The Oval: The Dangers of Dependency

Good afternoon.

From this desk, the nation hears many great promises…

About programs to be launched… governmental agencies to be set up… legislation to be introduced… and laws to be signed.

It is therefore easy to believe that the person behind this desk directs all that flows from it. That all governmental decisions rest with his wisdom… or lack thereof.

It is easy to think that from this desk the giant enterprise of the government - all $3.5 trillion worth of it - rolls forward, like a massive tide that sweeps away all those that stand before it.

And in this time of year, with an election looming, that's how both candidates want it.

They want you to believe that they alone can take the government in the direction the voters want it to go.

You won't hear a presidential candidate say: "well, everything depends on which party controls congress… or which senior legislator gets the committee chairmanship to write the tax laws… or which way the supreme court rules on some arcane element of the law."

They tell you that they alone can deliver. They alone can tilt the might U.S. government in one direction or another.

That without their victory, the nation's course will be altered… for the worse.

What a bunch of nonsense.

Does anyone think that one man, in one office, can ruin America or save it? Have we forgotten the sad and long human experience with caesars, monarchs and dictators?

That whatever the ambitions or dreams or even intelligence of a single man, that the rule of one can never compete with the wisdom of a free people?

That is, after all, what set America afire in 1776 - the idea that a rabble of free men, organized into 13 different states, led by a weak and largely ineffective central government, could be better and stronger and more durable than the King of Britain, the leader of the mightiest empire the world had seen since the fall of Rome.

And here's the thing: the americans were right.

E pluburus unum - out of many, one.

Not… ex una, unus - out of one, one.

It takes many to make america what it is. Not one man in the Oval Office. Not 9 justices. Not 100 senators. Not 435 members of the House of Representatives.

We have to remember this, especially this time of year. When presidential candidates tell you they have a plan to fix this, or change that, or improve this… just remember: they can't do it alone. They can't do it because they were never supposed to do it.

The idea that the president is supposed to be this all-knowing chieftain is hogwash.

Presidents are ordinary men. One day, we will see an ordinary woman do the job.

They're not kings. They're not princes. And they're not priests.

Which brings me to an issue which has occupied the presidential campaign the last few days: How dependent we are on the president.

Dependency on government is at its highest levels in us history. It's been on a steady march, but now, most of the us government budget exists to support citizens through transfers of wealth from some people to other people.

Social Security. Medicare. Medicaid. Food stamps. Housing assistance. It's all part of the same broad category.

Dependency.

Practically speaking, all americans, at some point in their lives, become government dependents. Social security and medicare - two programs nearly all americans draw from - are part of the big giant government dependency system.

I'm not here to debate whether this is good or bad. Whether this is what the founders envisioned or not.

I'm not here to focus on what this means for elections, and why this puts non-dependent americans at peril from an electoral perspective.

I'd like to talk about the moral implications.

What does it mean when every citizen becomes dependent on the government? What does that do to the individual?

It's easy to generalize about government programs, that they help the poor. Help the poor. We all want to help the poor. So if government is helping the poor, that's a good thing, right?

But we know that the poor often aren't helped by government programs. Often, they're hurt by them. The vast expansion of the welfare state has destroyed marriage, fatherhood, the impulse of parents to work to feed their children, the sense of personal responsibility among those who are at the bottom of the ladder.

Are poor people lazy and immoral? No. Poor people don't want to be poor. But government programs for the poor need poor people! Otherwise they go out of business. And as we know, government is very good at staying in business.

Show me a government program to help the poor, and i'll show you a government program that needs the poor to stay that way, otherwise the government program goes away!

Do poor people want to be poor? Absolutely not. But with vast programs, government make poverty an easier choice - and that's what turns poverty into dependency.

Most of us struggled at some point in our lives. Most of us drove a car when it was rusted out… wore clothes that were falling apart… ate rice and beans a few nights a week to save money… pushed the credit cards to their max. Most of us have been there. Some of us are there now.

