Glenn Beck: Arrogance in Washington

Watch Glenn Beck weekdays at 5p & 2a ET on Fox News Channel

I want to start with a phrase that could be the quintessential American ideal: All men are created equal. I don't think we've ever achieved it; even in the golden era of the American Revolution, it was short and fleeting. But we strive for it.

Do you agree we should strive for it? Before you answer that, take a look at video of Democratic Rep. Pete Stark that came out this week. Stark is the guy who taunted The Minutemen and asked how many illegals they killed. He was taking questions at a town hall meeting in Hayward, California about the power of the federal government:


REP. PETE STARK, D-CALIF.: The federal government, yes, can do most anything in this country.


WOMAN: You, sir, and people that think like you are destroying this nation.

STARK: Well, I'm sure glad you're here to save it. Makes me feel very comfortable.


These are his constituents and arrogance just oozes out of him. He's not even trying to hide it. Now, if this was just one lone arrogant jerk then I wouldn't be giving this clown the light of day, but it's not just him. I think this is how the overwhelming majority of our congressmen and senators view you. They hold you in contempt. They think you're stupid.

How many times have you called your representative's office, only to get hung up on or be given the runaround? How many times did you call to get information on a health care town hall or event and get lied to about the time and date of the event?

Why would they treat their own constituents this way? Because they can. They think you'll just go away.

We've got a show coming up soon — another one of my crazy ratings ploys: "Manifest destiny vs. divine providence."

Divine providence is the idea that you are just trying to live your life — working, raising a family, trying to live by God's principles — but doors are opened and things happen that could only be explained as the finger of God, who helps you along the way. The understanding of divine providence actually humbles those involved.

But just like all good things, the dark side turns it inside out, into something horrible. The opposite of divine providence is manifest destiny; it's "Get the hell out of our way, we're on a mission from God." And you see this from Andrew Jackson to Woodrow Wilson to today. What do you think Obama means when he says this:


BARACK OBAMA: My individual salvation is not going to come about without a collective salvation for the country.



OBAMA: I strongly believe that my personal story is wrapped up with the larger story of this country. That my individual salvation rests on our collective salvation.

OBAMA: What I found in my life is that my individual salvation depends on our collective salvation.

OBAMA: Our individual salvation depends on collective salvation.


What does that mean? He cannot be saved, unless we're all saved. That is a perversion. The point is that the president and progressives like him have put themselves in a position that they know something you don't know or are too stupid to figure out. So the smart people have to figure things out; it's their obligation to save you.

Is Obama making himself God? No. But the progressive movement wants to replace God with the state. They have the right to punish, to take away rights, grant favors and decide who lives and who dies. The state has become God and it's for the good of the collective. If you disagree, well, you have to be stopped. They know best.

That's why Pope Benedict says this: "Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes not divine but demonic."

Demonic not divine.

Now, help me figure this one out: They say they want to help you. Well let's look at the difference between a democracy and a republic. What's the difference?

A pure democracy operates by direct majority vote of the people; the majority feeling rules.

A republic is what we currently have: You elect representatives who then go to work for you. You don't have time to read the 2,500-page bills coming out one after another, so you hire someone to do it for you. Which makes the arrogance of John Conyers even more amazing when he says this:


REP. JOHN CONYERS: I love these members that get up and say, "read the bill." What good is reading the bill if it's a thousand pages and you don't have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?


That's like a truck driver saying, "Why would I do all that driving? Have you seen how many miles that is?" He's supposed to do that so I don't have to! That's what we pay him for. But if they think that the bills are too confusing and long for them to read, why do they want more democracy? How can they expect you (the stupid one) to read it? You're too stupid to know universal health care is good, that TARP is for the best, but they are pushing for more voice from you? That doesn't seem consistent.

Only way to make those consistent is that they are only telling the truth on half of it. Are they really empowering you and lying about being arrogant? Or are they truly elitists and getting you to be like sheep to be led into the barn — that's for you to decide. But it's kind of obvious.

Have you ever played poker? Pete Stark is a tell — something that gives away your hand. These guys are at best a tell, but I think more so they are just tired of playing the game: We're close, let's just take it!

Same with progressive Bill Maher, who says the stupid people have to be dragged into health care:


BILL MAHER, HBO: Forget this stuff. You can't get Americans to agree on anything. Sixty-percent? Sixty-percent of people don't believe in evolution in this country. He just needs to drag them to it. Like I just said, they're stupid. Just drag them to this. Get health care done with or without them...


America, you might think these are isolated events, that they are not connected. But here's what about Walter Lippman — icon in the press industry — says: "The common interests very largely elude public opinion entirely and can be managed only by a specialized class whose personal interests reach beyond the locality."

In other words: You're too stupid or greedy to understand.

How about when the president's favorite blog, Arianna Huffington's The Huffington Post, wanted to understand Sarah Palin. Here's Arianna's conclusion: "It's not Palin's positions people respond to — it's her use of symbols."

No, that's not what it is. They like the fact that she's real. She says what she means and means what she says. People are starving for someone that is real, not calculating. Does Arianna believe Sarah Palin is equal to her? Of course not.

How about President Obama, who knows the Cambridge police acted stupidly and knows the Arizona police will act stupidly. He doesn't need to meet the head of BP, he already knows what those people are like. Does he believe all men are created equal?

— Watch Glenn Beck weekdays at 5p & 2a ET on Fox News Channel

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.