Dennis Prager Talks Google, YouTube Lawsuits Over ‘Ideologically Driven Censorship’

PragerU, a website that promotes conservative ideals in pithy 5-minute video clips, is suing Google and YouTube for content policies that the company says are overly vague and used to censor “conservative political thought.”

Founder Dennis Prager joined Glenn today to talk about the lawsuit over YouTube’s restrictions on their videos. The lawsuit claims that PragerU videos have been arbitrarily marked “inappropriate” for younger views and demonetized, or cut off from generating ad money.

“I really did believe all my life that there was one thing that did unite Americans,” Prager said. “And that is … free speech. But I was wrong. The left in particular does not believe in free speech because it threatens their power.”

Get the full story with our explainer of the PragerU lawsuit.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: There is a chill wind blowing across the First Amendment. And it is happening from all sides. When we have conservatives talking about limiting free speech and free press, it's disturbing.

But there's something else that's going on right now with the -- with all of the big -- I would call them, you know, railroad companies. They're -- the rail lines of communication, they've all been laid now. And so now, these rail companies of Google, Apple, YouTube, which is Google, Facebook. They're going to start dictating exactly what's heard and what's not heard. And it's -- we're entering a very dangerous phase.

I wanted to bring on Dennis Prager. Because Dennis and Prager University have just filed a lawsuit against Google and YouTube. And we have a story up on TheBlaze.com that lays this all out very clearly. And you need to pay attention to this, because we have information from the dark web, where Media Matters was -- was hiding out their plan for the future, that shows what's happening to Dennis Prager was planned and coordinated. And this is their MO moving forward, to silence any voice on YouTube or Google or Apple or Amazon, that disagrees with Media Matters.

Welcome to the program, Dennis Prager.

DENNIS: What a joy to be with you. I'm in Israel. And wherever I am, it's good to talk to you.

GLENN: Thank you, sir. Dennis, I have tremendous respect for you and what you guys are doing. You are making these five-minute videos. And it's educating a lot of people in a very entertaining way. You are approaching your billionth view, if I'm not mistaken.

But YouTube has now removed or demonetized several of your videos and have blocked them because they say that it violates some sort of standard that you can't figure out.

DENNIS: Right. They're inappropriate. I think that's the term. And it's -- we are putting up the lawsuit actually on our website, so that anybody can read it. It's so devastating that it portrays an America that you and I never really thought would -- would take place. If there was one thing, I guess I was naive.

I really did believe all of my life that there's one thing that did unite Americans. Because I don't -- I never buy the unity issue, as you probably know.

I think there's too big a division in the country. But I did believe there was one, a common belief. And that is in free speech. But I was wrong.

The -- the left in particular does not believe in free speech because it threatens their power.

The more people know, the less left they will be. I would -- I bank my life on that belief. I devote my life to that belief. Prager University is devoted to it, my radio show, et cetera. And that's why they're very afraid of us. They have every reason to be afraid of us. We have 500 million views this year. And we change a lot of minds, in a very sophisticated manner. Just for your audience's knowledge, I think it's important that they understand these are five-minute videos on every subject outside of the natural sciences. We're not going to teach botany in five minutes. We understand that. Or mathematics or something like that.

And four of our presenters are Pulitzer prize winners. We have professors from Stanford, Yale, Harvard, UCLA, et cetera, et cetera.

We have liberals like Alan Dershowitz. It is -- it's an extremely sophisticated teaching operation. There is no yelling. There is no slamming. There is no anger. There are five had an minute intellectual presentations. And that's why they change minds. Because they're geared to the mind and not to the emotion. Yeah, go ahead.

GLENN: Is Alan Dershowitz's video on Israel, is that one of them that has been banned?

DENNIS: That's correct. That is correct. It was. They have been recently -- yeah, it was.

GLENN: Alan Dershowitz, in TheBlaze story was asked about it, and he said This is one of the most disturbing things that has happened to him.

DENNIS: Yeah.

GLENN: I mean, here's a guy -- here's a guy on the left whose voice is being silenced by YouTube.

DENNIS: Right. Right. Well, let me then venture forth a very important point that I make I think almost daily.

There is nothing in common between leftism and liberalism. They have nothing in common.

GLENN: Yes.

DENNIS: And liberals used to understand this. They no longer do. And so many side with the left, even though it violates everything they stand for. For example, liberalism begins in integration, the melting pot, and that race means nothing. The left believes that race is important, the first ideology since the Nazis to believe that. They have separate graduation exercises at Harvard for black graduate students. They have dorms for black students all over the country at universities. That was called segregation when I grew up. Liberals would have found that to be the antithesis to everything that a liberal stands for. And I'm trying to show -- so I'm trying to show people like Dershowitz are liberals, not leftists. And I think he would even agree to that. Because he spends more of his time now, to his great credit, attacking the left than attacking the right. This is a Hillary Clinton voter.

