Presidential Hopeful Darrell Castle Seeks 'Bloodless Revolution' in America

November 01, 2016

WRITER

Constitution Party candidate Darrell Castle joined The Glenn Beck Program on Tuesday for a deeper dive into his policies and beliefs.

In a nutshell, Castles platform includes abolishing the Federal Reserve, withdrawing from the United Nations, fighting Agenda 21, supporting pro-life beliefs and adhering to the U.S. Constitution.

Castle is officially on the ballot in 24 states and a registered write-in candidate in 23 other states. For more information on Darrell Castle, visit Castle2016.com.

Read below, watch the clip or listen for answers to these questions:

• Why does Castle oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)?

• Would Castle use ground forces to fight ISIS?

• Does Castle believe Putin is a friend or foe?

• Is Castle opposed to the U.S. constantly intervening militarily?

• When did Castle help found the Constitution Party?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: Welcome to the program, Darrell Castle.

DARRELL: Oh, thank you very much. I'm glad to be with you.

GLENN: The platform in a nutshell, as I understand it -- I'd like you to go through it. Audit the fed, withdraw from the UN, fight Agenda 21, be pro-life, and adhere to the US Constitution.

Pretty simple. Do you want to expand?

DARRELL: Well, except -- except for auditing the fed, you're exactly right.

GLENN: Oh, you don't want to audit the fed?

DARRELL: No, I want to end the fed.

GLENN: All right. All right. End the fed.

You want to expand on any of these?

DARRELL: Well, I'll expand on anything that you would like me to expand on. But I've done numerous podcasts and so forth on all of those positions in the last few months.

GLENN: So let me play devil's advocate. End the fed. How -- how do you think you could possibly as president end the fed?

DARRELL: Well, I couldn't. It would take an act of Congress. It would be very simple. Congress would just have to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and it would be done. And obviously, they would be forced to return to the Constitution and retake control of the monetary system themselves.

But if -- if I were elected president, I mean, it's quite obvious what I stand for. So the people would have to -- to rise up and turn up the heat on Congress. As Harry Truman said, "When you turn up the heat, they see the light." But I couldn't do it by myself. No, Congress would have to act.

GLENN: Darrell, I'm currently being called a globalist by those who are supporting Donald Trump. I couldn't be further from a globalist. I believe in free trade. Do you?

DARRELL: Yes, I do.

GLENN: Okay.

DARRELL: And I can explain that, if you would like.

GLENN: Go ahead.

DARRELL: I believe in free trade. I believe that the United States should -- should trade freely with Mexico, Chile, and other countries that it does now.

I just don't believe in free trade agreements. Unlike like your friend, Evan McMullin, I'm opposed to the Trans-Pacific Partnership and other free trade agreements because they transfer American sovereignty to bureaucracies and corporations totally unaccountable to the American people. I don't think that's necessary or wise.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: That is my belief on TPP as well. It is transferring too much sovereignty.

The -- you want to withdraw from the UN. Is there no reason to have an international body and an international community like that?

DARRELL: Well, there may be plenty of reasons to have an international body. But the United Nations does some really horrible things. It's not compatible with the American way of life. Agenda 21, it's depopulation. Many things like that. I just want this country to be free and independent again and be able to chart its own course in the world.

Like I said before, I'm all for trade. I believe trade brings friendship, and it brings economic prosperity and so forth for people around the world, all up and down the economic spectrum. So I'm all for interacting with the world, just not in a situation where the American Constitution is called into question and actually superseded by international bureaucrats. I -- I'm about tired of that.

Plus, the United Nations has had us almost continually at war since 1945. And we haven't won very many of them. So I'm for ending -- I'm for a different way of life.

PAT: Darrell, you also seem to be the strongest candidate who is running for president on immigration. Tell us your stand on the border and what you would do with the 20 million illegal aliens that are here. And what would you do on the border?

DARRELL: Well, on the border, it's my position that we should force the immigration laws that we have now in an effort to secure the border. I would do, as president, whatever it took. I just consider it my sworn duty as president of this country to secure the border, by whatever means proven necessary.

