Anarchy v. Totalitarian: The new right-left scale?

This morning on radio, Glenn talked about the importance of defining the real right and left in American politics. It might seem simplest to think of the right and left as Republicans and Democrats, but, as it turns out, the best right-left scale does not necessarily have anything to do with party lines.

“People think that, you know, the left is the Democrat and the right is the Republican. That's not true. Everything is upside down and that's just a lie,” Glenn said. “When you look at the real scale... On one side is anarchy and the other side is totalitarianism.”

When you look at this scale in terms of television coverage it becomes clear that whether you are watching Fox News or MSNBC, all of these networks are covering the same group of people. For example, people like John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Bill Clinton, and Chris Christie are accepted by all sides because, as Glenn put it, they are “an extremist on one end or the other… they go from one side to another.”

The fact that these men have a tendency of casting such a large net when it comes to what policies they choose to support, it becomes difficult to determine where they fall not on a right-left spectrum but on an anarchy-totalitarian scale.

“You know, we sat here at the chalkboard yesterday, Pat and I,” Glenn said. “I'm like, where does Chris Christie go? Where does he fit? Forget about left and right. Who does he fit with? I contend he fits with Bloomberg, Sunstein, Al Gore, and Newt Gingrich.”

Pat, on the other hand, had a slightly different interpretation of Christie. “He’s got some redeeming qualities and his redeeming qualities are really redeeming,” Pat said. “You know, look at the way we cheered for him at the beginning before we found out just how moderate he really is. But the things on which he's good, he is exceptional.”

On the chalkboard Glenn used on last night’s 5PM show, Christie was placed next to Newt Gingrich on scale. “I think Chris Christie does do some really good things and I think Newt Gingrich does as well,” Glenn said. “But the bottom line is: overall they see themselves as a bit too progressive in their vision of what government should do.”

Based on chalkboard, the establishment of the Republican and Democratic parties are all muddled in about the same place, but the most important people, the people Glenn feels could be the future of the GOP, are on a different chalkboard all together.

“We should actually be down in the other scale, past the edge of the Republican Party. And I put the edge of the Republican Party with Rubio and Paul Ryan,” Glenn said. “Those guys are accepted into the tent of the Republicans but not all the time. They could, they might be good on freedom, you know, but they could easily be sucked in the other way, don't you think?”

With Rubio and Ryan on the fringe of the establishment GOP, it will take people who fall to the right of them to actually affect any sort of change. “Then you move down the scale and you have Ted Cruz and Rand Paul… Then after that you have Ron Paul. I don't really put Ron there, but I put his supporters there… And then, then you have Penn Jillette. I know he's not political at all, but he's the guy who I think is at the edge of that line of, ‘No, I'm a libertarian and I don't care what happens" but he's still reasonable. He still knows there has to be some sort of a framework to be able to hold things together… He's not an anarchist.”

If the GOP’s comfort zone does not extend past Rubio and Ryan, as Glenn suggests, the race for 2016 is going to be a tough challenge.

“I think all these people, you know, you've got the, you know, the McConnell and the Boehner and the McCain and the Lindsey Graham and the Chris Christie. I've written those guys off. Written those guys off. We have 18 months before the political machine starts again. And if you really want to have a place at the table, I'm telling you now that Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, Paul Ryan and Rubio will either be destroyed by the machine in the next four years or sucked into the machine, one of the two,” Glenn said. “In the next 18 months, maybe even 12 months, we have to populate that area between Paul Ryan and Penn Jillette with people who we think will really stand, will buck the system and they don't care.”

“You know, Ted Cruz said there needs to be a third party. I think there does. We have to have a new party,” he concluded. “I would love to be able to use the structure and the framework of what they've already established, but what they've already established is garbage. It doesn't stand for anything. So I think we should start taking phone calls, I think we should start to these politicians.”

On the radio program Thursday, Glenn Beck sat down with chief researcher Jason Buttrill to go over two bombshell developments that have recently come to light regarding former Vice President Joe Biden's role in the 2016 dismissal of Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

"Wow! Two huge stories dropped within about 24 hours of each other," Jason began. He went on to explain that a court ruling in Ukraine has just prompted an "actual criminal investigation against Joe Biden in Ukraine."

This stunning development coincided with the release of leaked phone conversations, which took place in late 2015 and early 2016, allegedly among then-Vice President Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Ukraine's former President Petro Poroshenko.

One of the audiotapes seems to confirm allegations of a quid pro quo between Biden and Poroshenko, with the later admitting that he asked Shokin to resign despite having no evidence of him "doing anything wrong" in exchange for a $1 billion loan guarantee.