GLENN: Yeah. I know several people who would have voted for Hillary Clinton in days gone by, who now say that their own party has gone so far off the rails, they're more afraid of their side, the leftists, than they are of the Republicans and the people on the right.

DENNIS: Well, there's nothing to fear from us. We don't want power. I always make this point.

Conservatives, basically run on the doctrine, vote for me. I want less of your money. And I want less power over you.

So --

GLENN: Well, I think that's -- I think that's --

DENNIS: We're only in danger to the left.

GLENN: I think that's generally true. Not as true as I thought it was. You know, we are seeing people talk about, you know, how the government should regulate the free press. I don't want the government involved in the press at all. Period.

DENNIS: I agree with you. But who said that?

GLENN: The president has talked about, maybe it's time to regulate NBC.

DENNIS: Oh, really? I don't really him saying that.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah.

DENNIS: I believe you. Because you're an honorable man. It's hard for me to believe even he believes in that. But, anyway, obviously none of us believe it. So it doesn't matter.

GLENN: Yeah. So, Dennis, tell me some of the -- tell me which videos are being taken down. See if there's a pattern.

DENNIS: Well, the list is on -- I believe the list is in the indictment. I should have it in front of me. But off the top of my head, I'll give you a few examples.

GLENN: Yeah.

DENNIS: This is my favorite, okay? I think there are about 40 out of 250. But I'll give you -- this is my -- I'm laughing because it's actually hilarious.

I did -- I personally -- I only do 15 percent of the videos. About 85 percent of them are by other people. But I did the videos because we do a fair number. You know, about 10 percent of our videos are on religion. Because we think a godless United States is not what the Founders wanted. In any event, so I did 11 videos on the Ten Commandments, one on each of the Ten Commandments and one introduction.

Believe it or not, they actually took down my video much thou shalt not murder.

GLENN: Why? Why do you think --

DENNIS: I don't know. I don't know. To be honest, to this day, I don't know. That's how absurd -- we're talking about the realm of the absurd.

GLENN: So the videos that TheBlaze is talking about, there are 40 that have been restricted. Many of them have also been demonetized, which means you can't make any money on them. Among the restricted videos, why America must leave. Ten Commandments, do not murder. Why did America fight the Korean War, which is unbelievable. Everyone should see that one. The world's most persecuted minority, Christians. Another unbelievable video. And -- and there's no answer.

DENNIS: By the way, that's really -- that tells you something about the -- Google's morality. That the persecution of Christians in the Middle East would be taken down, would be restricted. It shows you, they're not -- they're not merely totalitarian. They're bad.

I mean, only a bad person would find it objectionable -- and I'm a Jew saying this. Calling -- calling the world's attention to the removal of Christian communities in Middle Eastern countries.

GLENN: Genocide, yeah.

So you are suing them. There's no damages so far that you're going for. What is your -- what's your plan for?

DENNIS: The plan is to win. And thereby bring down the greatest threat to free speech perhaps in world history, or in the history of the existence of freedom of speech. Because they control -- they are the conduit to free speech on earth. You can't -- there's no alternative.

GLENN: So, Dennis, doesn't that make them a utility? Aren't they a private --

DENNIS: That's correct. That's right. It does make them a utility. And the entitlement makes it clear that -- I will use these words. It's not in the indictment. They are a fraud because they -- utterly misrepresent themselves. They say they are a completely open forum. That is as pure a lie as exists. And Prager University is the living proof of the lie that it is. They are not an open forum. And if we don't prevail, it's over for free speech, until there will be an actually open Google. And I don't know how you rival Google at this time.

One day, it may happen. But in the meantime, it's critical to understand --

GLENN: I don't think so.

DENNIS: That this is what is happening.

STU: Dennis, isn't it consistent though with conservative principles that it's their website and they get to do what they want with it?

DENNIS: No. That's very important.

I have actually asked that. The indictment shows law after law after law in California. And it's not an indictment, by the way. That's a technical term. It's a complaint. So just for the record. But, in any event, the -- the -- we show law -- the lawyers -- by the way, that's important that you know who they are. It was actually the suggestion of former California governor Pete Wilson, who was -- I'm greatly honored to know, is a great fan of Prager University. And he is the one who has one of the most prestigious law firms in the country. He is leading this. And it was his idea actually. And they are -- they are truly helping out. I mean, it's very expensive to have lawyers, as you well know, as everybody knows in America.