And I think before we start doing radical things like building a wall -- and I will say, I would do that, if that's what it took. But just enforce the immigration laws that we have in place right now and empower the -- the Border Patrol and so he had authorities to -- to secure the border. And once we do that so that we know who is coming across, we could admit as many people as we want. But we would hopefully know whether those people are terrorists or not.

GLENN: The situation over in the middle east with ISIS, Darrell. What do we do?

DARRELL: Well, you know, I've read where Donald Trump constantly keeps saying he wants to -- he wants to destroy ISIS and so forth. And, I mean, that's fine. Who doesn't?

Mr. McMullin says he would commit ground forces in an offensive against ISIS. I wouldn't do that. I mean, I don't really understand the entire mentality that we're applying in Syria. I mean, number one, what business is it of ours, who runs Syria? The Assad family has run Syria for some 50 years now. But all of a sudden, we cannot tolerate this man Assad, a day longer.

And if the Russians want to fight ISIS, I mean, who cares what -- why not? But I'm not in favor of -- of ground troops in Syria. And I'm not in favor of what Mrs. Clinton called for, a no-fly zone. She tried to walk that back a little bit in the last debate, when it was pointed out that the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said that would mean war with Russia. You always have to ask yourself what the endgame is going to be when you have to confront Russian aircraft. All these confrontations and so forth, it seemed to me are unnecessary. We could devote a whole show sometime to talking about Russia, if you wanted to.

But the long short of it is, I'm not in favor of -- of committing ground troops to Syria right now. I don't see the need for it.

GLENN: Is Putin a friend, a foe? What is he?

DARRELL: Who knows, you know? What was it Winston Churchill said about Russia...

But, I mean, I don't know if he's a friend and a foe. I know he seems to love his own country and trying to protect his own country. And I know that -- I have a certain degree of sympathy with that because of Russia's history. You know, they -- every time they look to the West, they see tanks. And they remember the German invasion and many, many, many before that. And now German tanks are messing around on their border again. I don't blame them for being nervous about that. It's not Russia that's in Mexico. It's not Russia that's in Canada. But NATO and the United States and the European Union are at Russia's border. Who wouldn't be nervous about that?

GLENN: Well, I mean, when Poland asks NATO and the United States to be there --

DARRELL: Yeah.

GLENN: Because they're afraid.

DARRELL: They always do. They always ask. And I -- I've gotten a few calls in the campaign from Polish people who are very nervous about it.

But, you know, those types of things are easy to manipulate. I -- you know, the first thing we think about is confrontation and war. I just suspect that Poland would be sitting there just as happy as they could be if NATO and the union had not pushed to the borders of Russia, which we promised them we wouldn't do when Reagan and Gorbachev had their meeting.

But nevertheless, that's the way I see it. I mean, I would take whatever action necessary to protect this country. But right now, you know, I think these constant confrontations with sanctions and pushing the Russian economy to the brink and so forth, as Roosevelt did with the Japanese -- and I'm not saying that wasn't necessary. I'm just saying, it oftentimes leaves a desperate country with only one choice.

And you always want to leave your opponent a way out.

PAT: Other than trade, would you consider yourself isolationist?

DARRELL: No, I wouldn't.

GLENN: What would you consider yourself? What's the difference between you and an isolationist?

DARRELL: Well, isolationist, you know, let's withdraw to the borders and build fortress America. But the opposite of that -- people often accuse me of isolation because I don't choose war.

The opposite of war is peace, not isolation. I don't want to withdraw to the borders in this totally interconnected world with instantaneous communication that we have now. It's ridiculous to -- to think of such a thing. But neither do I -- I mean, would you -- any of the countries around the world who don't have the military power that the United States has, they'll constantly intervene militarily every time they see a rattlesnakes nest in some other part of the world.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: Darrell, every conservative or someone who thinks themselves conservative wants to lower taxes in some way. We'll hear either lowering rates or we'll go to a flat tax or a consumption tax. Your tax plan is different than all of those. Can you kind of explain it and walk through it?

