No Obamacare: Whole Foods CEO John Mackey plans to open private office for employees to get free healthcare

Glenn has had a bit of a love-hate relationship with Whole Foods over the years (let us not forget the story about the torture of lobsters during transport), but he has always had a tremendous amount of respect for Whole Foods co-CEO, John Mackey.

Mackey is a libertarian at heart, who has managed to gain favor with the left and the right because of his tremendous business sense and the company he has created. Glenn has been talking a lot about the “Golden Circle” lately – the idea that it is the ‘why’ not the ‘what’ that matters most in business. Mackey’s latest book, Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business, tackles these themes and explains the importance of capitalism and the entrepreneurial spirit.

On radio this morning, Glenn interviewed Mackey about his latest book and the business model that has made Whole Foods so successful. View the full transcript of the interview below:

GLENN: Hi, John. How are you?

MACKEY: Very well. How are you doing?

GLENN: I'm really good. I'm thrilled to see someone stand up for capitalism, but a different kind of capitalism that I think is what we all want capitalism to be. Too many people are not doing it.

MACKEY: Yes. Capitalism is the greatest creation humanity has done for social cooperation. It has lifted humanity out of the dirt. In statistics we discovered when we researching the book, about 200 years ago when capitalism was created, 85% of the people alive lived on $1 a day. Toady, that number is 16%. Still too high, but capitalism is wiping out poverty across the world. 200 years ago illiteracy rates were 90%. Today, they are down to about 14%. 200 years ago the average lifespan was 30. Today it is 68 across the world, 78 in the States, almost 82 in Japan. This is due to business. This is due to capitalism. And it doesn’t get credit for it. Most of the time, business is portrayed by its enemies as selfish and greedy and exploitative, yet it's the greatest value creator in the world.

GLENN: I've been reading a lot of 19th century history, especially around Edison, and Tesla, and GE. There is – there was back then, and there is now, the greedy capitalist that doesn't care, and then there's the capitalist that does care, the Westinghouse of the day that is trying to do the right thing and sees his product as something with value, sells it at a proper price but is trying to create something of real value and holds to his principles. When that happens you have happy employees; you have happy customers; and you create value all around. However, even in today's world, look at what the symbol of the person that represents capitalism, at least if you're a conservative, I guess would be Donald Trump. That doesn't seem like happiness at all. The ‘why’ is: my name is in gold and I've got a whole bunch of money in the end.

MACKEY: Business is judged, unfortunately, by its worst actors. There are greedy doctors too, and there are plenty of greedy lawyers. There are bad actors in every profession. Business tends to be judged by its very worst practitioners: the Enrons, the World Coms, and the Bernie Madoff's. And they are the ones that capture the media's attention, and it's extended to all of business. Most business people though are ethical, and they create value for their customers, for their employees, for their suppliers, their investors, and the communities they are a part of. Business is fundamentally about voluntary exchange for mutual benefit. And it shouldn't be judged by its worst actors any more than all doctors should be slandered because a doctor misdiagnosed a disease or took out the wrong kidney. That doesn’t mean all are bad. That means there are a few that are. I think that is the same way in business.

GLENN: The name of the book by John Mackey is Conscious Capitalism. Tell me the difference – you talk about it here – but can you sum it up – the difference between what you're talking about and corporate social responsibility.

MACKEY: The biggest difference between corporate social responsibility and conscious capitalism is corporate social responsibility takes the standard sort of profit centric model of the purpose of business is to maximize profits, and then it grafts on to what it calls corporate social responsibility, which is usually a department that reports through public relations and marketing in an attempt to help the brand image of the company. It may just be skin deep. It may not have any authenticity to it, whereas conscious capitalism starts with the principle of creating a business having a higher purpose than just making money and creating value for all of its interdependent state holders, which includes the community. So creating value for stake holders including the community is at the essence of the conscious business or the conscious capitalistic company. It’s not an add on. It's not grafted on. It's why the business exists in the first place. That's the biggest difference.

