BLOGMay 02, 2017

Feminism Run Amok: So-called 'Rape Culture' Redefines and Trivializes Real Rape

The Factual Feminist Christina Hoff Sommers, former philosophy professor and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, joined Glenn on radio Tuesday to discuss contemporary feminism and how it's damaging to both women and men.

"The feminist establishment is not celebrating the empowerment of women. They act as those things are worse than ever and getting worse every day. I find this baffling, and it's very destructive. It's very harmful to the young women who are told to be victims and taught to be paranoid," Sommers said.

Sommers also addressed her fear for mothers of sons, as well as her theory that the purpose of many college classes is to tear down Western civilization.

GLENN: Hello, America. Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. We're glad you're here. We have Christina Hoff Sommers with us. She's a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. She hosts a series on YouTube -- fantastic -- called The Factual Feminist. Each episode corrects a feminist myth.

And tomorrow, she is going to be giving a lecture at St. Olaf College. She joins us now to talk about the state of feminism and the -- this new push into the -- into the realm of, I think, insanity.

Welcome to the program, Christina, how are you?

CHRISTINA: Hi. Nice to be here.

GLENN: Thank you very much.

So where do we even begin on this new rape culture and what we're teaching and what millennials are now believing about this rape culture?

CHRISTINA: Well, it -- it's all fiction. It's a fantasy. It was created by radical feminist scholars with an agenda eager to indict the average man in a social atrocity. They have exaggerated statistics. And they change definitions beyond, you know, the meaning of words. And most of us do think of rape as a horrible crime. They now have definitions that include seduction. So if you're willing to do that, you will get a rape epidemic. There is a lot of seduction.

GLENN: So doesn't this -- doesn't this -- you know, I've said for 20 years with the Al Sharptons of the world and then in the last eight years, you know, the cry that everything is racist -- to say the word Chicago was called racist. To do that takes all of the cries of actual racism and makes them meaningless.

CHRISTINA: Exactly. It trivializes it. This is what happens with rape. And the students are not asking that the cases be turned over to the police, which would be reasonable. Because they have the ability to investigate. They turn it over to a campus tribunal that then determines guilt and innocence through what look to be kangaroo courts. And we have over 100 young men suing. And if you read through these cases, it's absolutely terrifying if you're the mother of sons because a boy can be accused -- he's perceived to be guilty because he's accused because along with this idea of a rape culture is the idea that women don't lie. You have to believe women.

Well, women lie. Not because they're women. But because they're human. Human beings lie, especially about sex.

GLENN: Christina, may I take you to probably a different place than you expected.

I am really concerned that we are imploding as a species because we are -- hear me out for a second. I know that's a crazy thing to say.

CHRISTINA: No, no. I worry about that too.

GLENN: Right? We're imploding as a species. We're taking technology and we're going to give you the ultimate pleasure by creating your own little sexual world. You can live in it any way you want. You don't have to interact with anyone. And the -- and the more we go down that road, while at the same time making common sense completely driven into the wilderness, you won't want to have a relationship with somebody. Because it -- you'll be accused as rape. You'll be --

CHRISTINA: Oh, I know. You'll be brought before a tribunal and told that every --

GLENN: Right.

CHRISTINA: -- and told that -- you know, without any possibility of defending yourself.

You can't -- you're just presumed guilty, and you are shamed. They've created a shame culture on campus, based on these strange definitions. And it's -- it is very disturbing.

I worry because our colleges are now just so carried away with this so-called social justice agenda, but it's an agenda of -- of authoritarianism. So this is where we are.

STU: Christina Hoff Sommers is with us. And legitimately one of the bravest people you're going to find, talking about this.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

STU: Any issue --

GLENN: You must just be a pariah. Why do you hate women so much?

CHRISTINA: You know, I have been a feminist in the reasonable sense of the word for more years than I care to mention. I was a philosophy professor. I encouraged the young women in my class. I watched as women surpassed men in education. And only to turn around and find that the feminist establishment is not celebrating, that -- you know, the empowerment of women. They act as though things are worse than ever and getting worse every day. And I find this baffling. And it's very destructive. It's very harmful to the young woman who are told that they are victims and taught to be paranoid.

And I will also mention -- I don't want to say most. Many college classes. No one has done a good study of this. They should. The purpose of the class is to tear down western civilization. It's not something to be proud of. Don't be proud of American history. It's a rape culture. It's -- and it's defined by its worst injustices. Don't be proud.

