How Harley-Davidson’s woke pivot betrays true American values

Archive Photos / Stringer | Getty Images

Modern progressives are attacking American greatness, one beloved brand at a time. But you are not powerless.

I once read an amazing analysis about the birth of modern America. It explained how veterans returned from World War II and how programs like the GI Bill opened new avenues and opportunities that hadn’t existed before.

As American soldiers returned home, many of them were battle-hardened warriors who had faced the worst of humanity. They fought for freedom and brought back skills that aren’t taught in any elementary school or university.

We learned to see American brands as icons for what we stood for, but we are now being conditioned to be 'unburdened.'

Veterans’ benefits made the American dream possible for over 13 million people. Some went to college, while others bought homes. Many started businesses, empowered by new skills in engineering, auto mechanics, and air mechanics — all fueled by a grit and determination reminiscent of the American pioneers.

A few years later, some of those men helped build the U.S. interstate highway system, which connected this new generation of American pioneers like never before. “Go West, young man” was replaced with “get your hands dirty,” “work for what you believe in,” “improve your community,” and “fix what is broken.”

Americans once took pride in maintaining their heritage. We valued American brands like John Deere, Tractor Supply, Ford, Chevrolet, Indian, and Harley-Davidson, and we actively protected their legacy. We worked on these products in the fields and in our home garages, building businesses to ensure they continued serving the American public. These weren’t just commodities. They were our livelihood. They plowed our fields, fed our families, and took our kids to school. They embodied the American spirit, symbolizing everything we were willing to fight and die for.

To the children of some of those returning veterans, how many of you learned about real American muscle while leaning over the front end of a 1965 Shelby GT, a 1969 Chevrolet Camaro, or a 1970 Chevy Chevelle, or learned about the internal combustion engine while Pop tore apart a 1941 Harley-Davidson Knucklehead?

How many of you assisted your dad in keeping the plowing season alive by repairing the family’s 1949 Model B John Deere tractor? How many trips to Tractor Supply did it take?

You no doubt bloodied a bunch of fingers. You sat in the garage, on the hood, or in the field and dumped about 10 gallons of sweat, but you did it proudly. You listened as Dad or Granddad patiently said, “There’s where the crankshaft is. That’s the water pump. That’s the alternator. That’s the fuel pump, and that’s the line that goes up to the carburetor.” He might have even let you pull on the throttle linkage so you could hear that baby sing.

There was no agenda here besides pure American greatness. American brands built our country. We relied and depended on them. We built businesses of our own from them, and we passed that legacy on to our children. It was their birthright, and it created modern America.

Harley’s woke surrender

This is a big part of the reason why today’s corporate “diversity, equity, and inclusion” craze is such a huge slap in the face. Woke politics have replaced the purity of the American brands that we grew up with. We depended on these products. We built income from them, and we supported our communities with their logos displayed proudly on barns and in garages. Those symbols are now being replaced by corporate boards who get their marching orders from people like Larry Fink at BlackRock.

Robby Starbuck has recently exposed multiple companies for this behavior: John Deere, Tractor Supply, and especially Harley-Davidson.

Can you think of a bigger slap in the face than the woke capitulation of Harley-Davidson? Harley is one of the brands that helped win World War II. The Harley-Davidson WLA carried American GIs to war against the Nazis. The WLA was brought back to the United States, and a new era of motorcycles was born after the veterans began chopping them up for civilians to use. The “chopper” was born.

Bettmann/Getty Images

Veterans returning from war from the 1940s through today have ridden Harleys as both a therapeutic mechanism to deal with what they saw on the battlefield and as an homage to experience the openness of American freedom. And that legacy has been taught and handed down to Harley-Davidson riders from father to son enthusiastically since 1903.

What has Harley-Davidson done with that legacy? Here are just a few of the things that Starbuck exposed:

  • Harley-Davidson openly supports the Equality Act, which would allow men into girls' bathrooms, sports, and locker rooms.
  • The company funded an all-ages Pride event that featured a "rage room" next to drag queen story time.
  • 1,800 employees were required to attend a virtual training course on how to become “LGBTQ+ allies.”
  • The woke CEO, Jochen Zeitz, signed the CEO Action for Diversity and Inclusion Pledge.
  • The company made February and March "months of inclusion" because, apparently, Pride Month isn’t enough.
  • The company hosted multiple woke United Way trainings.
  • Harley-Davidson sent some employees to a “white male only” woke diversity training program.
  • To top it off, the company is openly working to have fewer white suppliers, dealers, and employees.