GLENN: I have – the Ayn Rand people have a problem with me, and I don’t have a problem with the Ayn Rand people, they have a problem with me because I believe in charity, and I believe in doing good. But I don't believe in forcing anybody. That’s why I have a problem with a lot of our tax structure. You're forcing me to do it, and it doesn't change my heart in a good way. It changes my heart in a bad way. I lived in New York for a while. You eventually end up saying, ‘Why isn’t the city taking care of this?’ instead of you doing it. You know the Ayn Rand philosophy is much of just the greed is good and go make it because you want to do it, and you want to build something, and it only belongs to you. Where I think if you are doing part of that – if you are following that, you are following your passion. Your passion is because you want to it but also because it is doing something good. That's where the real magic happens.

MACKEY: I tend to – on this particular discussion I happen to side with you on it.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

MACKEY: A lot of the Ayn Rand people don’t like me either for a similar reason. But I admire Ayn Rand’s novels a great deal.

GLENN: So do I.

MACKEY: They are wonderful novels and had an impact on me particularly when I was younger. But I think she is fundamentally wrong when she makes a distinction between the kind of a straw man that people are completely self-interested or they're altruistic. It seems obvious to me that humans are both self-interested but we also care about others. We also have ideals. We also want to do good. And so I don't see it. She's fundamentally, I think, wrong. Glenn when you consider the fact that Gallup shows that the overall approval rating of big business in America is down to 19%. That means 81% do not approve of it. So I think when you say it’s all about selfishness and greed then you have basically fallen into the – you’re reinforcing the critics perspective and it’s harming the overall brand image and reputation of business in the world. Business is about creating value for other people and voluntary exchange. It is the greatest value creator in the world. It's what's making all the different. But if we are going to let it be portrayed as fundamentally selfish and greedy, we’ve already lost the argument before we even begin it.

GLENN: There's no problem with making money. If you are in the banking or Wall Street industry, at the end of your days you can say, ‘I helped create business. I helped lift people out of poverty.’ But the creation of money in and of itself – money is a tool. It’s not a destination. It's a vehicle.

MACKEY: I agree.

GLENN: And too many people don't understand that.

MACKEY: The money is produced through exchange, through voluntary exchange. You create value. You create goods and services that other people voluntarily buy because it is in your best interest to do so. You usually have competition for their money and their time, and their energy. If you're producing a profit, it’s because – and I'm not saying there's not crooked businesses out there, but they are rare and not the most common ones. If you produce money it’s because you've created value for others and they've exchanged with you. Your profit is justly earned through the creation of value for other people.

GLENN: I will tell you John, when I first saw Whole Foods, I didn't go into your store. I think I rolled my eyes when I first saw your store because I thought, ‘oh is this the new marketing thing now? Oh look at us.’ I think that’s the problem with business now. We've been marketed to our whole life. If you were born past 1950, you've been marketed to your entire life. And so you can spot a fraud now really pretty fast. And everybody seems to be a fraud, and I think that the media, and way we spin stories and everything else tends to make everybody a fraud. Over time all I had to do was walk into one of your stores you can feel the difference. You can tell when a company means it and when it's just a show. And that is extraordinarily difficult to do.

MACKEY: Well, thank you. I do think that the world and people today, you are absolutely right, we have been marketed to. We’ve been spun to. It's one of the reasons we have trouble liking most of our politicians. We don't feel like they're telling us the truth. We always feel like they are telling us, they are spinning to us, they are deceiving us. Politicians do that. Advertisers do it. There's a strong desire for basic authenticity, for basic integrity, and truth telling. And we want that in our products. We want that in with the businesses we trade with. We like to have it with our politicians. I do think Whole Foods is very authentic. I appreciate you for recognizing that.

