Learning From History: Don't Think Fascism Can't Happen in America Today

In 2017, Nazis and racism have somehow made their way to the forefront in America. If we want to combat fascism today, we need to look at what happened in history.

The Nazi movement in 1930s Germany managed to convince people to overlook, tolerate and participate in horrifying crimes against others. How did they pull off their massive scam and persuade the German people that they were standing up for their “heritage”?

Glenn took a historical look at fascism in the hopes of stopping people today from going over the cliff on radio Wednesday. The key issue was how people were trained to believe that their suffering was the fault of the Jews, giving them an excuse to look the other way during Hitler’s atrocities.

“How did the Nazis actually pull this off?” Glenn asked the difficult question. “How did something so evil become something that so many people, and some of the best-educated people in the world [fell for]; how did they fall for that?”

Part of the problem was how society slowly began to devalue human life, while simultaneously turning to science as the answer to all of people’s problems.

“’Science will solve everything,’” Glenn paraphrased the thinking of the time. “’If we can just get rid of the stupid people, if we can just get rid of the handicapped people’ …”

GLENN: Hello, America. There's a couple of stories that are really fascinating. One is in the Washington Post. The road to hate. For six young men, Charlottesville is only the beginning. And it talks about how these guys have fallen in with neo-Nazis. And it's very, very clear and easy to see what's happening. But it is a difficult conversation to actually come at this and try to have a real conversation in more than a seven-second sound bite.

And so for the love of our nation. For the love of each other. For the love of decency, common sense, and our very survival, we're going to try every day to have an actual conversation. I don't know if that's even possible anymore.

But we're going to take another step towards it, beginning right now.

(music)

GLENN: How did the Nazis -- how did the Nazis actually pull this off? How did something so evil become something that so many people -- and some of the best educated people in the world, how did they fall for that?

It is the question that I don't think that we've ever really, truly answered. We have spent -- at least me -- we have spent our lives watching all these World War II documentaries. And if it's black and white and it's got Nazis in it, guys somehow or another are always flocking to those documentaries. We're fascinated by this.

And we're fascinated because it is so clearly evil. And it just swept a nation. And almost swept the world.

How? How?

There's been a lot of surface answers. But the real answer, to me, is pain and humiliation. The pain and the humiliation that was caused by World War I. And then the indoctrination that -- that happened in the -- in the universities, beginning at the turn of the century, long before the Nazis. The devaluing of life and the sanctity at this time of life and the -- the elevation of science, to get rid of all of our problems. Science will solve everything.

If we can just get rid of the stupid people, if we can just get rid of the handicapped people -- excuse the language, but this is the language they used to use, if we can just get rid of all the retarded people, we're going to be fine.

But we don't have time. You want to make the world a better place: We've got to get rid of those people. And that quickly turns into: If we would just get rid of all of the greedy people. If we just get rid of all of these bankers because, you know, the bankers were involved.

Let me say this to you: Do you believe the Nazis are good?

Okay. I think that's -- I didn't even need to pause. I think everybody's like, "Nope."

Do you think -- now, here's where it's going to get complicated for some people, "Do you think the Nazis have some good points that they're making?" Think about that.

Your knee-jerk is no. But how many in the audience are like, "Well, they are standing against the -- wait a minute. A door is opening. They are standing against the erasing of our heritage. A door has just opened.

If I said, "Jews, Jews, Jews, they all must die. They're bad. They're keeping you down," I don't know a soul that's going to believe that. Not a soul is going to believe that. But then let's take it to the next chant that they do, the next chant is, "Jews, they run the banks."

Okay. I don't know anybody of any intelligence that believes that and is going to say, "You know what, that Nazi is making a good point."

"Jews, they run the banks, and the banks are getting rich off of your back."

Now, wait a minute. The door is starting to open a crack because the average person who is suffering will dismiss the Jew part, but begin to see, "Yeah, well, wait a minute, the banks are getting rich."

And the smart Nazi will say, "The banks are getting rich. They got a bailout. Did you get a bailout? I didn't get a bailout. They got a bailout, and it's the -- it's the banks, and it's the corporations that are doing it."

Now that door is open to anyone who suffering. And that door is there. And all of a sudden, the guy who didn't say Jews, didn't say Jews are running the world, didn't say Jews are running all the banks, but that's implied because he's a Nazi.

Because he has found that one place of connection and he looks like you. Read the story in the Washington Post. The guys who went down there, they never saw themselves as Nazis. But I know this to be true because I've joined another very unpopular club. I hate to say this. But I am a big supporter of Alcoholics Anonymous. And I remember the first time I went to an AA meeting, my first thing I said was, "I think I'm an alcoholic." And the room laughed. And they said, "Well, brother, if you think you're an alcoholic, I mean, there's usually a reason for that. You know, people who aren't, you know, having blackouts don't generally think they're an alcoholic. You've got some signs. So if you're thinking that way, you most likely are."

And I said, "Well, here's my problem: You guys don't look like alcoholics."

And a lady -- an old lady with pearls and a sweater set, who looked like a grandma and a really respectable wealthy grandma -- not my grandma. A really respected wealthy grandma, just without even turning around said, "Oh, honey, we're all drunks in here." All of a sudden, I could accept that I was an alcoholic, because they didn't look like I thought alcoholics looked.

The Nazis are coming out. And did you hear about the Antifa protester that was beaten up by his own people because he looked like a Nazi? And he was like, "I'm not a Nazi. I'm on your side." And they beat him within an inch of his life. Because he looked like a white supremacist Nazi.

Well, when you're coming in -- why do you think -- do you know who designed the Nazi uniform, the storm trooper, the SS, the black uniform? That was Hugo Boss. Hugo Boss, the designer. He's the one who designed those uniforms.

Oh, but his suits aren't oppressing you, right? Or should we burn down all Hugo Boss uniforms, I mean, stores?

Somehow or another, he gets a pass. They get a pass.

Volkswagen gets a pass. Volkswagen, you put the little flower in the little cannister there, the little vase by the steering wheel. Volkswagen is a thing of peace and love. Volkswagen. The people's car. The people's wagon. It was a national socialist design and commissioned by Adolf Hitler.

Oh. But they get a pass. We're not burning Volkswagens down, are we?

Why? Because they've changed their image. They no longer have Adolf Hitler going, "This is the people's car." They have a little flower by the steering wheel.

We're being tricked by image. And people are falling into it for a couple of reasons: One, they are actually hurting. People are going to Antifa, and they are excusing -- they're not joining. They're excusing Antifa, even though there are many people on the left who do not believe what Antifa is doing is right. They do not believe that burning the city of Berkeley down to the ground is a good thing. They don't believe any of that.

They're actually afraid of Antifa. But they're excusing it, because, look at the other side. Look at what they're doing. We got to stop that, right? The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

No, the enemy of my enemy may be your friend, but he also may be your enemy.

And Antifa is your enemy. Same with Nazis. They are your enemy. You cannot stand with them, no matter how much you want to dismiss the bad parts about them. No matter how much they image themselves just like you. That's not who you are.

There was something that happened yesterday that is the cliff of insanity. And I refuse to go no further.

And I'm going to ask you to join me on something. But everything in you will say, "I'm not going to do that." Everything in you.

And, you know what, partially, you will be justified in saying it. Because you're tired. And you've been convinced you don't make a difference. But I'm going to ask you, "Don't go over the cliff with the rest of humanity. Take a stand."

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Could China OWN our National Parks?

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.