DARRELL: Yes. My tax plan is different. And it seeks to free the American people to keep all their income, and that would be pretty sweet.

STU: Yeah.

DARRELL: But it also empowers the states, which the original intent of this Constitution and this union that the states entered into originally, it returns sovereignty to the states because the taxes, the budget would be apportioned like the census to the various states. So if your state of Texas, for example, add 5 percent of the nation's population, it would -- Texas would be required to produce 5 percent of the budget. And Texas could do that as it saw fit. It could exploit its own best resources, its natural resources or it' -- you could build a toll road across the state and charge tourists a dollar and charge Texans ten cents, or however it wanted to raise that money.

And each state could do that as natural resources in Alaska, tourism in Hawaii and Florida, gambling in Nevada. And each state could raise the money as it saw fit.

And the states -- their representatives would be under pressure from the people to hold down the federal government, not make it bigger. And every time the federal government decided that they wanted to go fight somebody somewhere, they would have to tell the states, "Look, folks, we're going to need another trillion dollars to go fight these people."

And the states might say, "Well, let's take a hard look at whether we really need to fight these people or not." Because the pressure would be on a lower budget, not a higher budget. And the states would be free. The federal government coming to them for the money, rather than the other way around.

So to me, it seems like a wonderful system, especially when you consider my overall platform, that there would be so much less government to fund.

GLENN: Darrell, the reason why I -- and I've got about 90 seconds to answer this.

The reason why yesterday I said, I don't know who I'm going to vote for. Because I said that I was probably going to vote for you. Is because I didn't think you were serious about really running. This -- you've dedicated your life for how many years to this. And where are you going to be, you know, on -- what are you going to be doing on November 9th?

DARRELL: Well, I'm going to be sitting in my law office like I am right now, practicing law and taking care of my clients and so forth. That's what I do for a living. But -- and that's where I personally am going to be, unless I'm elected president.

And if I do, I'll probably be -- well, I don't know. That would be a whole 'nother thing. But I -- I mean, I'll just go back to my law practice, assuming I don't win the election.

GLENN: You're one of the founders of the Constitution Party, right?

DARRELL: Yes, I am.

GLENN: And what drove you to that how many years ago?

DARRELL: Well, we founded it in 1992. Started in the latter months of '91.

What drove me to it? I was planning to not vote in that election. And a dear gentleman who became a good friend of mine convinced me that his efforts to start a third party could meet with some success. We thought that when people saw our platform and who we were and what we were trying to do, they would leave the Republican Party and join us. But we didn't -- we kind of underestimated the enemy's strength, I guess. But we did it because we believe that the Democrat/Republican Party would never take the nation where it needed to be. And that it would gradually, little by little, election by election, get worse and worse. We were right in that regard.

GLENN: That hasn't happened. No, that hasn't happened at all. I don't know what you're talking about.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Darrell, thank you very much. I appreciate it. Are you on the ballot in all 50 states?

DARRELL: No, I'm not, Glenn. I'm on the ballot in 24 states as a name. And I'm on the ballot in 23 other states as a registered write-in.

GLENN: Okay. So you can write-in or you can -- or you can pull the lever because it will be on the ballot.

PAT: And how can people help? Where do you go if you want to donate or volunteer?

DARRELL: Well, you can go to my website, which is Castle2016.com. And that will give people an opportunity to send me money, which is always welcome.

(chuckling)

DARRELL: And they can go out on the 2016 Election Day, as I hope you will do, and do the right thing and vote for me. Because this country would be in far better shape if most people would do that. And I could wake up on November 9th and actually be president and this country -- the people of this country out there listening right now could in effect start a bloodless revolution.

GLENN: Yeah.

DARRELL: Even our own revolution was bloody, but this could be bloodless. And the world would never be the same, I can assure you. And everybody would be happy. All right. I know I got to go.

