Millennials are proving to be a generation beleaguered by low self-esteem. It turns out that parental coddling, participation trophies and being told you can be anything may be a full-proof recipe for personal implosion. Listener Josh, a 24-year-old millennial, called The Glenn Beck Program on Monday to talk about overcoming his personal struggles with drugs and alcohol after receiving a healthy does of tough love from his parents.
Enjoy this complimentary clip from The Glenn Beck Program:
Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:
Let's go to Josh in Indiana. Go ahead, Josh.
CALLER: Hey, thanks for taking my call.
GLENN: You bet. You're a millennial?
CALLER: Yeah, I'm 24 years old.
GLENN: Okay.
CALLER: So thanks for taking my call.
You know, I was to a certain degree coddled and didn't really know it at the time, and, you know, my parents were doing their best. But, you know, I think a lot of it was just afraid of real life. So it started off that they -- I'm sober three, almost four years now. So I did drugs. Failed out of college. Moved back home. Did the whole millennial thing.
PAT: Wow.
CALLER: But I finally looked up. And I'm a long-time listener of your program. And I had to learn a lot of lessons the hard way, but I think what, you know, millennials need is we need strong American values.
PAT: Hang on a second.
GLENN: Hold on, Josh. Hold on because I want to delve into your story a little bit more. Back in a minute.
[break]
GLENN: Let's go back to Indiana and Josh who is a millennial. You're how old, 25, Josh?
CALLER: Hey, still here.
GLENN: Yeah, are you 25?
CALLER: Twenty-four.
GLENN: Twenty-four.
And you were raised like pretty much everybody else was raised. You know, you're special, and here's your trophy and everything else.
And then you said that caused a breakdown and you started into alcohol and drugs.
CALLER: Well, the thing about it is, you know, I was listening to you guys. A lot of the generation, the millennials, we are looking for our why and our purpose. And, you know, high school, that's not real life. And college, you know, that's also not real life. So it took me a lot of time to sort out what's reality and what's not reality.
GLENN: What do you mean by that? That it's not real life.
CALLER: Well, you know, in high school, it's a whole different system. And in college, it's a whole different system. And you get out in the real world and you start paying bills and you can't necessarily stay up till 2:00 a.m. on the weekends and party and live that kind of lifestyle. And so for me, I got into drugs and alcohol at a young age. Do that. And it really took -- go ahead.
GLENN: So then what turned you around? Because we were talking about this, that I don't believe that -- and this is a real -- a broad generation. Of course, there will be exceptions to every rule.
But generally speaking, people don't make a change in their life until there's a problem. And, you know, the millennials are walking into the world with the lowest self-esteem of any generation ever. And it's because they realize we're kind of a fraud. We didn't actually earn these trophies. We didn't really have to work for it. And so they are looking for something meaningful in their life.
What was the -- what was the turning point for you? And how did you grab a hold of your life?
CALLER: Sure, yeah. For me, it was hitting rock bottom. Getting kicked out of my parents' house and having to make it on my own. But it's tough love. That's what Americans need to provide for the millennials, whether it's the parents or the corporations. You know, it's a good shakedown. And for me, I had to fall back on good values, American values from my parents, that they tried to teach me. But I had to basically reject a lot of -- a lot of the stuff you hear in college and a lot of the stuff you hear in high school.
PAT: So your parents finally said, "Okay. You've been here long enough. You need to go."
CALLER: Yeah.
PAT: And where did you go?
CALLER: Well, I moved out into a halfway house myself.
PAT: Did you really?
CALLER: Yeah. Had to stay sober, go to AA meetings, get a job at Waffle House.
PAT: Wow. Wow.
CALLER: Get a job at Wendy's. Pay my own bills.
PAT: Wow.
STU: That's a lot of living for 24 years old.
GLENN: Good for you.
PAT: Yeah, you've been through some stuff.
GLENN: Good for you. Good for you.
PAT: So are you making it now? Are you doing well?
CALLER: I am. I'm in school full-time. I hold a full-time job myself. Self-employed. And looking to get my degree here and get a job in the health care career.
PAT: Good for you.
GLENN: Good luck with that.
What is -- how is your self-esteem?
CALLER: You know, I -- I had to find my own purpose. It's a lot better now, you know, now that I'm sober and not have cloudy judgment anymore. But I think it's just going to take some time for a lot of millennials to find their self-worth and to make it on their own. And definitely don't need to be coddled by anybody. A good shakeup is really what's needed.
PAT: That's great.
GLENN: Please check in with us again. I'd love to hear how you continue to do. Thanks so much, Josh.
CALLER: Sure thing. Thanks for having me.
Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?
Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.
From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?
Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images
In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."
The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.
LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images
Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.
Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.
Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images
In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.
Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.
President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.
After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.
However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.
Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images
Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.
Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.
These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.
Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images
Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.
The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.
Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.
Handout / Handout | Getty Images
While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.
The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.
Did Canadians just vote in their doom?
On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.
Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.
So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?
Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)
GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images
The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.
For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.
At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.
PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images
What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?
Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.
Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.
This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.