There's no shame in struggling. And no shame in needing help.

But the question is: what happens when the government steps in and saves us from these problems? Do they go away? Do individuals learn resiliency? Do they force themselves to learn a new and more marketable skill? Do they discover what decisions led them to a place of need, and change the way they live as a result?

But dependency is not merely an economic state of being. There's economic dependency, and then there's moral dependency.

I'm deeply troubled by economic dependency. But what really worries me is moral dependency.

Moral dependency is what happens when citizens become complacent in their moral choices… in their sense of their own self-worth.

Moral complacency is what happens when citizens, egged on by a permissive media, look at the man sitting in this chair as a father figure, as the great protector.

When people are dependent on the government, the head of the government is invested with far more power than he is entitled… and steadily, we begin to accept the premise that the world spins on its axis right from this place.

When you believe that the nation's leader can actually affect your life, far beyond your ability to act or think, you reach the stage of moral emptiness. You reach the stage of moral slavery.

It's no wonder that when dictators rise up, they always do two things: first, they offer unbounded promises of economic prosperity - free health care, free food, free shelter, regulations to protect you against any kind of wrongdoing and unsafe products you never knew existed.

And then, they go after those who stand on the moral heights of any free society. They go after the priests and the ministers, the religious organizations who honor no god but their own.

They call them bigots…hypocrites… chauvinists… those who stand for something besides the government, we are told, are not to be trusted. "we're all in it together," they say. "we can't have priests telling us how to run things."

This is how dependency works. First through the stomach… then through the heart.

They understand that to seize power and retain it, they must have no competitor for the stomachs and hearts of the citizenry.

They feed and they clothe and they bring the citizens into a soft embrace. "those free markets are unfair… and dangerous. You need protections. You need help. You need us."

"You're not on your own anymore," they say. "Come in from the cold… and you'll be warm."

Thus they dull the instincts for individual initiative … not by banning it, but by making it harder. Dependency is therefore offered not as a form of slavery, but as a vacation from the "hard work" of a demanding job… a break from the "drudgery" of a work week… a change from the ordinary difficulties of an ordinary life.

Dependency makes it possible for an ordinary person to believe that the man who sits in this chair can reach through the television or computer screen, and touch you personally. Make you more prosperous. Make you morally righteous. Make you feel that you're part of a great society. And the best part is, you don't have to do anything. Just sit back. And watch the president work his magic.

It's a wonderful show.

But at the end, there's a price to be paid. I'll save that for another day. I don't want to spoil the fun.

Thanks for watching, and may god bless you and may god bless the republic.

Have you ever wondered why so many insane things are happening simultaneously RIGHT NOW? Big corporations are going woke. The stock market got red-hot during a FORCED recession. Stores like Walmart and Target were allowed to stay open during the lockdown, but mom-and-pop stores on Main Street had to close, some of them forever.

On Wednesday's "GlennTV" special, Glenn Beck explains it all in this sneak-peek episode — a primer to his new book and the upcoming explosive, in-depth special: “The Great Reset: Joe Biden & the Rise of 21st-Century Fascism.” Co-author Justin Haskins joins along with Glenn’s head writer and researcher, Jason Buttrill, to answer audience questions about a topic that the media has tried to censor and “fact-check.” You will be equipped with everything you need to know about what the global elites of the world have planned for the transformation of society and YOUR life.

Watch the full episode of "Glenn TV" below:


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

After new information came out that suggests Dr. Anthony Fauci intimidated and bribed scientists into dismissing the COVID-19 lab-leak theory, Sen. Rand Paul and Fauci got into a heated debate in a Senate hearing. But instead of providing answers, Fauci accused Sen. Paul of endangering him.

Sen. Paul joined "The Glenn Beck Program" Wednesday with his response and explained why he believes "people live in fear of what [Fauci] will do to them."