So they're replacing pride with shame. I don't know that this is a way to progress. I don't think people react well to being shamed. They recoil or they -- you know, in this case, at the campus, they're acting out these -- lots of mob justice. So it's very unhealthy.

STU: Christina, let's take on one of the big ones here. People hear this all the time. That depending on who you hear it from, one in four or one in five women in college will be raped when they're there. Can you walk us through that statistic and what it actually is talking about?

CHRISTINA: Yes. That sort of statistic comes from -- not from the Bureau of Justice statistics. Not from the FBI. Legitimate data-gathering organizations. You know, they use careful methodology. And they will come up with a figure like one in 50. That's still too many. But it's far different from one in four. One in four is worse than war-torn Congo. They're telling us that, you know, your daughter enters Wesleyan or Bard or Stanford, and she's basically entering a -- you know, a society more dangerous than anyplace on earth for a woman.

How do they get that? Well, the first thing to know, they don't ask on these surveys, were you raped? If you ask that, you get a fairly low number. They describe events, and then they say, did this ever happen?

And some of them do sound like a -- every woman agree that someone said, "Yes, I was violated. Assaulted and penetrated." You would agree that's rape. But they would include things like, did you have sex that you regretted because you were drunk? And if you say yes to that, that counts as rape.

So they change the definition from, you know, an assault to a bad -- a bad hookup, essentially. So that's one thing they do. They enlarge the definition. They ask a nonrepresentative sample. A lot of these studies are computer generated. And they will go send it out and see who responds. They'll send it out to 200,000 people and maybe 1,000 respond. But that's a self-selected group of respondents. It may be people that feel more strongly about it. So you have to be very careful. So they do that. They ask a nonrepresentative sample. And then they project it on to all college students.

So bad definition. And a bad sample. And you can have an epidemic of anything that way.

GLENN: How do we --

CHRISTINA: Claim to have it.

GLENN: How do we look at things like what's happening with Fox News? Where I believe -- we don't know the facts yet. But I believe that there were bad things that happened at Fox. I worked there. I never saw anything. But I believe that some of these things happened. Some of these things most likely also did not happen. And that's for the courts to work out.

But they just fired Bill Shine yesterday, who was the vice president and really one of the stabilizing factors of Fox News. There's no charges that I -- that I'm aware of, that he was assaulting anybody or coming on to anybody.

When you have this witch hunt, nobody wants to stand up and say, "Now, wait a minute. Wait a minute." Because it's just -- it just becomes, I want to protect women. And we should believe the women. And men are bad. And all of a sudden, anyone can be swept up into this.

How do we stop that?

CHRISTINA: Well, it's a moral panic. And those -- you know, it creates a lot of hysteria. And going back to what you said. There was a problem with some people at Fox News.

CHRISTINA:

GLENN: Yes.

CHRISTINA: And here's what -- and here's what distresses me the most as an equity feminist, an equality feminist. Is if we want to help women, we should tell the truth. But it shouldn't be done in an atmosphere of panic and hysteria. Women who are victims need sober analysis. They need truth. Not hype. Not spin. Not panic. We have too much of the latter. So if you want to help people who are at risk for sexual harassment, for sexual assault, these are real criminals -- if we want to help them, then we should tell the truth and not cry wolf and not get hysterical. That helps no one.

GLENN: But how do you do that when -- I mean, I found as a father of three women, I am -- I was -- I found it beyond offensive what President Trump said about women when he was on the bus with Billy Bush. Just like shocking. I thought that was the end for sure.

The left, of course, came out against that. The right suddenly was quiet. But when this happened in the 1990s, they were musical chairs. They were on the opposite side, when it was Bill Clinton.

CHRISTINA: Oh, when it was Mr. Clinton.

GLENN: Yeah. How do we -- how does the average effect something when these big powerful groups don't really care? They're just using it.

CHRISTINA: Exactly. They're using it. And in this case, it's a little harder to fight because it's -- the source are these scholars in the gender studies department. People have to realize, their work is not carefully reviewed. They don't even -- many of them don't even believe in the basic protocols of scientific research. They have their own methods they've invented of just listening to stories and believing people.

And so -- but journalists and even legislators, they take them seriously. They take these scholars seriously. And I'm just saying -- I've been watching this for 20 years -- at the heart of the women's movement today is a body of recklessly false information, and it's not helping women.

