Glenn Beck: Arguing with Idiots - White House Edition

Arguing with Idiots: How to Stop Small Minds and Big Government

by Glenn Beck

GLENN: That's right, Arguing With Idiots. This is a book where it shows you how to win all of the it is the best book of facts to win the argument of the free market system. You know, that whole freedom thing is a good thing, at least with those of us here on the program. Today a special White House edition of Arguing With Idiots.

PAT: Yeah, I heard your clip of Anita Dunn, the White House official who said Mao was one of her favorite political philosophers.


PAT: But what you missed, Mr. Fatty Fat Fatso was that she got that from Republican Lee Atwater. Aha! I got you on that one.

GLENN: Yeah. We can't find that. We can't find any record of any Lee Atwater saying anything like that, you know. And I can't say that I'm a Lee Atwater expert here, but I've heard nothing that indicates that Mao was Lee Atwater's favorite political philosopher. You know what I mean? Or one that what did Anita say? One that she turns to most often. I haven't seen anyone produce the evidence that she actually got this from him, but here's the thing. If Chairman Mao was Lee Atwater's favorite political philosopher, then Lee Atwater sucked as well. I don't care about the parties. That's your game, not mine.

PAT: Well, John McCain even quoted Mao in his speech. I didn't hear you complaining about John McCain!

GLENN: Right, right, I've never been on the record complaining about John McCain. But here's the thing and the White House should understand this no one on the planet thinks that quoting someone is the same as naming them as their favorite political philosopher or someone they turn to most often. No one. If the White House believed any of their voters had more than four brain cells, they wouldn't even attempt to try this defense. For example, do you know who does a lot of quoting of Adolf Hitler?

PAT: Who?

GLENN: Holocaust museum. Yeah. But nowhere at the Holocaust museum do they say Adolf Hitler was one of their favorite political philosophers. I think that would be newsworthy if they did.

PAT: Yeah, you won't talk about the comparisons you've made in the past I noticed.

GLENN: The problem here is not making comparisons. You know, your line of attack is totally bizarre and so is the White House. Why would comparing things be controversial? You could fairly describe a good portion of my job as comparing conservatism to liberalism. I think it's quite clear that there's one of them I like and one of them that I don't.

PAT: Well, don't try to change the subject here. You brought Adolf Hitler up and you won't talk about, what you don't talk about ever is the fact that you compared Adolf Hitler to Jesus! You don't even mention that, I noticed.

GLENN: Who's got a blog organization reading my old books? You do. Well, it was as much of a comparison as my last point about Hitler and the Holocaust museum. One use Hitler quotes for good; the other for evil. The point that I illustrated with Hitler and Jesus was that they both stood up and said, "Follow me, I have answers." One used that approach for good: Love one another; the other used it for evil: Kill all the Jews. But the larger point here is we've come to a time where the White House is comfortable citing Mao, a man responsible for the deaths of 70 million people as their favorite philosopher and the person they turn to most often, while we're supposed to feel bad about citing Jesus for any reason whatsoever. Well, guess what.

PAT: What?

GLENN: Jesus is one of my favorite philosophers. The guy I turn to most often. In fact, in the countdown, he comes in all the way at number one. And I don't apologize for it. I don't need a communications department to make excuses for it, either.

PAT: I knew it! This is all about your religious zealotry. Guess what? You forgot one thing about the Bible.

GLENN: Yeah? What's that?

PAT: Gluttony is one of the seven deadly sins! That's what!

VOICE: Arguing With Idiots, available at bookstores everywhere or order now at


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

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

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

They don't actually care about the working class.

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

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

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

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

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

They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Watch the video clip below:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

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

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

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

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

Watch the video clip below:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Critical race theory: A special brand of evil


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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