"It's all about money. If you cross Tony Fauci, you don't get your money. He controls the purse strings for the entire country, the entire university system. And he's been doing it for forty years," Sen. Paul began.

"It's consistent with his arrogance, this level of arrogance that he's developed. He said several weeks ago, that he is science and any attack on him is an attack on science. Yesterday, he said anybody who opposes him is encouraging death threats," he added.

"Look, I've been on the receiving end of semi-automatic gunfire. I was 20 yards away from Steve Scalise when he almost died. I was 10 feet away from a staffer that was shot. And, you know what? The guy doing the shooting was a Bernie Sanders supporter. But not one of us, not one of the Republicans on the ball field, said, 'Oh, it was Bernie Sanders' fault.' But that's the juvenile level of personal attack that Fauci is now stooping to. He is saying that the personal threats he gets are actually the fault of his critics."

Sen. Paul continued, "But the thing is, [Fauci] needs to answer the question. Everything he did in the committee yesterday was misdirection so he didn't have to answer the question. The question was, why did he smear three scientists from Stanford, Oxford, and Harvard? Why did he smear them as fringe epidemiologists? And why did he conspire against Francis Collins to take them down in a very public way? He wouldn't answer the question."

Watch the video clip below to hear more of Glenn's conversation with Sen. Rand Paul:


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Over the past year, an increasing number of voices on the left have pushed for radical changes to our way of life, from reforming capitalism to enacting strict vaccine mandates. But are the American people behind these changes? A recent poll from the Heartland Institute and Rasmussen sought to find out, and the results are startling. The three-part poll asked likely voters for their thoughts on the Great Reset (half said they don't know what that is), COVID-19 authoritarianism, and whether they prefer former President Donald Trump or President Joe Biden.

The Heartland Institute's Justin Haskins joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to break down the results of this exclusive poll, including the disturbing revelation that roughly half of Democrats polled supported shockingly authoritarian COVID-19 policies. For example, nearly half of Democrats polled said they think federal or state governments should require unvaccinated people to live in "designated areas or facilitates," or essentially camps. Nearly half of Democrats supported a proposal "to fine or imprison individuals" just for questioning the efficacy of the existing COVID-19 vaccines on social media, television, radio, or in online or digital publications. And, when asked if people who refuse to get vaccinated should lose custody of their children, 20% of Democrats answered "yes."

But the poll showed some good news, too. Watch the video clip below for more details:


Glenn and Justin’s new book, ‘The Great Reset: Joe Biden And The Rise Of 21st Century Fascism’ is available to order now.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) recently sent a fiery letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi demanding she stop obstructing GOP efforts to investigate security measures taken before and on January 6, 2021.

On "The Glenn Beck Program," Rep. Davis said the Capitol Police should release all communications concerning security from that day, but the police chief can’t do so without an "okay" from the House sergeant at arms — a Pelosi appointee. Americans deserve to know why the Capitol’s security posture was so bad that day, so we can be sure it won’t happen again, but unfortunately, Rep. Davis told Glenn, that may not occur until Republicans take the House majority back.

"Republicans condemn the violence that took place a year ago. That was unanimous," Davis said. "But here we are today still left wondering, what did the sergeant at arms of the House — the lead law enforcement official appointed directly by the speaker — what did he do in preparation leading up to January 6? There's been conflicting testimony, and all I've ever asked for, as the lead Republican on the respective oversight committee, is just to get the communications. We want to know what preparations were made, and the only person standing in the way of us getting the communications from her own appointee, who controls the House security operations, is Speaker Pelosi," he added.

"Unfortunately, the House is a very majority-driven institution. And remember, the Capitol Police chief cannot make a single security decision without going to Speaker Pelosi's appointed sergeant at arms. That's her own political appointee," Davis continued. "So, you know when I'm going to get this information? It's when I'm the chairman of the House Administration Committee when Republicans take over Congress in November of 2022."

Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation:


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.