"Poroshenko said, 'despite the fact that we didn't have any corruption charges on [Shokin], and we don't have any information about him doing something wrong, I asked him to resign,'" Jason explained. "But none of the Western media is pointing this out."

Watch the video below for more details:


Listen to the released audiotapes in full here.

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

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 multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

A recently declassified email, written by former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and sent herself on the day of President Donald Trump's inauguration, reveals the players involved in the origins of the Trump-Russia probe and "unmasking" of then-incoming National Security Adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn.

Rice's email details a meeting in the Oval Office on Jan 5, 2017, which included herself, former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former Vice President Joe Biden, and former President Barack Obama. Acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grenell, fully declassified the email recently amid President Trump's repeated references to "Obamagate" and claims that Obama "used his last weeks in office to target incoming officials and sabotage the new administration."

On Glenn Beck's Wednesday night special, Glenn broke down the details of Rice's email and discussed what they reveal about the Obama administration officials involved in the Russia investigation's origins.

Watch the video clip below:

Fellow BlazeTV host, Mark Levin, joined Glenn Beck on his exclusive Friday episode of "GlennTV" to discuss why the declassified list of Obama administration officials who were aware of the details of Gen. Michael Flynn's wiretapped phone calls are so significant.

Glenn argued that Obama built a covert bureaucracy to "transform America" for a long time to come, and Gen. Flynn was targeted because he happened to know "where the bodies were buried", making him a threat to Obama's "secret legacy."

Levin agreed, noting the "shocking extent of the police state tactics" by the Obama administration. He recalled several scandalous happenings during Obama's "scandal free presidency," which nobody seems to remember.

Watch the video below for more:


Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

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.

Colleges and universities should be home to a lively and open debate about questions both current and timeless, independent from a political bias or rules that stifle speech. Unfortunately for students, speaking out about personal beliefs or challenging political dogma can be a dangerous undertaking. I experienced this firsthand as an undergraduate, and I'm fighting that trend now as an adjunct professor.

In 2013, Glenn Beck was one of the most listened to radio personalities in the world. For a college senior with hopes of working on policy and media, a job working for Glenn was a ticket to big things. I needed a foot in the door and hoped to tap into the alumni network at the small liberal arts school where I was an undergrad. When I met with a career services specialist in early March 2013 about possible alumni connections to Glenn Beck, she disdainfully told me: "Why would you want to work for someone like him?" That was the beginning and end of our conversation.

I was floored by her response, and sent an email to the school complaining that her behavior was inappropriate. Her personal opinions, political or otherwise, I argued, shouldn't play a role in the decision to help students.

That isn't the kind of response a student should hear when seeking guidance and help in kick starting their career. Regardless of the position, a career specialist or professors' opinion or belief shouldn't be a factor in whether the student deserves access to the alumni network and schools' resources.

Now, seven years later, I work full time for a law firm and part time as an adjunct teaching business to undergraduate students. The culture at colleges and universities seems to have gotten even worse, unfortunately, since I was an undergrad.

College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions.

I never want to see a student told they shouldn't pursue their goals, regardless of their personal or political beliefs. College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions. I never got access to the alumni network or schools' resources from the career services office.

Lucky for students in 2020, there are several legal organizations that help students protect their rights when an issue goes beyond what can be handled by an undergraduate facing tremendous pressure from a powerful academic institution. Organizations like Speech First and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), for instance, are resources I wish I knew about at the time.

When I experienced mistreatment from my college, I spoke up and challenged the behavior by emailing the administration and explaining what happened. I received a letter from the career services specialist apologizing for the "unprofessional comment."

What she described in that apology as a "momentary lapse of good judgement" was anything but momentary. It was indicative of the larger battle for ideas that has been happening on college campuses across the country. In the past seven years, the pressure, mistreatment and oppression of free expression have only increased. Even right now, some are raising concerns that campus administrations are using the COVID-19 pandemic to limit free speech even further. Social distancing guidelines and crowd size may both be used to limit or refuse controversial speakers.

Students often feel pressure to conform to a college or university's wishes. If they don't, they could be expelled, fail a class or experience other retribution. The college holds all the cards. On most campuses, the burden of proof for guilt in student conduct hearings is "more likely than not," making it very difficult for students to stand up for their rights without legal help.

As an adjunct professor, every student who comes to me for help in finding purpose gets my full support and my active help — even if the students' goals run counter to mine. But I have learned something crucial in my time in this role: It's not the job of an educator to dictate a student's purpose in life. I'm meant to help them achieve their dreams, no matter what.

Conner Drigotas is the Director of Communications and Development at a national law firm and is a Young Voices contributor.