GLENN: Especially against Google --

DENNIS: Yes, exactly. Unlimited funds, like the government.

But, anyway, they list law after law. This is not a -- this is not a new idea. This predates Google. It predates us. It predates my existence on earth, where the Supreme Court has established that there has to be free speech, where there are claims to be free speech in the private sphere. So it's not merely government cannot -- cannot suppress speech. Now, obviously in the case, let's say of religion. If you have a Christian school and it teaches that -- you know, that -- you know, that a Catholic school teaches that abortion is immortal sin. A teacher says, no, you know, I think that Catholicism welcomes abortion. Obviously, a religion can teach a certain thing. By the way, in that regard, it would be very interesting. I wonder, I don't have the answer to this myself. I'm posing a question to me.

What if Google did announce, you know what, we are a left-wing organization. And we can't stand any left-wing idea that has any traction. And therefore we will shut it down. I wonder then --

GLENN: If they could get away with it.

DENNIS: Yeah. That would be interesting. Because that's what they are.

GLENN: Okay. Dennis, we'll have more on this tonight. Hope to have more on this tomorrow. We are big supporters. Thank you for everything that you're doing. And we will continue to help you get the word out on this. Anything that we can do, you know, that the audience can do?

DENNIS: Right. Well, yes, of course. First of all, they -- for no money whatsoever, they need to watch our videos. Because they are life-changing. They're meant to be. If their kid is in college, their kid is being indoctrinated.

GLENN: Yes.

DENNIS: And we are an antidote to that indoctrination. If they have to pay their kids in high school or college to watch it, or whatever, they should. And, obviously, if they want to help us in any other way, that's great.

GLENN: Okay. Dennis Prager, thank you very much from Prager University. This is worth your money and your time to help them out. Prager University.

Grim warning: Bad-faith Israel critics duck REAL questions

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.

A nation unravels when its shared culture is the first thing to go

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.

Shocking: AI-written country song tops charts, sparks soul debate

VCG / Contributor | Getty Images

A machine can imitate heartbreak well enough to top the charts, but it cannot carry grief, choose courage, or hear the whisper that calls human beings to something higher.

The No. 1 country song in America right now was not written in Nashville or Texas or even L.A. It came from code. “Walk My Walk,” the AI-generated single by the AI artist Breaking Rust, hit the top spot on Billboard’s Country Digital Song Sales chart, and if you listen to it without knowing that fact, you would swear a real singer lived the pain he is describing.

Except there is no “he.” There is no lived experience. There is no soul behind the voice dominating the country music charts.

If a machine can imitate the soul, then what is the soul?

I will admit it: I enjoy some AI music. Some of it is very good. And that leaves us with a question that is no longer science fiction. If a machine can fake being human this well, what does it mean to be human?

A new world of artificial experience

This is not just about one song. We are walking straight into a technological moment that will reshape everyday life.

Elon Musk said recently that we may not even have phones in five years. Instead, we will carry a small device that listens, anticipates, and creates — a personal AI agent that knows what we want to hear before we ask. It will make the music, the news, the podcasts, the stories. We already live in digital bubbles. Soon, those bubbles might become our own private worlds.

If an algorithm can write a hit country song about hardship and perseverance without a shred of actual experience, then the deeper question becomes unavoidable: If a machine can imitate the soul, then what is the soul?

What machines can never do

A machine can produce, and soon it may produce better than we can. It can calculate faster than any human mind. It can rearrange the notes and words of a thousand human songs into something that sounds real enough to fool millions.

But it cannot care. It cannot love. It cannot choose right and wrong. It cannot forgive because it cannot be hurt. It cannot stand between a child and danger. It cannot walk through sorrow.

A machine can imitate the sound of suffering. It cannot suffer.

The difference is the soul. The divine spark. The thing God breathed into man that no code will ever have. Only humans can take pain and let it grow into compassion. Only humans can take fear and turn it into courage. Only humans can rebuild their lives after losing everything. Only humans hear the whisper inside, the divine voice that says, “Live for something greater.”

We are building artificial minds. We are not building artificial life.

Questions that define us

And as these artificial minds grow sharper, as their tools become more convincing, the right response is not panic. It is to ask the oldest and most important questions.

Who am I? Why am I here? What is the meaning of freedom? What is worth defending? What is worth sacrificing for?

That answer is not found in a lab or a server rack. It is found in that mysterious place inside each of us where reason meets faith, where suffering becomes wisdom, where God reminds us we are more than flesh and more than thought. We are not accidents. We are not circuits. We are not replaceable.

