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

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Why Is Apple’s Chief of Diversity Leaving After 6 Months?

November 21, 2017
Staff

WRITER

What happened?

Apple’s vice president of diversity and inclusion is leaving the company at the end of the year after assuming the role in May. Denise Young Smith has been at Apple since 1997 and most recently served as human resources chief; the abrupt announcement just six months after she took on the diversity chief role came as a surprise.

Wasn’t there some controversy about her earlier?

Yes. Young Smith was under fire last month after she made comments on diversity and inclusion that were viewed as controversial, and she has since apologized for her “choice of words.”

What did she say?

As part of a much larger discussion about diversity in the workplace, Young Smith said that diversity of thought and experience is valuable regardless of your gender or racial background.

“Diversity is the human experience. I get a little bit frustrated when diversity or the term diversity is tagged to the people of color or the women or the LGBT or whatever because that means they’re carrying that around…because that means that we are carrying that around on our foreheads.

“And I’ve often told people a story– there can be 12 white blue-eyed blonde men in a room and they are going to be diverse too because they’re going to bring a different life experience and life perspective to the conversation.”

Is her departure related to the diversity comments?

Hard to say. Young Smith has reportedly been in talks about her future at Apple for a year, so she may have made up her mind to leave long before the backlash. Still, as Doc pointed out while standing in for Glenn on today’s show, it’s ironic that a black woman is stepping down as diversity chief after “controversial” comments and being replaced by a white woman.

Just 3 percent of Apple’s leaders in the U.S. are black, according to TechCrunch.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

DOC: Some of this stuff deserves to be mocked. Because that's the only way it will be changed. Satire. Sarcasm. And mocking something this ridiculous. I'm not just talking about mocking people you disagree with. Although, if you want to do that, that's fine as well. I think it's nice to be able to engage in a civil conversation and try to find common ground, which we try to do, but when it's this silly, you deserve to be mocked for change.

The way you're going to change this is to mock people like this, to point out how ridiculous it is through humor.

That's the only way it's going to change. How many people on the left are calling this guy out? When they read it, even if it's crazy and they know it's crazy, are they going to be like, dude, come on? They're not.

KAL: Even there, they're like, you're stretching it a bit. You're reaching.

DOC: Right. In their heart of hearts, they know it is.

But they don't say it. It's either one of two things, they look the other way because he's on the team, or they know it's going to help push the agenda. By any means necessary. The end justifies the means.

And then some of them are likely crazy and believe it as well. But most people know it's ridiculous. That whites somehow have greater access to outdoors.

KAL: That's so ridiculous.

DOC: It's insane. So mock it. Share it. And it should be. A lot of people online mocking as well.

If you want to follow me on Twitter. It's @DocThompsonshow. Use the #whatIlearnedtoday. You can join the program. We have some calls coming up. It's 888-727-BECK. 888-727-BECK.

We'll get some calls in a couple of minutes. Denise Young -- Denise Young Smith, rather, was named Apple's VP of diversity and inclusion in May. Remember that?

KAL: Oh, that's good. Yeah.

DOC: Remember the big discussion we had in May because of the letter that was written? Remember the former CEO of Facebook, or executive at Facebook, or person who worked at Facebook -- we had that whole discussion.

KAL: Yeah.

DOC: And then at Apple, they had this brouhaha. Anyway, they appointed her as the VP of diversity and inclusion in May. She's stepping down.

KAL: That's only been, what? Like six months?

DOC: Denise Young Smith --

KAL: A little less?

DOC: Yeah. Not even. Yep. Stepping down because of something she said.

KAL: Oh, boy. What did she say? Was it allowed outdoors?

DOC: During a summit in Columbia, she said -- now, she is a black woman, mind you.

KAL: Uh-huh.

DOC: Apple's VP of diversity and inclusion. Apple's VP of diversity and inclusion said she likes to focus on everyone, and that diversity goes beyond race, gender, and sexual orientation. She said, there can be twelve white blue-eyed, blonde men in a room, and they're going to be diverse too because they're going to bring different life experience and life perspectives to the conversation.

KAL: Good. I like that.

DOC: She's right.

KAL: Yeah, she is. She got fired for that?

DOC: Well...

She is stepping down.

KAL: Which means she was asked to step down?

DOC: She was fired. That's likely what was meant. She said, diversity is a human experience. She said, I get a little bit frustrated when diversity or the term diversity is tagged to people of color or women or LGBT. She said, we're not representative have how I think about diversity or how Apple sees it. Those were her later apologies, that's when she later apologized.

She said, we're not representative of how I think about diversity or how Apple sees it. For that, I'm sorry. She was forced to apologize. And for what? She basically said --

KAL: Don't judge a book by its cover?

DOC: Well, she said something that I said over and over again: Your claim and maybe accurate claim that you have it worse off because of, fill in the blank. Your race, your gender, your religion. Even if it's true that you are either disadvantaged because of your race -- you walk in, there's more white people. Maybe there's a bias. Even if it's an underlying subconscious bias, fine. Let's go with it and say that you are at a disadvantage. There are many ways to advantage or disadvantage people. And, you know what, very few of them have to do with race. There are more ways that you can disadvantage people that have nothing to do with race or religion or gender. Economic situation.

