Glenn: "This should scare the living bat snot out of every American"

August 13, 2013

Writer

Tonight, I want to talk to you about science. I want to talk to you about the pinheads that think that they are better than you. President Obama has recruited a bunch of behavioral scientists, yes, a behavioral insights team. This should scare the living bat snot out of every American. We’re not for propaganda, right?

Are we for the kind of stuff that Goebbels was using? Because that’s what he did. He figured out if I put enough images of rats in front of people, and I say “Jew” every time you see a rat, will they start thinking that those rats are vermin? Yes, as it turns out, yes. And so we’ve always had this understanding in America, we don’t do propaganda. We’ve always been against it.

And to have some creepy behavioral scientists standing around in lab coats looking at the American public as rats, that’s a problem – at least it used to be. What they try to do is to suddenly influence your behavior, to make the government more efficient – that’s what the president says – no, to get you to do what the government wants you to do.

Behavioral science, it’s a key weapon. The president used it. In fact, he used a “consortium of behavioral scientists.” Oh, he did that during the 2008 election, and then he used it again in 2012, and nobody said anything about it, scientists looking at you like a lab rat. Cass Sunstein, this is one of the big problems I have with him. He is the behavioral science mastermind. He wrote about it and how it can be tested on the public in his book Nudge.

This is critical for people to understand. Progressives are not progressed. They’re not enlightened. They are early 20th century thinkers. They view themselves as superior to the rest of society. They think they know what’s best for you, what’s best for society, eat more carrots, drive hybrids, support the overthrow of regimes they don’t like, Libya, Syria. Oh, wait a minute. Libya and Syria, that’s the Progressives in the Democratic Party –

oh no, and also the Republican Party.

The secret is they always try to win people over with public debate. Wilson did it. FDR did it. This president has done it. And when they can’t win you over with debate, not because, you know, their solution is stupid, but because they honestly believe the American people are too stupid, they have to find another way to get people to behave the way they feel you should be behaving. That’s where behavioral science comes into play.

Now, I guess the ultimate behavioral scientists some people would say would be God and our churches, because that’s what used to control our behavior. But now you can’t leave your church because your church is the federal government. God is in Washington. And instead of preaching to you and telling you you should choose or you’re going to go to hell, what they have is choice architecture, where they remove all of the bad choices and leave people with only the good choices.

They argue that people are still free to make choices – you know, you can eat the flag, you can eat grass, or you could have a banana. You still have a choice. Which one do you want? They’ve trapped you in a box. Nobody’s going to eat this. Nobody I know…well, actually I do know some hippies out in California that blend this up and drink it. Anybody sane is eating this out of this choice architecture.

That’s how behavioral science works. It’s based in manipulation, coercion, and control. All of these attributes are distinctly un-American, but they are the cornerstone of the progressive ideology. Don’t take my word for it. Look it up.

This manipulation goes all the way back to the progressive pioneer Edward Bernays. This is the guy who really started selling soap. He was dubbed “the father of spin.” He was the master of swaying public opinion. We’ve talked about him several times. He changed how Americans ate breakfast. We used to have, I believe, coffee and a piece of toast. After Bernays, it was ham and eggs. That’s what it was for breakfast.

He made the cigarette sexy. He’s the one that got everybody smoking cigarettes in movies. One of Bernays’ greatest manipulations was his work, believe it or not, with bananas, the United Fruit Company. Based in Guatemala, the United Fruit Company gained incredible power because we started eating bananas.

The United States started importing bananas in the late 1800s, and the United Fruit Company dominated much of the country and portions of almost a dozen countries in the Western Hemisphere due to the power and control of corrupt dictators. And what would happen is these bad dictators would just give the United Fruit Company massive swaths of land as gifts, and then the United Fruit Company kind of like GE, what GE does today, just does whatever the dictator wants.

Unfortunately, the power for the United Fruit Company was challenged in the 1950s, and Guatemala elected a president who promised to take on the fruit producer and reduce their power through land reforms. Now this threatened these guys, and they turned to an army, an army of one, Edward Bernays.

