Are we watching a New World Order take shape? How ISIS and Russia are about to change the globe

Below is a transcript of Monday's opening monologue. Scroll down for a free video highlight - and sign up now for TheBlaze TV to watch the full episode. Don't miss The Root: Armies of Armageddon Thursday at 5pm ET for more on this topic. 

Well, hello, America. I’m going to lay that out a little bit more clearly for you today. That was early this morning. Welcome to The Glenn Beck Program and to TheBlaze. This is the network that you are building.

Vladimir Putin literally vanished for nearly two weeks, but nobody seemed to care. The media was more interested in the political bickering over Hillary Clinton and the emails. You would think that the president of a major country going AWOL would be a bigger story. Imagine if our president didn’t show up. Okay, well, that’s a bad example. Hang on, let’s imagine that. Ooh…okay, imagine he didn’t show up. People would be interested, right?

American news would go all Jerry Springer, and that’s really what we’re doing now. We’re just playing left and right games. We’re playing the nonsense. I really hate being the guy that brings you this really bad news, but no one else is offering any meaningful perspective, so we don’t really have much of a choice.

All week, we’re going to be wargaming what I believe is coming, and I told you this a couple of weeks ago that I feel compelled to stand on these things and tell them to you until you really understand them, because you need to understand what the power players around the globe are actually saying and doing, their words and their actions. We’ll follow the logical trail to the logical outcome.

You may disagree with us, but it’s what I believe, and it all culminates on Thursday with The Root: The Armies of Armageddon, which traces the evolution of jihad and explains how and why ethnic Fascism and Islamic Fascism are rising and how they’re tied together.

[...]

Another chalkboard that I did in 2011 when GBTV first started and came on the air was this. I wanted to bring it back because, and I want to make this very, very clear, this is 2011 that I did this. Time and order may vary wildly. I still agree with that, but I want to show you where we are on this.

This is what I said would happen to the world to establish a new world order. The Arab Spring, war and revolution would spread. The caliphate would gather with Turkey at the center. I was one country off. It is Syria. Israel the focus of the hate, I think we can say that’s true. Pressure extends to Europe and America, that’s what’s happening now over in Europe.

European fall, the civil unrest, the default and then the collapse of the euro, the riots joined by Islamic protesters, and war and civil war, this is where I really want to focus today, but then I said that we’d get the American Spring. Again, I put these in consecutive order, but this is not obviously the time. Times will vary wildly.

Network framework completed, in other words, everything that this new government that we’re building would be completed by then. All of our pressure points would hit, our military would be stretched, our people would be stretched, our churches would be stretched, everything. Poverty push, we would be discouraging people from working. Economic hardship and eventually a collapse, riots and civil war, that we’re going to leave for another time. Hopefully that never happens, but so far all of this has happened and now this.

Civil unrest, we’re starting to see that. Default and collapse of the euro, we are starting to see that. It is now in negative gain. The treasury bills for Germany, they are now offering negative interest. Riots joined by the Islamic whoever, that would be, we’re seeing that right now. Then war, this pertains to Russia.

I want to show you on this map what I mean by that, and I’ll try to explain this a little bit better than I did in that clip this morning. Russia is playing for this part of the world between these two seas right here. They want their old territory back. They want all of this back and then some. They are trying to reestablish the third Roman Empire, and the third Roman Empire was centered here in Crimea. They have already taken that.

We have just done Operation Atlantic Resolve, which means unbeknownst to most of us because our media just doesn’t care to cover important things, Operation Atlantic Resolve, we have put troops and tanks and everything else here in this area, and we have drawn a line saying as NATO you are not crossing this.

Okay, so now Putin disappears, comes back more of a hardline, and that hardline wants to take the Ukraine which is right here across that line—Russia trying to reclaim the land that they believe is there. We’ve put up our defensive line, the Operation Atlantic Resolve, and the caliphate, the caliphate is pushing another way. Here is where the caliphate is, in Syria. I said that it would actually be in Turkey.

The reason why I said it would be in Turkey is because the other important iconic place in the world was in Turkey, Istanbul. That was another that used to be Constantinople. It was a very important religious, for Christians, religious center point. Most people think of Rome as the Christian empire, but it’s not. It is now.

It was here, here, and at the time when the Arab world was sweeping through the Middle East and coming up here, they were stopped in Paris. It was in the 1300s that the French pushed them back through Spain. So, if you think like somebody who was, you know, stuck in the 1300s, you would want these guys. This is a Rome to you. This is Rome to you. We have to start thinking like they think.

Now, what happened, Moscow is destabilizing Europe by funding the neo-Nazis, PEGIDA, the Golden Dawn. There’s Nazis here. There’s Nazis here. There’s Nazis here. There’s Nazis here, and all of that money is coming in from Moscow. This is a collision course with Putin and the West, and this is what you have to understand, what Putin is doing here is Putin is sending all of this money over to Europe because he’s saying the Christians have lost their way. The United States of America is not standing up our Christendom anymore. Who is really standing up?

Because in the caliphate and because we’ve destabilize the Middle East, all of this has been destabilized, and where are all of the refugees going? They’re all going up into Italy. Two hundred thousand refugees and illegal immigrants have come up into Europe just in what, the last quarter, 200,000. Can you imagine having a bunch of people from Tunisia or Libya or Egypt or Syria coming through your border, 200,000 of them?

That’s why you have the neo-Nazis starting to rise up, because just like our governments, their governments aren’t doing anything about it. They’re not stopping any of the illegal immigration. So, what’s going to happen, I believe, is they’re going to hit Paris, and that will excite all of the people to come up here and here and up through here. It will start to squeeze Europe.

When that happens, as I said, this line of NATO will fall back around here, and Moscow will push this way and this way. Then we’re going to be left with a question that we had in the 1940s, do we fight the Fascists and the Communists or do we side with the Communists to beat the Fascists? We decided we would band with the Communists. So, this time it will be, oh geez, Russia is a really bad guy again, the Fascist there. Do we side with the Fascist or do we side with ISIS? We will pick Russia.

Russia and ISIS are the two driving forces steering the globe closer to the edge of world war. Let me take you to Russia. Let me give you an update on what has happened with Putin. He finally reappeared this morning, and he joked about the gossip surrounding his disappearance, but he never disclosed what the actual reason for his ten-day escape was. So, why was he gone?

Well, let me show you a few things that have happened, because I don’t have the answer, but let me give you a few things that bother me. Before the disappearance, a Putin critic, we’ve shown you, got whacked. Now, this is the guy who was on our side. This is the only guy that if Putin was going to get whacked himself we would say, “Okay, whew!” but he got whacked in an obvious hit job. At the same time, you have the head of the military, Igor Girkin, saying that Putin is going to end up like Czar Nicholas or Milosevic if he doesn’t straighten up. Those ended in a coup and death.

Then Putin goes missing. Wild rumors began to circulate—he’s dealing with a love child, there’s a coup, he’s had a stroke, he’s dead. While he’s missing, and this is important to notice, the state media—remember that—the state media released a documentary where Putin said Russia was ready to go nuclear if need be. This was a message to the West. Then this morning Putin returned. He joked about being gone for a while, and the first thing he did was order a massive scale military drill over the polar cap.

Why would you do it over the polar cap? Because the polar cap allows you to come over into the NATO territory. So, let me put this into context of Operation Atlantic Resolve. In response to Russia’s recent aggression in the Ukraine, the U.S. Army launched a massive military convoy stretching over 1,000 miles through six European countries, forming the defensive line against Russia.

We warned in our special The Root: Red Storm Rising that this would end in one of two ways, either Putin would get more aggressive or Putin wouldn’t be aggressive enough, and extremists would grow impatient and seek a coup. So, the missing Putin, was this a warning to Putin to say “Do as we say” or was it just about a love child?

I will tell you up until I found out that he was gone for 11 days, I bought the love child thing. I thought okay, if he’s gone for three or four days, but the love child thing I have a hard time from the guy who I hunt bears and sharks in my underpants without a shirt with my bare hands. I just don’t see him fazed by his love for children for 10 or 11 days.

So, Russia continues to destabilize the region and itself. Here’s the problem, if men like Dugin and Girkin are publicly supporting a hostile military takeover, which they are, we are in for a very dark times. One of the possible candidates is Sergey Shoygu. He is the most hardline of the hardliner Fascists, and he possesses all three prerequisites needed to pull off a successful coup. He has access to lots of money. He controls the Russian state media, you know, the one that just released an old tape of Putin taking a hard line. He is also the head of the military.

If he takes over, it would make Putin look like Mother Teresa. Any Russian restraint would be snuffed out. Russia’s march to reclaim the third Roman Empire would be on big time. This is very scary stuff, especially if you understand what the caliphate is after. We can only cross our fingers and hope that it was the love child, which indeed it might have been, but let me give you the update now on ISIS.

I saw another story that made my blood run cold. A few weeks ago, I said on the air that France was in real danger. Watch.

VIDEO

Glenn: Because of what is happening, I believe London, France, Germany, Greece, I believe these things could be destroyed in what is coming and especially because remember who you’re fighting against. You’re fighting against Islamic extremists. The places that they will target will be places like the Cathedral of Notre Dame. You could go back to France in 15 years from now, and it might be free. It might not be. It might be free, but the Cathedral of Notre Dame may be gone.

So, this weekend when I saw this headline on TheBlaze, I froze: “ISIS Vows to Bomb White House, Big Ben, and the Eiffel Tower.” I thought for a while now that it was France, especially with the massive illegal immigration problem that it would take the center stage. I will tell you that I have an interview coming out with Tim Ferriss on his podcast that I did a week ago. I think it comes out in three or four weeks, and he asked me, “What do you see for Europe?” I told him in that interview maybe a week, two weeks ago, that it’s going to be France, and it’s going to be the Cathedral of Notre Dame.

He looked at me, and I felt a little awkward because it was strangely specific and out of the blue, but now that I see ISIS is all but declaring Paris their number-one target, I believe this is important for you to understand.

On a side note, the young kid who executed the so-called spy that ISIS caught, he’s from France, they believe. The kid couldn’t have been more than 11 or 12 years old. That’s how scary this is getting. I know people have mocked ISIS on Twitter for saying that they were going to conquer Rome, but I don’t believe they look at Rome the way you look at Rome. Maybe they do. Again, they are coming through Italy as well.

Can they do it? I don’t know. Will they try? Well, bin Laden in 1999 said that he was going to bomb the skyscrapers of New York. I would suggest that we take these people at their word. You have to think like a 13th century person and the Crusades to understand their words. Remember, ISIS keeps talking about fighting the armies of Rome. Back in the Crusades days, the caliphate was dominating, and it was France that pushed the Moors out of Spain and put a stop to it.

So, what does that have to do with the armies of Rome? Here’s where it gets interesting. Pope Clement V in the 13th century relocated the seat of the Catholic Church to Avignon, France. Most people don’t remember. Believe me, the Muslims do. It was Pope Clement who gave the order to send the Crusades out to the Levant, as in the L in ISIL.

So, to them they would be fighting the armies of Rome when they target France. Their symbolic target I don’t believe will be the Eiffel Tower. I think they will go for something sacred like the Cathedral at Notre Dame or maybe something in Avignon. I don’t know. They’ll hit what they can. After all, ISIS wants to conquer a small town in Dabiq just because they believe it will initiate the literal countdown to the apocalypse. These people are looking for religious symbolism.

The globe continues its march toward war. The media continues to fail to give us perspective, so we will stay on this.

Trump v. Slaughter: The Deep State on trial

JIM WATSON / Contributor | Getty Images

The administrative state has long operated as an unelected super-government. Trump v. Slaughter may be the moment voters reclaim authority over their own institutions.

Washington is watching and worrying about a U.S. Supreme Court case that could very well define the future of American self-government. And I don’t say that lightly. At the center of Trump v. Slaughter is a deceptively simple question: Can the president — the one official chosen by the entire nation — remove the administrators and “experts” who wield enormous, unaccountable power inside the executive branch?

This isn’t a technical fight. It’s not a paperwork dispute. It’s a turning point. Because if the answer is no, then the American people no longer control their own government. Elections become ceremonial. The bureaucracy becomes permanent. And the Constitution becomes a suggestion rather than the law of the land.

A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.

That simply cannot be. Justice Neil Gorsuch summed it up perfectly during oral arguments on Monday: “There is no such thing in our constitutional order as a fourth branch of government that’s quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative.”

Yet for more than a century, the administrative state has grown like kudzu — quietly, relentlessly, and always in one direction. Today we have a fourth branch of government: unelected, unaccountable, insulated from consequence. Congress hands off lawmaking to agencies. Presidents arrive with agendas, but the bureaucrats remain, and they decide what actually gets done.

If the Supreme Court decides that presidents cannot fire the very people who execute federal power, they are not just rearranging an org chart. The justices are rewriting the structure of the republic. They are confirming what we’ve long feared: Here, the experts rule, not the voters.

A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.

The founders warned us

The men who wrote the Constitution saw this temptation coming. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison in the Federalist Papers hammered home the same principle again and again: Power must remain traceable to the people. They understood human nature far too well. They knew that once administrators are protected from accountability, they will accumulate power endlessly. It is what humans do.

That’s why the Constitution vests the executive power in a single president — someone the entire nation elects and can unelect. They did not want a managerial council. They did not want a permanent priesthood of experts. They wanted responsibility and authority to live in one place so the people could reward or replace it.

So this case will answer a simple question: Do the people still govern this country, or does a protected class of bureaucrats now run the show?

Not-so-expert advice

Look around. The experts insisted they could manage the economy — and produced historic debt and inflation.

The experts insisted they could run public health — and left millions of Americans sick, injured, and dead while avoiding accountability.

The experts insisted they could steer foreign policy — and delivered endless conflict with no measurable benefit to our citizens.

And through it all, they stayed. Untouched, unelected, and utterly unapologetic.

If a president cannot fire these people, then you — the voter — have no ability to change the direction of your own government. You can vote for reform, but you will get the same insiders making the same decisions in the same agencies.

That is not self-government. That is inertia disguised as expertise.

A republic no more?

A monarchy can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A dictatorship can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A constitutional republic cannot. Not for long anyway.

We are supposed to live in a system where the people set the course, Congress writes the laws, and the president carries them out. When agencies write their own rules, judges shield them from oversight, and presidents are forbidden from removing them, we no longer live in that system. We live in something else — something the founders warned us about.

And the people become spectators of their own government.

JIM WATSON / Contributor | Getty Images

The path forward

Restoring the separation of powers does not mean rejecting expertise. It means returning expertise to its proper role: advisory, not sovereign.

No expert should hold power that voters cannot revoke. No agency should drift beyond the reach of the executive. No bureaucracy should be allowed to grow branches the Constitution never gave it.

The Supreme Court now faces a choice that will shape American life for a generation. It can reinforce the Constitution, or it can allow the administrative state to wander even farther from democratic control.

This case isn’t about President Trump. It isn’t about Rebecca Slaughter, the former Federal Trade Commission official suing to get her job back. It’s about whether elections still mean anything — whether the American people still hold the reins of their own government.

That is what is at stake: not procedure, not technicalities, but the survival of a system built on the revolutionary idea that the citizens — not the experts — are the ones who rule.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

1 in 20 Canadians die by MAID—Is this 'compassion'?

Vaughn Ridley / Stringer | Getty Images

Medical assistance in dying isn’t health care. It’s the moment a Western democracy decided some lives aren’t worth saving, and it’s a warning sign we can’t ignore.

Canada loves to lecture America about compassion. Every time a shooting makes the headlines, Canadian commentators cannot wait to discuss how the United States has a “culture of death” because we refuse to regulate guns the way enlightened nations supposedly do.

But north of our border, a very different crisis is unfolding — one that is harder to moralize because it exposes a deeper cultural failure.

A society that no longer recognizes the value of life will not long defend freedom, dignity, or moral order.

The Canadian government is not only permitting death, but it’s also administering, expanding, and redefining it as “medical care.” Medical assistance in dying is no longer a rare, tragic exception. It has become one of the country’s leading causes of death, offered to people whose problems are treatable, whose conditions are survivable, and whose value should never have been in question.

In Canada, MAID is now responsible for nearly 5% of all deaths — 1 out of every 20 citizens. And this is happening in a country that claims the moral high ground over American gun violence. Canada now records more deaths per capita from doctors administering lethal drugs than America records from firearms. Their number is 37.9 deaths per 100,000 people. Ours is 13.7. Yet we are the country supposedly drowning in a “culture of death.”

No lecture from abroad can paper over this fact: Canada has built a system where eliminating suffering increasingly means eliminating the sufferer.

Choosing death over care

One example of what Canada now calls “compassion” is the case of Jolene Bond, a woman suffering from a painful but treatable thyroid condition that causes dangerously high calcium levels, bone deterioration, soft-tissue damage, nausea, and unrelenting pain. Her condition is severe, but it is not terminal. Surgery could help her. And in a functioning medical system, she would have it.

But Jolene lives under socialized medicine. The specialists she needs are either unavailable, overrun with patients, or blocked behind bureaucratic requirements she cannot meet. She cannot get a referral. She cannot get an appointment. She cannot reach the doctor in another province who is qualified to perform the operation. Every pathway to treatment is jammed by paperwork, shortages, and waitlists that stretch into the horizon and beyond.

Yet the Canadian government had something else ready for her — something immediate.

They offered her MAID.

Not help, not relief, not a doctor willing to drive across a provincial line and simply examine her. Instead, Canada offered Jolene a state-approved death. A lethal injection is easier to obtain than a medical referral. Killing her would be easier than treating her. And the system calls that compassion.

Bureaucracy replaces medicine

Jolene’s story is not an outlier. It is the logical outcome of a system that cannot keep its promises. When the machinery of socialized medicine breaks down, the state simply replaces care with a final, irreversible “solution.” A bureaucratic checkbox becomes the last decision of a person’s life.

Canada insists its process is rigorous, humane, and safeguarded. Yet the bureaucracy now reviewing Jolene’s case is not asking how she can receive treatment; it is asking whether she has enough signatures to qualify for a lethal injection. And the debate among Canadian officials is not how to preserve life, but whether she has met the paperwork threshold to end it.

This is the dark inversion that always emerges when the state claims the power to decide when life is no longer worth living. Bureaucracy replaces conscience. Eligibility criteria replace compassion. A panel of physicians replaces the family gathered at a bedside. And eventually, the “right” to die becomes an expectation — especially for those who are poor, elderly, or alone.

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

The logical end of a broken system

We ignore this lesson at our own peril. Canada’s health care system is collapsing under demographic pressure, uncontrolled migration, and the unavoidable math of government-run medicine.

When the system breaks, someone must bear the cost. MAID has become the release valve.

The ideology behind this system is already drifting south. In American medical journals and bioethics conferences, you will hear this same rhetoric. The argument is always dressed in compassion. But underneath, it reduces the value of human life to a calculation: Are you useful? Are you affordable? Are you too much of a burden?

The West was built on a conviction that every human life has inherent value. That truth gave us hospitals before it gave us universities. It gave us charity before it gave us science. It is written into the Declaration of Independence.

Canada’s MAID program reveals what happens when a country lets that foundation erode. Life becomes negotiable, and suffering becomes a justification for elimination.

A society that no longer recognizes the value of life will not long defend freedom, dignity, or moral order. If compassion becomes indistinguishable from convenience, and if medicine becomes indistinguishable from euthanasia, the West will have abandoned the very principles that built it. That is the lesson from our northern neighbor — a warning, not a blueprint.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A Sharia enclave is quietly taking root in America. It's time to wake up.

NOVA SAFO / Staff | Getty Images

Sharia-based projects like the Meadow in Texas show how political Islam grows quietly, counting on Americans to stay silent while an incompatible legal system takes root.

Apolitical system completely incompatible with the Constitution is gaining ground in the United States, and we are pretending it is not happening.

Sharia — the legal and political framework of Islam — is being woven into developments, institutions, and neighborhoods, including a massive project in Texas. And the consequences will be enormous if we continue to look the other way.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

Before we can have an honest debate, we’d better understand what Sharia represents. Sharia is not simply a set of religious rules about prayer or diet. It is a comprehensive legal and political structure that governs marriage, finance, criminal penalties, and civic life. It is a parallel system that claims supremacy wherever it takes hold.

This is where the distinction matters. Many Muslims in America want nothing to do with Sharia governance. They came here precisely because they lived under it. But political Islam — the movement that seeks to implement Sharia as law — is not the same as personal religious belief.

It is a political ideology with global ambitions, much like communism. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently warned that Islamist movements do not seek peaceful coexistence with the West. They seek dominance. History backs him up.

How Sharia arrives

Political Islam does not begin with dramatic declarations. It starts quietly, through enclaves that operate by their own rules. That is why the development once called EPIC City — now rebranded as the Meadow — is so concerning. Early plans framed it as a Muslim-only community built around a mega-mosque and governed by Sharia-compliant financing. After state investigations were conducted, the branding changed, but the underlying intent remained the same.

Developers have openly described practices designed to keep non-Muslims out, using fees and ownership structures to create de facto religious exclusivity. This is not assimilation. It is the construction of a parallel society within a constitutional republic.

The warning from those who have lived under it

Years ago, local imams in Texas told me, without hesitation, that certain Sharia punishments “just work.” They spoke about cutting off hands for theft, stoning adulterers, and maintaining separate standards of testimony for men and women. They insisted it was logical and effective while insisting they would never attempt to implement it in Texas.

But when pressed, they could not explain why a system they consider divinely mandated would suddenly stop applying once someone crossed a border.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

AASHISH KIPHAYET / Contributor | Getty Images

America is vulnerable

Europe is already showing us where this road leads. No-go zones, parallel courts, political intimidation, and clerics preaching supremacy have taken root across major cities.

America’s strength has always come from its melting pot, but assimilation requires boundaries. It requires insisting that the Constitution, not religious law, is the supreme authority on this soil.

Yet we are becoming complacent, even fearful, about saying so. We mistake silence for tolerance. We mistake avoidance for fairness. Meanwhile, political Islam views this hesitation as weakness.

Religious freedom is one of America’s greatest gifts. Muslims may worship freely here, as they should. But political Islam must not be permitted to plant a flag on American soil. The Constitution cannot coexist with a system that denies equal rights, restricts speech, subordinates women, and places clerical authority above civil law.

Wake up before it is too late

Projects like the Meadow are not isolated. They are test runs, footholds, proofs of concept. Political Islam operates with patience. It advances through demographic growth, legal ambiguity, and cultural hesitation — and it counts on Americans being too polite, too distracted, or too afraid to confront it.

We cannot afford that luxury. If we fail to defend the principles that make this country free, we will one day find ourselves asking how a parallel system gained power right in front of us. The answer will be simple: We looked away.

The time to draw boundaries and to speak honestly is now. The time to defend the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is now. Act while there is still time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why do Americans feel so empty?

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

Anxiety, anger, and chronic dissatisfaction signal a country searching for meaning. Without truth and purpose, politics becomes a dangerous substitute for identity.

We have built a world overflowing with noise, convenience, and endless choice, yet something essential has slipped out of reach. You can sense it in the restless mood of the country, the anxiety among young people who cannot explain why they feel empty, in the angry confusion that dominates our politics.

We have more wealth than any nation in history, but the heart of the culture feels strangely malnourished. Before we can debate debt or elections, we must confront the reality that we created a world of things, but not a world of purpose.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

What we are living through is not just economic or political dysfunction. It is the vacuum that appears when a civilization mistakes abundance for meaning.

Modern life is stuffed with everything except what the human soul actually needs. We built systems to make life faster, easier, and more efficient — and then wondered why those systems cannot teach our children who they are, why they matter, or what is worth living for.

We tell the next generation to chase success, influence, and wealth, turning childhood into branding. We ask kids what they want to do, not who they want to be. We build a world wired for dopamine rather than dignity, and then we wonder why so many people feel unmoored.

When everything is curated, optimized, and delivered at the push of a button, the question “what is my life for?” gets lost in the static.

The crisis beneath the headlines

It is not just the young who feel this crisis. Every part of our society is straining under the weight of meaninglessness.

Look at the debt cycle — the mathematical fate no civilization has ever escaped once it crosses a threshold that we seem to have already blown by. While ordinary families feel the pressure, our leaders respond with distraction, with denial, or by rewriting the very history that could have warned us.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

We have entered a cultural moment where the noise is so loud that it drowns out the simplest truths. We are living in a country that no longer knows how to hear itself think.

So people go searching. Some drift toward the false promise of socialism, some toward the empty thrill of rebellion. Some simply check out. When a culture forgets what gives life meaning, it becomes vulnerable to every ideology that offers a quick answer.

The quiet return of meaning

And yet, quietly, something else is happening. Beneath the frustration and cynicism, many Americans are recognizing that meaning does not come from what we own, but from what we honor. It does not rise from success, but from virtue. It does not emerge from noise, but from the small, sacred things that modern life has pushed to the margins — the home, the table, the duty you fulfill, the person you help when no one is watching.

The danger is assuming that this rediscovery happens on its own. It does not.

Reorientation requires intention. It requires rebuilding the habits and virtues that once held us together. It requires telling the truth about our history instead of rewriting it to fit today’s narratives. And it requires acknowledging what has been erased: that meaning is inseparable from God’s presence in a nation’s life.

Harold M. Lambert / Contributor | Getty Images

Where renewal begins

We have built a world without stillness, and then we wondered why no one can hear the questions that matter. Those questions remain, whether we acknowledge them or not. They do not disappear just because we drown them in entertainment or noise. They wait for us, and the longer we ignore them, the more disoriented we become.

Meaning is still available. It is found in rebuilding the smallest, most human spaces — the places that cannot be digitized, globalized, or automated. The home. The family. The community.

These are the daily virtues that do not trend on social media, but that hold a civilization upright. If we want to repair this country, we begin there, exactly where every durable civilization has always begun: one virtue at a time, one tradition at a time, one generation at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.