GLENN: I appreciate it. No, no. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Darrell Castle from the Constitution Party. Don't throw your vote away. If you believe somebody, then vote for them, no matter who they are. Hillary people, you look at it, write in Bernie Sanders, go for Jill, go for the Libertarian -- write in or vote your conscience. He's right. It just gets worse and worse and worse.

Featured Image: Screenshot from C-SPAN

Why do Americans feel so empty?

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

Anxiety, anger, and chronic dissatisfaction signal a country searching for meaning. Without truth and purpose, politics becomes a dangerous substitute for identity.

We have built a world overflowing with noise, convenience, and endless choice, yet something essential has slipped out of reach. You can sense it in the restless mood of the country, the anxiety among young people who cannot explain why they feel empty, in the angry confusion that dominates our politics.

We have more wealth than any nation in history, but the heart of the culture feels strangely malnourished. Before we can debate debt or elections, we must confront the reality that we created a world of things, but not a world of purpose.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

What we are living through is not just economic or political dysfunction. It is the vacuum that appears when a civilization mistakes abundance for meaning.

Modern life is stuffed with everything except what the human soul actually needs. We built systems to make life faster, easier, and more efficient — and then wondered why those systems cannot teach our children who they are, why they matter, or what is worth living for.

We tell the next generation to chase success, influence, and wealth, turning childhood into branding. We ask kids what they want to do, not who they want to be. We build a world wired for dopamine rather than dignity, and then we wonder why so many people feel unmoored.

When everything is curated, optimized, and delivered at the push of a button, the question “what is my life for?” gets lost in the static.

The crisis beneath the headlines

It is not just the young who feel this crisis. Every part of our society is straining under the weight of meaninglessness.

Look at the debt cycle — the mathematical fate no civilization has ever escaped once it crosses a threshold that we seem to have already blown by. While ordinary families feel the pressure, our leaders respond with distraction, with denial, or by rewriting the very history that could have warned us.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

We have entered a cultural moment where the noise is so loud that it drowns out the simplest truths. We are living in a country that no longer knows how to hear itself think.

So people go searching. Some drift toward the false promise of socialism, some toward the empty thrill of rebellion. Some simply check out. When a culture forgets what gives life meaning, it becomes vulnerable to every ideology that offers a quick answer.

The quiet return of meaning

And yet, quietly, something else is happening. Beneath the frustration and cynicism, many Americans are recognizing that meaning does not come from what we own, but from what we honor. It does not rise from success, but from virtue. It does not emerge from noise, but from the small, sacred things that modern life has pushed to the margins — the home, the table, the duty you fulfill, the person you help when no one is watching.

The danger is assuming that this rediscovery happens on its own. It does not.

Reorientation requires intention. It requires rebuilding the habits and virtues that once held us together. It requires telling the truth about our history instead of rewriting it to fit today’s narratives. And it requires acknowledging what has been erased: that meaning is inseparable from God’s presence in a nation’s life.

Harold M. Lambert / Contributor | Getty Images

Where renewal begins

We have built a world without stillness, and then we wondered why no one can hear the questions that matter. Those questions remain, whether we acknowledge them or not. They do not disappear just because we drown them in entertainment or noise. They wait for us, and the longer we ignore them, the more disoriented we become.

Meaning is still available. It is found in rebuilding the smallest, most human spaces — the places that cannot be digitized, globalized, or automated. The home. The family. The community.

These are the daily virtues that do not trend on social media, but that hold a civilization upright. If we want to repair this country, we begin there, exactly where every durable civilization has always begun: one virtue at a time, one tradition at a time, one generation at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A break in trust: A NEW Watergate is brewing in plain sight

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

When institutions betray the public’s trust, the country splits, and the spiral is hard to stop.

Something drastic is happening in American life. Headlines that should leave us stunned barely register anymore. Stories that once would have united the country instead dissolve into silence or shrugs.

It is not apathy exactly. It is something deeper — a growing belief that the people in charge either cannot or will not fix what is broken.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf.

I call this response the Bubba effect. It describes what happens when institutions lose so much public trust that “Bubba,” the average American minding his own business, finally throws his hands up and says, “Fine. I will handle it myself.” Not because he wants to, but because the system that was supposed to protect him now feels indifferent, corrupt, or openly hostile.

The Bubba effect is not a political movement. It is a survival instinct.

What triggers the Bubba effect

We are watching the triggers unfold in real time. When members of Congress publicly encourage active duty troops to disregard orders from the commander in chief, that is not a political squabble. When a federal judge quietly rewrites the rules so one branch of government can secretly surveil another, that is not normal. That is how republics fall. Yet these stories glided across the news cycle without urgency, without consequence, without explanation.

When the American people see the leadership class shrug, they conclude — correctly — that no one is steering the ship.

This is how the Bubba effect spreads. It is not just individuals resisting authority. It is sheriffs refusing to enforce new policies, school boards ignoring state mandates, entire communities saying, “We do not believe you anymore.” It becomes institutional, cultural, national.

A country cracking from the inside

This effect can be seen in Dearborn, Michigan. In the rise of fringe voices like Nick Fuentes. In the Epstein scandal, where powerful people could not seem to locate a single accountable adult. These stories are different in content but identical in message: The system protects itself, not you.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf. That does not mean they suddenly agree with everything that person says. It means they feel abandoned by the institutions that were supposed to be trustworthy.

The Bubba effect is what fills that vacuum.

The dangers of a faithless system

A republic cannot survive without credibility. Congress cannot oversee intelligence agencies if it refuses to discipline its own members. The military cannot remain apolitical if its chain of command becomes optional. The judiciary cannot defend the Constitution while inventing loopholes that erase the separation of powers.

History shows that once a nation militarizes politics, normalizes constitutional shortcuts, or allows government agencies to operate without scrutiny, it does not return to equilibrium peacefully. Something will give.

The question is what — and when.

The responsibility now belongs to us

In a healthy country, this is where the media steps in. This is where universities, pastors, journalists, and cultural leaders pause the outrage machine and explain what is at stake. But today, too many see themselves not as guardians of the republic, but of ideology. Their first loyalty is to narrative, not truth.

The founders never trusted the press more than the public. They trusted citizens who understood their rights, lived their responsibilities, and demanded accountability. That is the antidote to the Bubba effect — not rage, but citizenship.

How to respond without breaking ourselves

Do not riot. Do not withdraw. Do not cheer on destruction just because you dislike the target. That is how nations lose themselves. Instead, demand transparency. Call your representatives. Insist on consequences. Refuse to normalize constitutional violations simply because “everyone does it.” If you expect nothing, you will get nothing.

Do not hand your voice to the loudest warrior simply because he is swinging a bat at the establishment. You do not beat corruption by joining a different version of it. You beat it by modeling the country you want to preserve: principled, accountable, rooted in truth.

Adam Gray / Stringer | Getty Images

Every republic reaches a moment when historians will later say, “That was the warning.” We are living in ours. But warnings are gifts if they are recognized. Institutions bend. People fail. The Constitution can recover — if enough Americans still know and cherish it.

It does not take a majority. Twenty percent of the country — awake, educated, and courageous — can reset the system. It has happened before. It can happen again.

Wake up. Stand up. Demand integrity — from leaders, from institutions, and from yourself. Because the Bubba effect will not end until Americans reclaim the duty that has always belonged to them: preserving the republic for the next generation.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Warning: Stop letting TikTok activists think for you

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Bad-faith attacks on Israel and AIPAC warp every debate. Real answers emerge only when people set aside scripts and ask what serves America’s long-term interests.

The search for truth has always required something very much in short supply these days: honesty. Not performative questions, not scripted outrage, not whatever happens to be trending on TikTok, but real curiosity.

Some issues, often focused on foreign aid, AIPAC, or Israel, have become hotbeds of debate and disagreement. Before we jump into those debates, however, we must return to a simpler, more important issue: honest questioning. Without it, nothing in these debates matters.

Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

The phrase “just asking questions” has re-entered the zeitgeist, and that’s fine. We should always question power. But too many of those questions feel preloaded with someone else’s answer. If the goal is truth, then the questions should come from a sincere desire to understand, not from a hunt for a villain.

Honest desire for truth is the only foundation that can support a real conversation about these issues.

Truth-seeking is real work

Right now, plenty of people are not seeking the truth at all. They are repeating something they heard from a politician on cable news or from a stranger on TikTok who has never opened a history book. That is not a search for answers. That is simply outsourcing your own thought.

If you want the truth, you need to work for it. You cannot treat the world like a Marvel movie where the good guy appears in a cape and the villain hisses on command. Real life does not give you a neat script with the moral wrapped up in two hours.

But that is how people are approaching politics now. They want the oppressed and the oppressor, the heroic underdog and the cartoon villain. They embrace this fantastical framing because it is easier than wrestling with reality.

This framing took root in the 1960s when the left rebuilt its worldview around colonizers and the colonized. Overnight, Zionism was recast as imperialism. Suddenly, every conflict had to fit the same script. Today’s young activists are just recycling the same narrative with updated graphics. Everything becomes a morality play. No nuance, no context, just the comforting clarity of heroes and villains.

Bad-faith questions

This same mindset is fueling the sudden obsession with Israel, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in particular. You hear it from members of Congress and activists alike: AIPAC pulls the strings, AIPAC controls the government, AIPAC should register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The questions are dramatic, but are they being asked in good faith?

FARA is clear. The standard is whether an individual or group acts under the direction or control of a foreign government. AIPAC simply does not qualify.

Here is a detail conveniently left out of these arguments: Dozens of domestic organizations — Armenian, Cuban, Irish, Turkish — lobby Congress on behalf of other countries. None of them registers under FARA because — like AIPAC — they are independent, domestic organizations.

If someone has a sincere problem with the structure of foreign lobbying, fair enough. Let us have that conversation. But singling out AIPAC alone is not a search for truth. It is bias dressed up as bravery.

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

If someone wants to question foreign aid to Israel, fine. Let’s have that debate. But let’s ask the right questions. The issue is not the size of the package but whether the aid advances our interests. What does the United States gain? Does the investment strengthen our position in the region? How does it compare to what we give other nations? And do we examine those countries with the same intensity?

The real target

These questions reflect good-faith scrutiny. But narrowing the entire argument to one country or one dollar amount misses the larger problem. If someone objects to the way America handles foreign aid, the target is not Israel. The target is the system itself — an entrenched bureaucracy, poor transparency, and decades-old commitments that have never been re-examined. Those problems run through programs around the world.

If you want answers, you need to broaden the lens. You have to be willing to put aside the movie script and confront reality. You have to hold yourself to a simple rule: Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

That is the only way this country ever gets clarity on foreign aid, influence, alliances, and our place in the world. Questioning is not just allowed. It is essential. But only if it is honest.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The melting pot fails when we stop agreeing to melt

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Texas now hosts Quran-first academies, Sharia-compliant housing schemes, and rapidly multiplying mosques — all part of a movement building a self-contained society apart from the country around it.

It is time to talk honestly about what is happening inside America’s rapidly growing Muslim communities. In city after city, large pockets of newcomers are choosing to build insulated enclaves rather than enter the broader American culture.

That trend is accelerating, and the longer we ignore it, the harder it becomes to address.

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world.

America has always welcomed people of every faith and people from every corner of the world, but the deal has never changed: You come here and you join the American family. You are free to honor your traditions, keep your faith, but you must embrace the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. You melt into the shared culture that allows all of us to live side by side.

Across the country, this bargain is being rejected by Islamist communities that insist on building a parallel society with its own rules, its own boundaries, and its own vision for how life should be lived.

Texas illustrates the trend. The state now has roughly 330 mosques. At least 48 of them were built in just the last 24 months. The Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex alone has around 200 Islamic centers. Houston has another hundred or so. Many of these communities have no interest in blending into American life.

This is not the same as past waves of immigration. Irish, Italian, Korean, Mexican, and every other group arrived with pride in their heritage. Still, they also raised American flags and wanted their children to be part of the country’s future. They became doctors, small-business owners, teachers, and soldiers. They wanted to be Americans.