GLENN: I've got two issues, if you don’t mind me having a private session with you here for a second. I have two issues. One, I refuse to dump my employees into government healthcare because it stinks, and I don't even want to dump my employees into cheaper healthcare. I currently pay 100% of the deductible. They don't put anything in it. We have the best healthcare money can buy. But it is increasingly becoming more and more difficult for me to do that. I want to think out of the box. I've told my employees if it comes down to it, if I can I'll build my own damn hospital and hire our own doctors. But we have to think out of the box. A, do you know anything on the horizon that is good for healthcare that is reasonable. Two, how do you move a company and make sure that it stays on that course as it grows? Six years ago we had six employees, and I think we're approaching 300 employees now and it's extraordinarily difficult especially in a fast growth business to hold that culture down. How do you do it?

MACKEY: It's very challenging. And it's good you're asking these questions. First on that – we’ll get back to the culture in a second – I applaud you for your idea. It’s interesting you say that about the hospital. Whole Foods is going to do a similar experiment. We’re going to open a doctor's office in L.A. that will be free for all of our team members and their dependants.

GLENN: That is exactly what we are thinking.

MACKEY: And if that works, we're going to spread it to other cities around the country, where we have our stores.

GLENN: May we watch and learn from you?

MACKEY: Sure, we believe that 80% of what we spend on healthcare in America are for diseases like heart disease and stroke and obesity, type 2 diabetes, cancer, and autoimmune diseases, and they really correlate very closely with what people eat, and the type of lifestyle we live. So the best way we can cut healthcare costs and help our people to be healthier is to help educate them and teach them. We can't force them, and we don’t want to force them. But we want to help educate them to eat healthier, and have a healthier lifestyle. We think that will be beneficial to people's health, and cut down on healthcare expenses so it's a win win. We think we need to do that best with doctors. With doctors that people trust and they know, and will tend to all of their medical needs while we're trying to educate them. We're going to do that experiment. I’m pretty excited about it. We’ve got our office located. We've hired our doctor. We'll be getting going on that in a month or two.

GLENN: Good for you. Good for you.

MACKEY: So good luck with your hospital.

GLENN: Thank you very much. Well, we’ll probably start with one doctor in an office.

MACKEY: Your second question was about culture, and how do you maintain that culture as you rapidly grow. I think it's important that you create what your own higher purpose is for your organization, and make sure everybody knows that. You’re the entrepreneur, so you may have a vision but you've got to be able to communicate what that vision is and get other people to understand it and share it. And then you need to consciously begin to create the culture that will reinforce that purpose. Decide the cultural traits that your organization needs to have. We write about that in the book. Things like empowerment and love and care trying to manage without fear are very important culture traits, and so you have to pay attention to that because if you don't your culture will get created anyway, and it may not be the way you want it to be in terms of the goals you want to see your organization achieve. It's good that you're becoming more conscious about culture, and if you're conscious about it you can act in ways to help your organization flourish.

GLENN: John, it's a real pleasure to talk to you. And I applaud you for what your company has done. I applaud your stance on capitalism, and applaud you for your book on trying to awaken more entrepreneurs and more capitalists. Capitalism has to be saved and the only way to do it is to actually start to highlight those people who are doing it right and proving that it is the greatest system for compassion in the history of the world.

MACKEY: Thank you Glenn. Interesting statistic that I don't know if your listeners know about it, but Of course the United States for the longest time had the highest degree of economic freedom in the world. In as short a period of time ago as 2000, we ranked number 3 behind Hong Kong and Singapore. Now in 2012 we fell down to number 18.

GLENN: Geez.

MACKEY: And as our economic freedom declines so does our prosperity – 7.9 percent unemployment. In the last decade we've actually seen for the first time in American history, the disposable income per capita actually declined. It’s the first time over a ten year period. We're losing our economic freedom and with it our prosperity. I think the first step is for business to begin to defend itself in a more cogent way, and that starts with purpose, and stake holder philosophy, and those are the principles we outline in the book.

GLENN: John. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

MACKEY: Thank you so much, Glenn.

GLENN: God bless. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the heroic spirit of business. A must, must read by John Mackey. Available everywhere. Finally somebody with some clout is doing it.

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.