And the list goes on.

What globalists want ... and fear

The purpose of modern cultural Marxism and progressivism is to destroy what was once great by attacking everything that made it great back in the beginning. You have to be “unburdened by what has been,” as Kamala Harris says, in order to open the door to “the fundamental transformation of America," to quote Barack Obama.

Twenty-first-century fascists are doing this, one beloved brand at a time, and we’re seeing it happen in real time. Woodrow Wilson once said, "The use of a university is to make young gentlemen as unlike their fathers as possible.” We’ve been seeing that from academia for decades. By and large, universities are lost.

Teach your kids that getting their hands dirty is a good thing. Something fought, bled, and sweat for has meaningful value. It’s part of who we are as Americans.

But that wasn’t enough. Progressives then turned their sights on our children in grade school. But that wasn’t enough either. They’re now going after the heart of the American entrepreneurial spirit and the beloved brands that made us who we are today. We were brought up to love them. We learned to see them as icons for what we stood for, but we are now being conditioned to be “unburdened.”

Reconnect your children to the basics of what makes American products so great. “American made” is more than just a slogan. It represents the weary men and women working in factories in small towns across Middle America. It’s the dad teaching his kids to change their own tires and oil. It’s the multiple trips to the local parts store and the thrill of victory as the family tractor roars back to life.

Teach your kids that getting their hands dirty is a good thing. Something fought, bled, and sweat for has meaningful value. It’s part of who we are as Americans. It benefits the family. It supports the community. It spreads that beloved American brand all over the country — and the world.

That connection goes all the way to the top of the corporate boardroom. That connection is what the globalists fear the most. Your passion has the power to destroy every coercive motive they can ever dream up. It is the same passion that fueled the American pioneer. It carried our soldiers into war against the Nazis and then drove them to catapult this country into the modern era.

That passion is why they’ll ultimately lose.

Unburden your families from the unburdening. Teach them the history of what made this country great. If a corporation tries to pervert a beloved American brand, show your kids what made them beloved to begin with.

Explain how the Harley-Davidson engine noise was specifically designed to be iconic, how the crankshaft has only one pin, and how the arrangement of the cylinders makes the pistons fire unevenly. No other motorcycle sounds the same. Why? Because it’s a friggin’ Harley! It’s part of Harley's story, and that is why American companies are so beloved to us. Sure, they sell quality products, but we fall in love with their story.

Reconnect these great American brands with their incredible stories. Get some oil, grease, and brake dust on your hands, and take pride when your kids ultimately cover their faces in it while trying to help you. Passion drives change, and it is your passion that scares these tyrants the most.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

EXPOSED: Why Eisenhower warned us about endless wars

PAUL J. RICHARDS / Staff | Getty Images

Donald Trump emphasizes peace through strength, reminding the world that the United States is willing to fight to win. That’s beyond ‘defense.’

President Donald Trump made headlines this week by signaling a rebrand of the Defense Department — restoring its original name, the Department of War.

At first, I was skeptical. “Defense” suggests restraint, a principle I consider vital to U.S. foreign policy. “War” suggests aggression. But for the first 158 years of the republic, that was the honest name: the Department of War.

A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

The founders never intended a permanent standing army. When conflict came — the Revolution, the War of 1812, the trenches of France, the beaches of Normandy — the nation called men to arms, fought, and then sent them home. Each campaign was temporary, targeted, and necessary.

From ‘war’ to ‘military-industrial complex’

Everything changed in 1947. President Harry Truman — facing the new reality of nuclear weapons, global tension, and two world wars within 20 years — established a full-time military and rebranded the Department of War as the Department of Defense. Americans resisted; we had never wanted a permanent army. But Truman convinced the country it was necessary.

Was the name change an early form of political correctness? A way to soften America’s image as a global aggressor? Or was it simply practical? Regardless, the move created a permanent, professional military. But it also set the stage for something Truman’s successor, President Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower, famously warned about: the military-industrial complex.

Ike, the five-star general who commanded Allied forces in World War II and stormed Normandy, delivered a harrowing warning during his farewell address: The military-industrial complex would grow powerful. Left unchecked, it could influence policy and push the nation toward unnecessary wars.

And that’s exactly what happened. The Department of Defense, with its full-time and permanent army, began spending like there was no tomorrow. Weapons were developed, deployed, and sometimes used simply to justify their existence.

Peace through strength

When Donald Trump said this week, “I don’t want to be defense only. We want defense, but we want offense too,” some people freaked out. They called him a warmonger. He isn’t. Trump is channeling a principle older than him: peace through strength. Ronald Reagan preached it; Trump is taking it a step further.

Just this week, Trump also suggested limiting nuclear missiles — hardly the considerations of a warmonger — echoing Reagan, who wanted to remove missiles from silos while keeping them deployable on planes.

The seemingly contradictory move of Trump calling for a Department of War sends a clear message: He wants Americans to recognize that our military exists not just for defense, but to project power when necessary.

Trump has pointed to something critically important: The best way to prevent war is to have a leader who knows exactly who he is and what he will do. Trump signals strength, deterrence, and resolve. You want to negotiate? Great. You don’t? Then we’ll finish the fight decisively.

That’s why the world listens to us. That’s why nations come to the table — not because Trump is reckless, but because he means what he says and says what he means. Peace under weakness invites aggression. Peace under strength commands respect.

Trump is the most anti-war president we’ve had since Jimmy Carter. But unlike Carter, Trump isn’t weak. Carter’s indecision emboldened enemies and made the world less safe. Trump’s strength makes the country stronger. He believes in peace as much as any president. But he knows peace requires readiness for war.

Names matter

When we think of “defense,” we imagine cybersecurity, spy programs, and missile shields. But when we think of “war,” we recall its harsh reality: death, destruction, and national survival. Trump is reminding us what the Department of Defense is really for: war. Not nation-building, not diplomacy disguised as military action, not endless training missions. War — full stop.

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Names matter. Words matter. They shape identity and character. A Department of Defense implies passivity, a posture of reaction. A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

So yes, I’ve changed my mind. I’m for the rebranding to the Department of War. It shows strength to the world. It reminds Americans, internally and externally, of the reality we face. The Department of Defense can no longer be a euphemism. Our military exists for war — not without deterrence, but not without strength either. And we need to stop deluding ourselves.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Censorship, spying, lies—The Deep State’s web finally unmasked

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

From surveillance abuse to censorship, the deep state used state power and private institutions to suppress dissent and influence two US elections.

The term “deep state” has long been dismissed as the province of cranks and conspiracists. But the recent declassification of two critical documents — the Durham annex, released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), and a report publicized by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard — has rendered further denial untenable.

These documents lay bare the structure and function of a bureaucratic, semi-autonomous network of agencies, contractors, nonprofits, and media entities that together constitute a parallel government operating alongside — and at times in opposition to — the duly elected one.

The ‘deep state’ is a self-reinforcing institutional machine — a decentralized, global bureaucracy whose members share ideological alignment.

The disclosures do not merely recount past abuses; they offer a schematic of how modern influence operations are conceived, coordinated, and deployed across domestic and international domains.

What they reveal is not a rogue element operating in secret, but a systematized apparatus capable of shaping elections, suppressing dissent, and laundering narratives through a transnational network of intelligence, academia, media, and philanthropic institutions.

Narrative engineering from the top

According to Gabbard’s report, a pivotal moment occurred on December 9, 2016, when the Obama White House convened its national security leadership in the Situation Room. Attendees included CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Secretary of State John Kerry, and others.

During this meeting, the consensus view up to that point — that Russia had not manipulated the election outcome — was subordinated to new instructions.

The record states plainly: The intelligence community was directed to prepare an assessment “per the President’s request” that would frame Russia as the aggressor and then-presidential candidate Donald Trump as its preferred candidate. Notably absent was any claim that new intelligence had emerged. The motivation was political, not evidentiary.

This maneuver became the foundation for the now-discredited 2017 intelligence community assessment on Russian election interference. From that point on, U.S. intelligence agencies became not neutral evaluators of fact but active participants in constructing a public narrative designed to delegitimize the incoming administration.

Institutional and media coordination

The ODNI report and the Durham annex jointly describe a feedback loop in which intelligence is laundered through think tanks and nongovernmental organizations, then cited by media outlets as “independent verification.” At the center of this loop are agencies like the CIA, FBI, and ODNI; law firms such as Perkins Coie; and NGOs such as the Open Society Foundations.

According to the Durham annex, think tanks including the Atlantic Council, the Carnegie Endowment, and the Center for a New American Security were allegedly informed of Clinton’s 2016 plan to link Trump to Russia. These institutions, operating under the veneer of academic independence, helped diffuse the narrative into public discourse.

Media coordination was not incidental. On the very day of the aforementioned White House meeting, the Washington Post published a front-page article headlined “Obama Orders Review of Russian Hacking During Presidential Campaign” — a story that mirrored the internal shift in official narrative. The article marked the beginning of a coordinated media campaign that would amplify the Trump-Russia collusion narrative throughout the transition period.

Surveillance and suppression

Surveillance, once limited to foreign intelligence operations, was turned inward through the abuse of FISA warrants. The Steele dossier — funded by the Clinton campaign via Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS — served as the basis for wiretaps on Trump affiliates, despite being unverified and partially discredited. The FBI even altered emails to facilitate the warrants.

ROBYN BECK / Contributor | Getty Images

This capacity for internal subversion reappeared in 2020, when 51 former intelligence officials signed a letter labeling the Hunter Biden laptop story as “Russian disinformation.” According to polling, 79% of Americans believed truthful coverage of the laptop could have altered the election. The suppression of that story — now confirmed as authentic — was election interference, pure and simple.

A machine, not a ‘conspiracy theory’

The deep state is a self-reinforcing institutional machine — a decentralized, global bureaucracy whose members share ideological alignment and strategic goals.

Each node — law firms, think tanks, newsrooms, federal agencies — operates with plausible deniability. But taken together, they form a matrix of influence capable of undermining electoral legitimacy and redirecting national policy without democratic input.

The ODNI report and the Durham annex mark the first crack in the firewall shielding this machine. They expose more than a political scandal buried in the past. They lay bare a living system of elite coordination — one that demands exposure, confrontation, and ultimately dismantling.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump's proposal explained: Ukraine's path to peace without NATO expansion

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor | Getty Images

Strategic compromise, not absolute victory, often ensures lasting stability.

When has any country been asked to give up land it won in a war? Even if a nation is at fault, the punishment must be measured.

After World War I, Germany, the main aggressor, faced harsh penalties under the Treaty of Versailles. Germans resented the restrictions, and that resentment fueled the rise of Adolf Hitler, ultimately leading to World War II. History teaches that justice for transgressions must avoid creating conditions for future conflict.

Ukraine and Russia must choose to either continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

Russia and Ukraine now stand at a similar crossroads. They can cling to disputed land and prolong a devastating war, or they can make concessions that might secure a lasting peace. The stakes could not be higher: Tens of thousands die each month, and the choice between endless bloodshed and negotiated stability hinges on each side’s willingness to yield.

History offers a guide. In 1967, Israel faced annihilation. Surrounded by hostile armies, the nation fought back and seized large swaths of territory from Jordan, Egypt, and Syria. Yet Israel did not seek an empire. It held only the buffer zones needed for survival and returned most of the land. Security and peace, not conquest, drove its decisions.

Peace requires concessions

Secretary of State Marco Rubio says both Russia and Ukraine will need to “get something” from a peace deal. He’s right. Israel proved that survival outweighs pride. By giving up land in exchange for recognition and an end to hostilities, it stopped the cycle of war. Egypt and Israel have not fought in more than 50 years.

Russia and Ukraine now press opposing security demands. Moscow wants a buffer to block NATO. Kyiv, scarred by invasion, seeks NATO membership — a pledge that any attack would trigger collective defense by the United States and Europe.

President Donald Trump and his allies have floated a middle path: an Article 5-style guarantee without full NATO membership. Article 5, the core of NATO’s charter, declares that an attack on one is an attack on all. For Ukraine, such a pledge would act as a powerful deterrent. For Russia, it might be more palatable than NATO expansion to its border

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

Peace requires concessions. The human cost is staggering: U.S. estimates indicate 20,000 Russian soldiers died in a single month — nearly half the total U.S. casualties in Vietnam — and the toll on Ukrainians is also severe. To stop this bloodshed, both sides need to recognize reality on the ground, make difficult choices, and anchor negotiations in security and peace rather than pride.

Peace or bloodshed?

Both Russia and Ukraine claim deep historical grievances. Ukraine arguably has a stronger claim of injustice. But the question is not whose parchment is older or whose deed is more valid. The question is whether either side is willing to trade some land for the lives of thousands of innocent people. True security, not historical vindication, must guide the path forward.

History shows that punitive measures or rigid insistence on territorial claims can perpetuate cycles of war. Germany’s punishment after World War I contributed directly to World War II. By contrast, Israel’s willingness to cede land for security and recognition created enduring peace. Ukraine and Russia now face the same choice: Continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The loneliness epidemic: Are machines replacing human connection?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Seniors, children, and the isolated increasingly rely on machines for conversation, risking real relationships and the emotional depth that only humans provide.

Jill Smola is 75 years old. She’s a retiree from Orlando, Florida, and she spent her life caring for the elderly. She played games, assembled puzzles, and offered company to those who otherwise would have sat alone.

Now, she sits alone herself. Her husband has died. She has a lung condition. She can’t drive. She can’t leave her home. Weeks can pass without human interaction.

Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

But CBS News reports that she has a new companion. And she likes this companion more than her own daughter.

The companion? Artificial intelligence.

She spends five hours a day talking to her AI friend. They play games, do trivia, and just talk. She says she even prefers it to real people.

My first thought was simple: Stop this. We are losing our humanity.

But as I sat with the story, I realized something uncomfortable. Maybe we’ve already lost some of our humanity — not to AI, but to ourselves.

Outsourcing presence

How often do we know the right thing to do yet fail to act? We know we should visit the lonely. We know we should sit with someone in pain. We know what Jesus would do: Notice the forgotten, touch the untouchable, offer time and attention without outsourcing compassion.

Yet how often do we just … talk about it? On the radio, online, in lectures, in posts. We pontificate, and then we retreat.

I asked myself: What am I actually doing to close the distance between knowing and doing?

Human connection is messy. It’s inconvenient. It takes patience, humility, and endurance. AI doesn’t challenge you. It doesn’t interrupt your day. It doesn’t ask anything of you. Real people do. Real people make us confront our pride, our discomfort, our loneliness.

We’ve built an economy of convenience. We can have groceries delivered, movies streamed, answers instantly. But friendships — real relationships — are slow, inefficient, unpredictable. They happen in the blank spaces of life that we’ve been trained to ignore.

And now we’re replacing that inefficiency with machines.

AI provides comfort without challenge. It eliminates the risk of real intimacy. It’s an elegant coping mechanism for loneliness, but a poor substitute for life. If we’re not careful, the lonely won’t just be alone — they’ll be alone with an anesthetic, a shadow that never asks for anything, never interrupts, never makes them grow.

Reclaiming our humanity

We need to reclaim our humanity. Presence matters. Not theory. Not outrage. Action.

It starts small. Pull up a chair for someone who eats alone. Call a neighbor you haven’t spoken to in months. Visit a nursing home once a month — then once a week. Ask their names, hear their stories. Teach your children how to be present, to sit with someone in grief, without rushing to fix it.

Turn phones off at dinner. Make Sunday afternoons human time. Listen. Ask questions. Don’t post about it afterward. Make the act itself sacred.

Humility is central. We prefer machines because we can control them. Real people are inconvenient. They interrupt our narratives. They demand patience, forgiveness, and endurance. They make us confront ourselves.

A friend will challenge your self-image. A chatbot won’t.

Our homes are quieter. Our streets are emptier. Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

Before we worry about how AI will reshape humanity, we must first practice humanity. It can start with 15 minutes a day of undivided attention, presence, and listening.

Change usually comes when pain finally wins. Let’s not wait for that. Let’s start now. Because real connection restores faster than any machine ever will.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.