, voted for Clinton. And I just said, "Hey, I'm someone who stands on the principle of individuality. And I know that just because one Bernie Sanders supporter did such a terrible act, that does not make all Bernie Sanders supporters terrible people." And I just wanted to remind them that. And that I loved them.

GLENN: And what was their response?

CALLER: A lot of them were just so grateful that I gave -- that I showed love. And they said, Carolyn, you've taught me that not all Trump supporters are KKK members. Or not all Trump supporters are Nazis. Because if you don't show love and reach out during those moments, it would be easy to let the status quo persist. And I just wanted to be able to show, you know, just little acts of live. And it does change people's minds rather quickly when you do that.

GLENN: You know, it's funny, I was having dinner last night with some Silicon Valley and some Hollywood lefties. And as we were -- we were talking, a couple of them sounded very much like people that -- one person in particular that I spoke to yesterday to, on the radio, a woman called, and she was very animated. And felt that --

CALLER: Sir.

GLENN: I was, you know, betraying the cause by -- by saying that we have to be -- we have to change our language and we have to be very aware of how we're talking. Because we can make an impact for the good as opposed to just building up more walls.

And -- and most of the people that were at dinner with me last night, they felt the same way. And they were looking for a way to start talking to people. And not necessarily about politics. Just talking to people. And one of the guys said something along the lines of, you know, we need to fix things politically. We need the government to -- to fix all of these things. And, you know, the language is not going to break through.

And I have found -- I mean, I -- I am sitting with you guys. Because I changed my language. And I haven't changed a thing in my policy and my principles. But we're talking. So how can you not say that it doesn't work? It does.

CALLER: I -- I -- I whole-heartedly agree with you, sir. I think it's very interesting that you're discussing, you know, the idea of care versus harm, liberty and oppression. Because last summer I was actually sitting in a lecture where we were discussing, you know, political campaigning and the such. And the speaker put up on the screen this chart about how liberals use certain words and they react to certain words versus conservatives. And it was the same kind of idea of liberty, care, harm, justice.

GLENN: Yes.

CALLER: And I just sat there, and I thought, you know, that's it. That's the secret.

And so ever since then, I've been able to engage some of my liberal friends on things such as Planned Parenthood and being pro-life and really some hot button topics. But if you go in and speak the language and you go in with genuine love and intellectual curiosity, which most of my liberal friends are curious, they want to know what a conservative believes. Why we believe what we believe. They don't just want to label everyone. They do want to know. And if you go in from that approach, they are much more open and much more understanding. They may not change their minds, but they want to understand, the same way we should want to understand.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. And it's really amazing -- and I have example after example after example of this -- people don't know how to be able to have that dialogue. But they want that dialogue. And if you will model it, they will fall into it.

And it's -- you know, the -- one of the -- one of the guys that was there last night said, you know, I read a book. And he said, "It totally changed my mind. Totally changed my mind."

CALLER: Yeah.

GLENN: And he said, "It is the Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt."

CALLER: Hmm.

GLENN: Which is the book that really takes the care and harm and liberty and oppression and is teaching me -- has totally changed the way I view things. And you can. I spoke at a table with 20 Silicon Valley liberals last night. One Libertarian.

And we spoke about abortion. And I talked about how they see oppression of women, and they all shook their heads. And I said, "We see sanctity." And I could feel their eyes roll up. And I said, and that's a word that you guys don't speak. So let's just talk about harm to women. And we had this conversation.

And it was -- I don't know if anybody changed their mind or anything, but at least it didn't devolve into where it usually devolves.

I mean, one of the guys who was with me, he sat back from the table, and he said -- I said, "What did you notice about things?" And he said, "I was watching people and listening." And he said, "As you were speaking, I heard so many people say, huh. Wow."

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: And that's the beginning of it. Just opening people's minds to, that's not what I thought at all.

CALLER: Yeah. Exactly. And I think as soon as -- as soon as that spark kind of goes off in someone's mind and the wheels start to turn -- it's not that you should go in with the approach of you want to change their mind, but you just want to understand and they want to understand, that's when real change happens.

GLENN: Yeah. The problems that I have with talking people is when they say, "How do you win?" Or they're trying to win the argument.

There's no -- Martin Luther King said -- and he is absolutely right. Winning assumes that there's going to be a loser. And you want everyone walking from the table feeling that they've -- that they've won, that they've reconciled with somebody else.

CALLER: Exactly.

GLENN: Because we're going to have to -- if you play this out in your head -- if the Democrats get absolutely everything that they want, and let's say they rule for the next 20 years and they get this socialist utopia. Well, there are going to be people like me and maybe you that -- no. Never. I'm not going there. I won't buy into it. I'm not going to speak that language. I'm not -- I will not go over the cliff with the rest of humanity because it's easier. I will stand for what I believe is the truth.

So what do they do with that ten to 30 percent of that population that doesn't comply? Well, usually, it's round them up and kill them or put them in a training camp or whatever.

That's what happens. And the same would happen if you are a big government person on the right. What are you going to do with the people that disagree with you that will never change their mind? You have to reconcile with them and live in peace. And that has to be done before we talk about any policies. We have to start trusting each other.

Carolyn, quickly, what do you want to do for a living?

CALLER: I've not thought that far. I will be attending Hillsdale College in the fall, where I'll be studying politics and history.

GLENN: Good choice.

CALLER: And I know I -- I joke with my mother, I was adopted from South Korea -- so I can't run for president. But I love to joke with my parents that I would like to find a way to be First Lady.

GLENN: Oh, that's great.

CALLER: The same way Jackie Kennedy went in and sort of restored the White House with interior design. I would say I would like to restore it with making it the people's house again. Allowing -- allowing people from all over the country to come in and, you know, have lunch with the president or the First Lady and just spend hours talking and really knowing what they want to hear.

GLENN: Carolyn, I would love to spend more time with you. I would like to have our producers grab your phone number. I would like to have you on at least once a year to see that you have held the course all the way through school. And if you're ever looking for an internship, I would love to have you intern directly with me. So I want to put you on hold. We'll get the phone numbers. Thank you so much. And say hello to your father and your mother.

CALLER: Thank you, sir.

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.