What we are watching now is not the melting pot. It is isolation by design.

Parallel societies do not end well

More than 300 fundamentalist Islamic schools now operate full-time across the country. Many use Quran-first curricula that require students to spend hours memorizing religious texts before they ever reach math or science. In Dallas, Brighter Horizons Academy enrolls more than 1,700 students and draws federal support while operating on a social model that keeps children culturally isolated.

Then there is the Epic City project in Collin and Hunt counties — 402 acres originally designated only for Muslim buyers, with Sharia-compliant financing and a mega-mosque at the center. After public outcry and state investigations, the developers renamed it “The Meadows,” but a new sign does not erase the original intent. It is not a neighborhood. It is a parallel society.

Americans should not hesitate to say that parallel societies are dangerous. Europe tried this experiment, and the results could not be clearer. In Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, entire neighborhoods now operate under their own cultural rules, some openly hostile to Western norms. When citizens speak up, they are branded bigots for asserting a basic right: the ability to live safely in their own communities.

A crisis of confidence

While this separation widens, another crisis is unfolding at home. A recent Gallup survey shows that about 40% of American women ages 18 to 39 would leave the country permanently if given the chance. Nearly half of a rising generation — daughters, sisters, soon-to-be mothers — no longer believe this nation is worth building a future in.

And who shapes the worldview of young boys? Their mothers. If a mother no longer believes America is home, why would her child grow up ready to defend it?

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world. If we lose confidence in our own national identity at the same time that we allow separatist enclaves to spread unchecked, the outcome is predictable. Europe is already showing us what comes next: cultural fracture, political radicalization, and the slow death of national unity.

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Stand up and tell the truth

America welcomes Muslims. America defends their right to worship freely. A Muslim who loves the Constitution, respects the rule of law, and wants to raise a family in peace is more than welcome in America.

But an Islamist movement that rejects assimilation, builds enclaves governed by its own religious framework, and treats American law as optional is not simply another participant in our melting pot. It is a direct challenge to it. If we refuse to call this problem out out of fear of being called names, we will bear the consequences.

Europe is already feeling those consequences — rising conflict and a political class too paralyzed to admit the obvious. When people feel their culture, safety, and freedoms slipping away, they will follow anyone who promises to defend them. History has shown that over and over again.

Stand up. Speak plainly. Be unafraid. You can practice any faith in this country, but the supremacy of the Constitution and the Judeo-Christian moral framework that shaped it is non-negotiable. It is what guarantees your freedom in the first place.

If you come here and honor that foundation, welcome. If you come here to undermine it, you do not belong here.

Wake up to what is unfolding before the consequences arrive. Because when a nation refuses to say what is true, the truth eventually forces its way in — and by then, it is always too late.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn's Show Prep

Presidential Hopeful Darrell Castle Seeks 'Bloodless Revolution' in America

Why do Americans feel so empty?

Anxiety, anger, and chronic dissatisfaction signal a country searching for meaning. Without truth and purpose, politics becomes a dangerous substitute for identity.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

The crisis beneath the headlines

The quiet return of meaning

Where renewal begins

A break in trust: A NEW Watergate is brewing in plain sight

When institutions betray the public’s trust, the country splits, and the spiral is hard to stop.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf.

What triggers the Bubba effect

A country cracking from the inside

The dangers of a faithless system

The responsibility now belongs to us

How to respond without breaking ourselves

Warning: Stop letting TikTok activists think for you

Bad-faith attacks on Israel and AIPAC warp every debate. Real answers emerge only when people set aside scripts and ask what serves America’s long-term interests.

Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

Truth-seeking is real work

Bad-faith questions

The real target

The melting pot fails when we stop agreeing to melt

Texas now hosts Quran-first academies, Sharia-compliant housing schemes, and rapidly multiplying mosques — all part of a movement building a self-contained society apart from the country around it.

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world.

Parallel societies do not end well

A crisis of confidence

Stand up and tell the truth