VIDEO
United Fruit brings in Bernays, and he basically understood that what United Fruit Company had to do was change this from being a popularly elected government that was doing some things that were good for the people there into to this being very close to the American shore, a threat to American democracy, that it being at a time in the Cold War when Americans responded to issues of the Red Scare and what Communism might do.
He was trying to transform this and brilliantly did transform it into an issue of a communist threat very close to our shores, taking United Fruit again as a commercial client out of the picture and making it look like a question of American democracy, American values being threatened. “The Century of the Self,” British Broadcasting Corporation.

Okay, was that right or wrong? Almost every American would say that’s wrong, tell the truth. Bernays unleashed a propaganda war of epic proportions. He sent reporters to Guatemala on fact-finding missions. He set out to paint the new president as a Communist, even though he wasn’t a Communist. Bernays played on the fears of the American public because he had bananas to sell. He even created a fake news agency.

VIDEO
He also created a fake independent news agency in America called the Middle American Information Bureau. It bombarded the American media with press releases saying that Moscow was planning to use Guatemala as a beachhead to attack America. “The Century of the Self,” British Broadcasting Corporation

Okay, not true. Suddenly the news reports started hitting major American media. “Articles began appearing in the New York Times, the New York Herald Tribune, the Atlantic Monthly, Time, Newsweek, the New Leader and other publications, all discussing the growing influence of Guatemala’s Communists.” Really?

He also tried to soften the company’s image. This is what he did, Senorita Chiquita banana – I’m a Chiquita banana, and I’m here to say. Bernays wasn’t interested in conducting merely a PR war. He was also conducting an actual war, a revolution. Bernays was working to forge a new network of intelligence agents in Central America expressly to discredit the regime. It led to a successful coup d’état which was engineered by the U.S. government and the CIA.

You want to know why there are so many Communists down in Central America that hate our guts? Because of Edward Bernays. Here’s an example of the media barrage and the U.S. engaging. Look at this 1950s newsreel.

VIDEO
On the Guatemala-Honduras border, the town of Nueva Ocotepeque, headquarters of the Guatemala insurgents, is invaded by a planeload of American newsmen, including Al Waldren, Movietone veteran war photographer. Here to bring the world reliable newsreel reports from this latest global hotspot, his camera catches a press interview with secondary anti-Communist liberation leaders, Captain Menbieto and Colonel Lopez, who with maps explain how they hope to capture the capital city. Massing for an advance against the Communist dominated forces of Pres. Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán, the liberation patriots are well equipped with small arms.

Believe it or not, this is why people hate, they hate Capitalism too, because all for the sale of the banana. Many believe the anti-American protests were staged and orchestrated by Bernays himself. Bernays had masterfully created an entirely different and alternate universe.

VIDEO
He totally understood that the coup would happen when the public and the press when conditions in the public and the press allowed for a coup to happen, and he created those conditions. He was totally savvy in terms of just what he was helping create there in terms of this overthrow. But ultimately he was reshaping reality, reshaping public opinion in a way that’s undemocratic and manipulative. “The Century of the Self,” British Broadcasting Corporation

I will tell you that that’s exactly what happened again in Egypt and Libya. Now, after this coup, Guatemala went back to an oppressive dictatorship controlled by the banana people. In fact, it is this story where the term “banana republic” was born. Over the next 40 years, four decades, 200,000 in Guatemala alone were killed in guerrilla attacks, government crackdowns, civil wars all across Latin America, just so he could protect the banana people, perpetual revolution.

Oh, and one other thing about this revolution, as always, there are unintended consequences. At the time, there was this young Argentine leftist. He was an activist. He happened to be in Guatemala during this particular coup staged by Edward Bernays. He was a supporter of the president. And after the coup, he became so angry that he actually said it’s time for a revolution, and he became a revolutionary himself. His name, Che.

Che concluded that the Guatemalan coup was successful because the president just didn’t kill enough people. And during his violent time in Cuba, he made sure that same mistake wasn’t made again, personally ordering the execution of hundreds of political opponents and executing many of them himself. Enjoy your Chiquita banana

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep