Mark Levin explains why we now live in ‘post-Constitutional’ society

On radio this morning, Glenn spoke to fellow conservative author and radio personality Mark Levin about his latest book, The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Public. Much like Glenn, Mark has been making the case that the principles and values that founded this nation have unraveled. In his new book, Mark provides a thorough look at the beliefs of the Founding Fathers and the language of the Constitution itself to put forth a plan to restore the American Republic.

Today’s radio interview marked the first time Glenn and Mark had ever spoken, and they quickly found that they agree on a lot of things – mainly, there is an ever-growing need to restore America.

“Tell me about the amendments because first of all, I don't think people understand what has been taken out of our Constitution and how much we have been changed in the last hundred years,” Glenn said. “People don't even understand the czars are not Constitutional and everything that has happened. You're calling for a Constitutional Convention.”

“We live in what I call a ‘post-Constitutional' period. And you're well familiar with Woodrow Wilson and the Progressive movement. We have to accept the fact that they won. They did win and this utopian statism and Constitutional Republicanism cannot coexist. And they don't coexist,” Mark explained. And the circle of liberty around every individual is shrinking and shrinking and shrinking… So if you believe in the Constitution, then you have to believe it's time to reestablish it.”

“And the Framers gave us one way to reestablish the Constitution, should the federal government become oppressive. And that's George Mason's own words from the Constitutional Convention,” he continued. “And two days before the end of at that Convention, in Philadelphia, he stood up and he said: ‘Look, what if Congress becomes oppressive? What if this new government becomes oppressive? Short of violence, what can the people do? Congress is not going to propose amendments to the states to fix themselves.’ And so, he insisted that the states have the power to get together and propose amendments to all the states – still requiring three-fourths ratification. And so, we can talk about the culture, and you do and I do, and we can talk about aspects like that. But when we're talking about the Constitution, people say, ‘I thought Levin he revered the Constitution, now you want to change it.’ No, I want to bring it back. And the book has some of my ideas.”

With that idea in mind, Glenn and Mark went on to discuss the practicality and ramifications of undertaking such a movement.

“Pat and I've been talking about the Constitutional Convention. We talked about it for years, and Pat said, ‘No, no, no,’” Glenn concluded. “I think there's something to this case. And I think Mark just made that case.”

Watch the entire interview below:

Read a rough transcript below:

GLENN: In this last week, we have seen in Texas, and in South Carolina, the Constitution being taught in textbooks in ways that you don't even recognize the Constitution anymore. Being taught in, in ways that make the Second Amendment really only four militias and if you're trying to stop the quartering the soldiers in your home, only at peace time it's really amazing what's going on and it is prompted me this week, to say to you that I don't, I don't think you are losing your country. I think you've lost your country. I think we've lost at least one generation, perhaps two. And if we don't start immediately restoring the information and putting things back we're not going to make it.

Mark Levin is a talk show host who has the number one non fiction book now for three straight weeks. And it is called The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic. Mark how are you sir?

MARK LEVIN: I'm good nice to meet you. How are you?

GLENN: Nice to meet you I was trying to, I asked this morning if we had ever met or even spoke to each other I don't think we ever have?

MARK LEVIN: We have never.

GLENN: Well, I'm glad to have you on the program.

MARK LEVIN: And I want your audience to know you sent me a very kind letter. And you're a patriot and you're fighting like hell and this is very, very important.

GLENN: Tell me about the amendments because you have at first of all, I don't think people understand what has been taken out of our constitution and how much we have been changed in the last, in the last hundred years people don't even understand the czars are not constitutional and everything that is, has happened. You're calling for a constitutional convention.

MARK LEVIN: We live what I call a post-constitutional period. And you're well familiar with Woodrow Wilson and the Progressive movement. We have to accept the fact that they

won. They did win and this utopian statism and constitutional Republicanism cannot coexist. And they don't coexist. And the circle of liberty around every individual is shrinking and shrinking and shrinking. People think I'm prone. I can go to of movies, I can go bowling I can get my IPhone. That's not what we're talking about. You're not free to pick your toilet. You're not free to pick your light bulb, yet you're free to pick your rulers. This doesn't make any sense. And we have this pubic by at this time all powerful central government the federal government that exists today is not in the Constitution. So I start with that premise. And I start with the premise that the Supreme Court is constantly rewriting Constitution as is the President and Congress and this massive fourth branch the Government. This administrative state that's not even in the Constitution. So if you believe in the Constitution, then you have to believe it's time to reestablish it.

And so, the framers gave us one way to reestablish the Constitution. Should the federal government become oppressive and that's George Mason's own words that the Constitutional convention. And two days before the end of at that convention, in Philadelphia, he stood up and he said, look, what if Congress becomes oppressive. What if this new government becomes oppressive. Short of violence, what can the people do? Congress is not going to propose amendments to the states to fix itself. And so, he insisted that the States have the power to get together and propose amendments to all the states. Still requiring three-fourths ratification. And so, we can talk about the culture and you do and I do and we can talk about aspects like that. But when we're talking about the Constitution, people say, I thought Levin he revered the Constitution, now you want to change it. No, I want to bring it back. And the book has some of my ideas.

GLENN: Hang on just a second. Are you talking about a constitutional convention because, I have heard people talk about a constitutional convention before.

MARK LEVIN: No.

GLENN: And that is a frightening prospect. You're talking about something entirely different.

MARK LEVIN: First of all, the Constitution doesn't talk about a constitutional convention. The article five talks about a convention of the states to propose amendments. There can't be a constitutional convention. The language that the framers in Philadelphia wrote, was two methods for amending the Constitution one led by Congress, the other led by the states. Either we believe in federalism or we don't. They did. It's the states legislatures in particular. Not the governor, not the Court, the states legislatures.

GLENN: Do we need, how many dates do we need and do they all have to show up can one state start it and say, this is what we, this is what we propose we do. And then they try to sell it to other states.

MARK LEVIN: That's the way it would work. I mean, they're not going to say, hey, guys let's have a convention and amend the Constitution. No, states are going to start, what used to happen is states would have meetings. That's what they meant by convention. And they would talk and they try and work out their differences and they come up with agreements. And then they would sends them back to the states for approval. The Constitutional convention, itself, in 1787, people wrongly state, you know they were there to amend the articles of confederation. Well I looked at the, at the commissions and that's what they recalled. That were given the delegates to the Constitutional convention and they were not there ten out of the 12 states to amend the Articles of Confederation. They were there to draft a constitution.

And so, people attack our constitution as some kind of bastardized process. There wasn't a bastardized process. And as you know Rhode Island didn't even send delegates to the convention. So, what we're talking about here, the language is limiting within article five. But we're talking about here I a convention of the states for proposing amendments and still requiring three-fourths of the states to ratify. What the --

GLENN: What's the most, where would you say you start?

MARK LEVIN: In terms of the amendment.

GLENN: That you could win? And that are you saying that you do all of them? Or are you saying we start with one and get that passed and then do another? How does this work, Mark?

MARK LEVIN: The way it works is, that the state Legislature would decide how many one, 10, three, subjects will be raised at this convention. The state legislatures picked the delegates, as many as they want. Each state gets a vote. We know this from past practice. One vote. Each state. At the, at this convention. And they can bring up multiple subjects. They can bring up one subject. The State legislatures can withdraw their delegates this their delegates are out of control and the states in the end, three-fourths of them have to decide if what comes out of this convention is acceptable or not.

GLENN: I see, I mean, the things that you spell out in the book, I happen to agree with. Term limits on Congress. Term limits the Supreme Court. The super majority can override the Supreme Court rulings. Make the U.S. senate a voice for the States again. Amen. However, you and I both know, the game that we have all been duped to some level or another, the people we thought were on our side, are not really on our side. The GOP is a nightmare. And perhaps a bigger nightmare than the Democrats, because they are, their people are awake, their people that support them are saying, no, we are electing you to do these things. And then they go in and say they're going to do them but for instance, you know, the universal health care they voted 41 times against this they say. They're not going to defund it.

MARK LEVIN: No they're not. And that's why this is the recourse. Because it by passes Congress. It by passes the GOP establishment. It bypasses the Supreme Court, the President, the bureaucracy. This is completely bottom up. The people working with state delegates and state senators, it's states legislatures.

Let's me tell you this, Glenn. In this system doesn't work,we're done. That means it's over. Because the top down system, the Progressives placed in the Constitution, with a centralized authoritarian ubiquitous government. We can't get anywhere with that. We can argue, we can win an election here and there, we may get arrested for four years or eight years.

GLENN: No, if you think Mitt Romney, I was not for Mitt Romney. He was my last choice. And I'll never go down the GOP road again I'll never do it again I'm not going to listen to that argument ever, ever, ever again. And if you think that Mitt Romney would not have been going into Syria and making a similar case, I mean he was making it during the election.

GLENN: So what do we do about it?

MARK LEVIN: Well, you a, don't go down the party road and you don't listen to the GOP anymore. And I think one of the things we do, is we look at the framers. And the framers said, this sort of thing likely to happen. George Mason said it's going to happen. And he said there has to be a way out. And the way out that they provide us with, that's for some reason people fear the State legislatures. Look, I know there's dark blue states out there. There's all over the place. I don't believe in static economics and I don't believe in static politics. Things get worse and they are going to get bad. Because you can see what their fighting over. They're fighting over crumbs in Washington this government almost wrote the way it operates now, it keeps moving in one direction. At some point in some way they have spent a hundred years or more driving us over the cliff. We need to spend, 20, 25 years, some period of time, trying the process with the framers gave us. Use th Constitution to save the Constitution.

PAT: Mark, once of the arguments against the convention route has always been once you open it up you open it up to everything and they can change things like, maybe they make that, maybe they try to make the Second Amendment about militias only and not the rights of the individual. So, how do you, how do you address that concern, do you just believe that you wouldn't get 37 states to, to adopt that amendment?

MARK LEVIN: In advance, the states have to decide what the subject matter is, where they're going to go with it. I don't believe there's going to be two-thirds of the State that say, states legislatures that say let's abolish the second amount amendment. But if they do, it's over. In other words, where do we go? If that's the position of the federal government, and the position of a super majority of the State governments, it's over, isn't it?

PAT: Yeah, it would be.

MARK LEVIN: Bottom line is, if the people want to surrender to tyranny. It's over either way. If you want to surrender to tyranny, then it's tyranny they get.

GLENN: You're making a very good case here, Mark. I'm really at that points to where look if this is what you want, I'm never going to make a part of it. I'm not going do go, I won't play your game. I would go on my dying breath fight for freedom as I understand it and fighting for the Constitution of the United States of America. And I will instill it in my children. But if that's what you want to do, just let's be open and honest about it. That's what you want, that's what you're voting for, good. Go for it. Take it.

MARK LEVIN: But the thing is, the reason the left has never gone through this approach, never, and the reason they would fight this approach, is they are getting damn near everything they want tomorrow down. They've not going to wants to work bottom up. And let's keep something in mind. There are tens of millions of us who still love this country. Who still love the Constitution. Who still revere our heritage. And we're looking for ways to deal with this. And we can keep beating our heads against the wall, elect more Republicans. Well, we had six years of Bush in the House and senate and other than Obama, it was the profligate out of control periods in federal recent federal history. So we can do that. But.

GLENN: Look at all the people in the house. They have the chance to stop the universal health care. They have the chance to stop it right now. And they're not doing it. And those are Republicans.

MARK LEVIN: I'm with you, that's why I wrote this book. I'm with you.

GLENN: Yeah.

MARK LEVIN: What I'm saying is, look, here's the thing. People aren't perfect, our institutions aren't perfect. There's no absolute 100% foolproof system or proposal that can be made. Countries are not guaranteed perpetual existence. They are just not. When people say what can we do, what can we do. I rack my brain and I do what I usually do. I go back and look at our founding and I look at our history and even before then. And the framers, even though they set up this magnificent constitution, they were concerned that if would be breached. If you don't have people of virtue in these positions then you have what, over tyranny. So, this, this is the approach that they left us. I just thought it was time to remind people about it. To make the case for it. I mean -- I hear all the mights. I hear, you know, the convention can be hijacked. Hhjacked by whom. They're not going to get three-fourths of the states to abolish the Second Amendment. And as I said, if we do it's over we have to look somewhere else I guess, but that's not going to happen. Because the Legislatures decide who the delegates are. They can pull them back. And you'll always can have 13 states stop anything. Stop anything. If we can't find 13 states to stop something, do you know right now,13 states can't stop the Supreme Court. They can't stop Congress. They can't stop an imperial president. In other words, it's not like we have this magnificent constitution that's being complied with. We don't. It's not being complied with. So, what's the alternative? If somebody else has another plan, I would love to see it.

GLENN: Mark, I have to tell you, there's, I think people expect that everybody's going to come up with the answer and, and you know, people I get people yelling at me all the time. Why are you doing this, why are you doing that. Well, because I play my role in the -- I don't have all the answers. I have no idea. I'm not a constitutional scholar. I'm not a attorney. I know my role. And my role is to try to effect the culture. That's where I am headed and that I think is an important piece. But we all have to understand that we each play a different role. Each of us. And you know, just like the founders, I mean, I am always, I'm always amazed at how Thomas Payne and George Washington, got together and if it wasn't for those two men, each of them, coming with their own special talents, the American experiment would've never happened. Never happened.

And yet, they died hating each other. And one's an atheist and one reveres God. They couldn't be two more different. Men that there were there. And you look at Sam Adams and, I mean all of them. Each of us play a role and I have to thank you for playing your role. Really, really good case. Really good case. And maybe you're onto the answer. Somebody needs to figure out how to fix Washington. And I certainly don't know how the hell to do it because it's a mess. Good job.

MARK LEVIN: Well thanks, Glenn. I don't know that I have the answer. I'm just trying to remind people what the framers argued for and it's certainly worth taking a look I think God bless you and your staff there.

GLENN: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Mark Levin, the Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic. I am so busy reading other books right now, on other topics, but I don't know if that wasn't a case to read this book, I don't know what is. Pat and I've been talking about the Constitutional convention. We talked about it for years and Pat said, no, no, no. I think there's something to this case. And I think, I think Mark just made that case. It's the Liberty Amendments. Restoring the American Republic available everywhere books are sold.

Most self-proclaimed Marxists know very little about Marxism. Some of them have all the buzzwords memorized. They talk about the exploits of labor. They talk about the slavery of capitalist society and the alienation caused by capital. They talk about the evils of power and domination.

But they don't actually believe what they say. Or else they wouldn't be such violent hypocrites. And we're not being dramatic when we say "violent."

For them, Marxism is a political tool that they use to degrade and annoy their political enemies.

They don't actually care about the working class.

Another important thing to remember about Marxists is that they talk about how they want to defend the working class, but they don't actually understand the working class. They definitely don't realize that the working class is composed mostly of so many of the people they hate. Because, here's the thing, they don't actually care about the working class. Or the middle class. They wouldn't have the slightest clue how to actually work, not the way we do. For them, work involves ranting about how work and labor are evil.

Ironically, if their communist utopia actually arrived, they would be the first ones against the wall. Because they have nothing to offer except dissent. They have no practical use and no real connection to reality.

Again ironically, they are the ultimate proof of the success of capitalism. The fact that they can freely call for its demise, in tweets that they send from their capitalistic iPhones, is proof that capitalism affords them tremendous luxuries.

Their specialty is complaining. They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They sneer at Christianity for promising Heaven in exchange for good deeds on earth — which is a terrible description of Christianity, but it's what they actually believe — and at the same time they criticize Christianity for promising a utopia, they give their unconditional devotion to a religion that promises a utopia.

They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They think capitalism has turned us into machines. Which is a bad interpretation of Marx's concept of the General Intellect, the idea that humans are the ones who create machines, so humans, not God, are the creators.

They think that the only way to achieve the perfect society is by radically changing and even destroying the current society. It's what they mean when they say things about the "status quo" and "hegemony" and the "established order." They believe that the system is broken and the way to fix it is to destroy, destroy, destroy.

Critical race theory actually takes it a step farther. It tells us that the racist system can never be changed. That racism is the original sin that white people can never overcome. Of course, critical race theorists suggest "alternative institutions," but these "alternative institutions" are basically the same as the ones we have now, only less effective and actually racist.

Marx's violent revolution never happened. Or at least it never succeeded. Marx's followers have had to take a different approach. And now, we are living through the Revolution of Constant Whining.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.

Americans are losing faith in our justice system and the idea that legal consequences are applied equally — even to powerful elites in office.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to detail what he believes will come next with the Durham investigation, which hopefully will provide answers to the Obama FBI's alleged attempts to sabotage former President Donald Trump and his campaign years ago.

Rep. Nunes and Glenn assert that we know Trump did NOT collude with Russia, and that several members of the FBI possibly committed huge abuses of power. So, when will we see justice?

Watch the video clip 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.

The corporate media is doing everything it can to protect Dr. Anthony Fauci after Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) roasted him for allegedly lying to Congress about funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China.

During an extremely heated exchange at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Paul challenged Dr. Fauci — who, as the director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, oversees research programs at the National Institute of Health — on whether the NIH funded dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Dr. Fauci denied the claims, but as Sen. Paul knows, there are documents that prove Dr. Fauci's NIH was funding gain-of-function research in the Wuhan biolab before COVID-19 broke out in China.

On "The Glenn Beck Program," Glenn and Producer Stu Burguiere presented the proof, because Dr. Fauci's shifting defenses don't change the truth.

Watch the video clip 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.

Critical race theory: A special brand of evil

wal_172619/Pixabay

Part of what makes it hard for us to challenge the left is that their beliefs are complicated. We don't mean complicated in a positive way. They aren't complicated the way love is complicated. They're complicated because there's no good explanation for them, no basis in reality.

The left cannot pull their heads out of the clouds. They are stuck on romantic ideas, abstract ideas, universal ideas. They talk in theories. They see the world through ideologies. They cannot divorce themselves from their own academic fixations. And — contrary to what they believe and how they act — it's not because leftists are smarter than the rest of us. And studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country. Marx was no different. The Communist Manifesto talks about how the rise of cities "rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life."

Studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country.

Instead of admitting that they're pathological hypocrites, they tell us that we're dumb and tell us to educate ourselves. Okay, so we educate ourselves; we return with a coherent argument. Then they say, "Well, you can't actually understand what you just said unless you understand the work of this other obscure Marxist writer. So educate yourselves more."

It's basically the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, the idea that when you point out a flaw in someone's argument, they say, "Well, that's a bad example."

After a while, it becomes obvious that there is no final destination for their bread-crumb trail. Everything they say is based on something that somebody else said, which is based on something somebody else said.

Take critical race theory. We're sure you've noticed by now that it is not evidence-based — at all. It is not, as academics say, a quantitative method. It doesn't use objective facts and data to arrive at conclusions. Probably because most of those conclusions don't have any basis in reality.

Critical race theory is based on feelings. These feelings are based on theories that are also based on feelings.

We wanted to trace the history of critical race theory back to the point where its special brand of evil began. What allowed it to become the toxic, racist monster that it is today?

Later, we'll tell you about some of the snobs who created critical theory, which laid the groundwork for CRT. But if you follow the bread-crumb trail from their ideas, you wind up with Marxism.

For years, the staff has devoted a lot of time to researching Marxism. We have read a lot of Marx and Marxist writing. It's part of our promise to you to be as informed as possible, so that you know where to go for answers; so that you know what to say when your back is up against the wall. What happens when we take the bread-crumb trail back farther, past Marxism? What is it based on?

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism.

It's actually based on the work of one of the most important philosophers in human history, a 19th-century German philosopher named Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism. And, as you'll see in just a bit, if we look at Hegel's actual ideas, it's obvious that Marx completely misrepresented them in order to confirm his own fantasies.

So, in a way, that's where the bread-crumb trail ends: With Marx's misrepresentation of an incredibly important, incredibly useful philosophy, a philosophy that's actually pretty conservative.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.