And that could be all kinds of different things. You know what else disadvantages people? Stupidity. You're just dumb. You think you're going to get that job as the CEO if you're dumb?

KAL: Probably not.

DOC: No, of course not. Let's say you're average intelligence, but you don't have any common sense. Okay. That may actually help you, based on the bosses that I've had. How about fat?

KAL: Yeah.

DOC: How about fat? You're going to be seen the same way when you're fat?

KAL: No.

DOC: Of course not. Let's say if you're fat with less control of it than other people. Some people, myself, you're fat because you're a little bit lazy, you're eating too much. You know, whatever. You're not taking care of yourself. You're not doing the hard work. Your metabolism slows a little when you get older. Fine. There are a lot of people though that are fat because of underlying circumstances. They also just generally have a slower metabolism. It's more difficult for them.

All things being equal, guy walks in the room who is thin, guy walks in the room who is fat, who is getting the job?

KAL: The thin guy.

DOC: How about ugly? Ugly.

KAL: Oh, yeah. You can't control that.

DOC: You cannot control ugly. And guess what, it's going to advantage you if you're pretty.

KAL: Absolutely.

DOC: All things being equal, good-looking guy walks in the room, bad-looking guy walks in the room. Who is getting the job? The good-looking guy. Right? All things being equal. Good-looking woman walks in the job. Ugly woman walks in the job. Who is getting it?

KAL: Good-looking.

DOC: No. The one with the large breasts. That's usually how it goes.

No. Seriously, but that matters too. Even if it's subconscious. We like certain things. Individuals, you're constantly making millions of calculations all the time.

Every time, sizing everything up, in every situation. On levels you don't even know about. And you are attracted to things that are attractive to you. You are drawn to things that are like you. Things that you appreciate.

And that's okay. It's human nature. It's not to say, well, welcome in, Bill, can't give you the job because you're black. Have a good day. I'm not justifying that. That's wrong. I'm saying that you can't control some of this. And, by the way, that's not just to say that white people are saying it. It happens with every race. Right?

You're an Asian guy and you're doing some hiring, you're going to have some biases, based on your race. But then, beyond race, religion, and gender, there are other ways you could be disadvantaged or disadvantaged.

I grew up near Cleveland, Ohio. How do you think that helped me out? Versus the guy who grew up in Malibu or Florida or whatever. A lot of places -- is it a small advantage or disadvantage?

Sure. But still, those things matter. Who is more interesting at the party? Right?

The guy who was from Key West, the guy who was from Manhattan, or the guy from Cleveland.

KAL: Hey. It's all about life experiences.

DOC: Well, these things all add up who you are and what you present. Another thing, your name. And I'm not talking about ethnic names which, by the way, those biased people as well. They've done studies where if you have certain ethnic names, it could bias you or whatever. But really bizarre, goofy, bad, whatever name, versus seemingly more traditional name.

There are countless ways you're advantaged or disadvantaged.

And yet, these Black Lives Matter groups, the people who constantly tell you that they're getting the worse deal. Meanwhile, they live in America, in 2017, where it is impossible to starve.

KAL: Yeah.

DOC: The only way you're starving is if you are simply -- if you're not willing to pick up the food and put it in your mouth. And sometimes, we even put it in your mouth for you.

Seriously, there's food everywhere. We throw out better food than some people eat on a regular basis.

KAL: Oh, absolutely.

DOC: This is just how it is. There's food banks everywhere. There's welfare. There's like 16 federal government plans to give you money and food.

You live in America in 2017. It's impossible to starve. You've got protections like nowhere else. America, the most diverse country on the planet, to check out that last Olympics.

KAL: Uh-huh.

DOC: In walks the Chinese team. How many white people do they have on it?

KAL: None.

DOC: All righty then. That team from Mexico, how many black people and Asian people do they have on it?

KAL: None.

DOC: No. Probably not a whole lot. You see the American team. Blacks, whites, Asians, Hispanics.

KAL: Yep. All kinds.

DOC: We are the most diverse country. And yet we let people lie to us and promote the fact that we need help with diversity. Screw that. The rest of the world needs help with diversity. If it matters so much. How come you're not bitching about China for not having more non-Asian people? Because they're Chinese. It's who they are. It's different. And it's acceptable.

KAL: That's a great point. I wonder if the rhetoric in these other countries is the same as it is here, about diversity.

DOC: The Chinese people going, you know, it's all these Asian people. I don't get it.

KAL: But, I mean, are there different levels of Chinese?

DOC: Of course. There's classes. There's regions. There's classes.

KAL: But do they cry for equality in the same way --

DOC: It's more economic. See, but we have allowed people to tie economic inequality to racial inequality. And they'll use it back and forth, whatever benefits them. So when Denise Young Smith, the former now VP of Apple, heading up diversity inclusion says that diversity goes beyond race, gender, and sexual orientation, she's right.

What we have allowed people to do is walk into a room, see white people, and say, "It's not diverse."

KAL: Yeah.

DOC: No, it may be. You could have all black people, and it could be diverse. It's all about life experiences, what you bring to the table. All of these things that aren't easily measurable. But they want to look, ironically, at the color of a person's skin and size up the situation.

KAL: It's incredibly racist, ironically.

DOC: It is incredibly racist. Stop. Knock it off. There's no way you will ever get to true diversification in all things. Okay. We have picked these 14 people to head up our whatever department and we've got exactly the same number of people from this region of the country and this person who is this weight. And this person who is this height. How about height? You don't think the tall guy is going to get the job? Of course he will. So we got to make sure we have proportionate people that are short, middle, tall, whatever. There's no way to go down the list and check every box and make sure it's even across-the-board.

How about this? We start judging people on their character.

Not if they're from Cleveland. Or short. Or fat. Or rich. Or white. How about the content of their character?

KAL: Whoa, whoa, whoa.

DOC: It's crazy, I know.

KAL: Crazy. Step it back some.

Faith, family, and freedom—The forgotten core of conservatism

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

Conservatism is not about rage or nostalgia. It’s about moral clarity, national renewal, and guarding the principles that built America’s freedom.

Our movement is at a crossroads, and the question before us is simple: What does it mean to be a conservative in America today?

For years, we have been told what we are against — against the left, against wokeism, against decline. But opposition alone does not define a movement, and it certainly does not define a moral vision.

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

The media, as usual, are eager to supply their own answer. The New York Times recently suggested that Nick Fuentes represents the “future” of conservatism. That’s nonsense — a distortion of both truth and tradition. Fuentes and those like him do not represent American conservatism. They represent its counterfeit.

Real conservatism is not rage. It is reverence. It does not treat the past as a museum, but as a teacher. America’s founders asked us to preserve their principles and improve upon their practice. That means understanding what we are conserving — a living covenant, not a relic.

Conservatism as stewardship

In 2025, conservatism means stewardship — of a nation, a culture, and a moral inheritance too precious to abandon. To conserve is not to freeze history. It is to stand guard over what is essential. We are custodians of an experiment in liberty that rests on the belief that rights come not from kings or Congress, but from the Creator.

That belief built this country. It will be what saves it. The Constitution is a covenant between generations. Conservatism is the duty to keep that covenant alive — to preserve what works, correct what fails, and pass on both wisdom and freedom to those who come next.

Economics, culture, and morality are inseparable. Debt is not only fiscal; it is moral. Spending what belongs to the unborn is theft. Dependence is not compassion; it is weakness parading as virtue. A society that trades responsibility for comfort teaches citizens how to live as slaves.

Freedom without virtue is not freedom; it is chaos. A culture that mocks faith cannot defend liberty, and a nation that rejects truth cannot sustain justice. Conservatism must again become the moral compass of a disoriented people, reminding America that liberty survives only when anchored to virtue.

Rebuilding what is broken

We cannot define ourselves by what we oppose. We must build families, communities, and institutions that endure. Government is broken because education is broken, and education is broken because we abandoned the formation of the mind and the soul. The work ahead is competence, not cynicism.

Conservatives should embrace innovation and technology while rejecting the chaos of Silicon Valley. Progress must not come at the expense of principle. Technology must strengthen people, not replace them. Artificial intelligence should remain a servant, never a master. The true strength of a nation is not measured by data or bureaucracy, but by the quiet webs of family, faith, and service that hold communities together. When Washington falters — and it will — those neighborhoods must stand.

Eric Lee / Stringer | Getty Images

This is the real work of conservatism: to conserve what is good and true and to reform what has decayed. It is not about slogans; it is about stewardship — the patient labor of building a civilization that remembers what it stands for.

A creed for the rising generation

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

For the rising generation, conservatism cannot be nostalgia. It must be more than a memory of 9/11 or admiration for a Reagan era they never lived through. Many young Americans did not experience those moments — and they should not have to in order to grasp the lessons they taught and the truths they embodied. The next chapter is not about preserving relics but renewing purpose. It must speak to conviction, not cynicism; to moral clarity, not despair.

Young people are searching for meaning in a culture that mocks truth and empties life of purpose. Conservatism should be the moral compass that reminds them freedom is responsibility and that faith, family, and moral courage remain the surest rebellions against hopelessness.

To be a conservative in 2025 is to defend the enduring principles of American liberty while stewarding the culture, the economy, and the spirit of a free people. It is to stand for truth when truth is unfashionable and to guard moral order when the world celebrates chaos.

We are not merely holding the torch. We are relighting it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Getty Images / Handout | Getty Images

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

  • for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
  • for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
  • for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
  • for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
  • and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn’t cling to the past — he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still.

It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself.
This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of -- of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's -- it's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to find.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't -- we didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are -- we are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past, that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want.
They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -- we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for.

Do you?

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.