Europa Press News / Contributor | Getty Images

The miracle machines can never copy

Being human is not about what we can produce. Machines will outproduce us. That is not the question. Being human is about what we can choose. We can choose to love even when it costs us something. We can choose to sacrifice when it is not easy. We can choose to tell the truth when the world rewards lies. We can choose to stand when everyone else bows. We can create because something inside us will not rest until we do.

An AI content generator can borrow our melodies, echo our stories, and dress itself up like a human soul, but it cannot carry grief across a lifetime. It cannot forgive an enemy. It cannot experience wonder. It cannot look at a broken world and say, “I am going to build again.”

The age of machines is rising. And if we do not know who we are, we will shrink. But if we use this moment to remember what makes us human, it will help us to become better, because the one thing no algorithm will ever recreate is the miracle that we exist at all — the miracle of the human soul.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Is Socialism seducing a lost generation?

Jeremy Weine / Stringer | Getty Images

A generation that’s lost faith in capitalism is turning to the oldest lie on earth: equality through control.

Something is breaking in America’s young people. You can feel it in every headline, every grocery bill, every young voice quietly asking if the American dream still means anything at all.

For many, the promise of America — work hard, build something that lasts, and give the next generation a better start — feels like it no longer exists. Home ownership and stability have become luxuries for a fortunate few.

Capitalism is not a perfect system. It is flawed because people are flawed, but it remains the only system that rewards creativity and effort rather than punishing them.

In that vacuum of hope, a new promise has begun to rise — one that sounds compassionate, equal, and fair. The promise of socialism.

The appeal of a broken dream

When the American dream becomes a checklist of things few can afford — a home, a car, two children, even a little peace — disappointment quickly turns to resentment. The average first-time homebuyer is now 40 years old. Debt lasts longer than marriages. The cost of living rises faster than opportunity.

For a generation that has never seen the system truly work, capitalism feels like a rigged game built to protect those already at the top.

That is where socialism finds its audience. It presents itself as fairness for the forgotten and justice for the disillusioned. It speaks softly at first, offering equality, compassion, and control disguised as care.

We are seeing that illusion play out now in New York City, where Zohran Mamdani — an open socialist — has won a major political victory. The same ideology that once hid behind euphemisms now campaigns openly throughout America’s once-great cities. And for many who feel left behind, it sounds like salvation.

But what socialism calls fairness is submission dressed as virtue. What it calls order is obedience. Once the system begins to replace personal responsibility with collective dependence, the erosion of liberty is only a matter of time.

The bridge that never ends

Socialism is not a destination; it is a bridge. Karl Marx described it as the necessary transition to communism — the scaffolding that builds the total state. Under socialism, people are taught to obey. Under communism, they forget that any other options exist.

History tells the story clearly. Russia, China, Cambodia, Cuba — each promised equality and delivered misery. One hundred million lives were lost, not because socialism failed, but because it succeeded at what it was designed to do: make the state supreme and the individual expendable.

Today’s advocates insist their version will be different — democratic, modern, and kind. They often cite Sweden as an example, but Sweden’s prosperity was never born of socialism. It grew out of capitalism, self-reliance, and a shared moral culture. Now that system is cracking under the weight of bureaucracy and division.

ANGELA WEISS / Contributor | Getty Images

The real issue is not economic but moral. Socialism begins with a lie about human nature — that people exist for the collective and that the collective knows better than the individual.

This lie is contrary to the truths on which America was founded — that rights come not from government’s authority, but from God’s. Once government replaces that authority, compassion becomes control, and freedom becomes permission.

What young America deserves

Young Americans have many reasons to be frustrated. They were told to study, work hard, and follow the rules — and many did, only to find the goalposts moved again and again. But tearing down the entire house does not make it fairer; it only leaves everyone standing in the rubble.

Capitalism is not a perfect system. It is flawed because people are flawed, but it remains the only system that rewards creativity and effort rather than punishing them. The answer is not revolution but renewal — moral, cultural, and spiritual.

It means restoring honesty to markets, integrity to government, and faith to the heart of our nation. A people who forsake God will always turn to government for salvation, and that road always ends in dependency and decay.

Freedom demands something of us. It requires faith, discipline, and courage. It expects citizens to govern themselves before others govern them. That is the truth this generation deserves to hear again — that liberty is not a gift from the state but a calling from God.

Socialism always begins with promises and ends with permission. It tells you what to drive, what to say, what to believe, all in the name of fairness. But real fairness is not everyone sharing the same chains — it is everyone having the same chance.

The American dream was never about guarantees. It was about the right to try, to fail, and try again. That freedom built the most prosperous nation in history, and it can do so again if we remember that liberty is not a handout but a duty.

Socialism does not offer salvation. It requires subservience.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.