GLENN: Is there a movement -- a legitimate movement that is out there?

CHRISTINA: You know, right now, there are small groups. There are groups like the Independent Women's Forum. There's a group called the Foundation for Individual Rights and Education. It's a civil libertarian group, not exclusively about women. But it addresses these issues.

Both of those groups are very good, FIRE and IWF. But they're small. It's nothing compared to this juggernaut of women's organizations. And they're all marching in solidarity. And they reinforce one another's messages. It's in the colleges. I've never seen anything like this. It's -- you know, usually, people can only go so far with -- that are alternative facts. And their concocted studies and pseudoscience. This has gone very far because I think a lot of men hesitated to correct the bad scholarship. They would be called sexist. A lot of women didn't want to belittle a cause they believed in at heart. They just thought they would be quiet. And so, well, now we're copying with it. Now we've got this rape panic. And it's very -- it's very destructive on campus. It's leading to fanaticism.

GLENN: Christina Hoff Sommers, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. She hosts a series on YouTube called The Factual Feminist, where she corrects in each episode a feminist myth. And it's fantastic. It's really good. Tomorrow night, she's going to be giving a lecture at St. Olaf College. It is great to have you on Christina. Thank you so much.

CHRISTINA: Thank you.

RADIO

Has THIS Islamist organization BROKEN state laws for YEARS?!

A new report accuses CAIR Action, the political arm of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, of breaking state laws with its political activism. Glenn Beck reviews this story...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So let me go over what is -- what's happening with -- with CAIR.

You know, the Founding Fathers were obsessed over accountability.

Because they knew one thing. You know, they did. They must get suggestions from people on, you know, through tweets. They studied every single system of government.

Every single republic that survived. That didn't survive.

Why didn't it survive?

They studied all forms of government. They were trying to come up with something that could -- could set people free.

And they -- they worked really hard on putting our checks and balances in place, because they knew, once power slips into the shadows. They knew, once power slips into the shadows, once influence becomes unmoored from law, what rises is not a republic.

It's a machine. And that's what you're seeing right now. We're not living in a republic. We're living in a machine.

We -- I think we're staring at one of the largest unregulated political machines operating in the United States ever! Okay.

There have been a couple of groups that are doing sweeping investigations, two watchdog groups. One of them is NCRI and the Intelligent Advocacy Network.

And they have concluded now that the political arm of CAIR, he known as CAIR action, has been operating nationwide with no legal authority, to do the things it has been doing for years now.

They're not allowed to raise money. They've been raising money. Coordinating political campaigns.

Not allowed to do it. Endorsing candidates. Not allowed to do it, they're doing it. Mobilizing voters, shaping policy, functioning as a national advocacy network.

They don't have the legal authority to do any of it. And no one has said anything.

Now, according to the report, CAIR action doesn't just have a paperwork problem.

Investigators found, state by state, that it lacks the license, the registrations. The charitable authorizations, required to legally solicit money.

Excuse me. Or conduct political activity, in any of the 22 states in which it operates. Think of that!

I know how serious this is, because I remember what it took to get the license in each and every state, for Mercury One.

So we could operate. We could raise money. We could do things in those states. It's a lot of work. And if you don't do it, you go to jail. And they find out pretty quickly.

Okay?

22 states, they operate not one, zero legal authorization.

In Washington, DC, the city where CAIR action is incorporated, the department of licensing and consumer protection told investigators, they have no record of CAIR action ever obtaining the basic business license required to solicit funds or to operate.

Imagine how long would you last in business, especially if you were controversial.

How long would you remain in business, if you never had a business license?

You think somebody would figure that out?

In a sooner time than I don't know. A couple of decades!

This report means, that the organization if true, is engaging in unlicensed inner state solicitation.

It has exposed itself to allegations as serious as deceptive solicitation. Wire fraud and false statements to the IRS. These are big things.

And this is not political rhetoric.

Are these phrases written in black and white. In the law.

And by investigators. In California, one of CAIR's most active hubs. The state attorney general has said, the state attorney general of California has said, same pattern here!

The state of California, to say, yep. That's what's happening here.

CAIR action has never registered with California's charitable registry.

Never filed the required CT1 form. And has no authorization whatsoever to request donations. But they've been doing it in California anyway.

Fundraising, selling memberships. Issuing endorsements. Mobilizing voters. All of that has been done by CAIR action. There's no record of any license. Any permission, ever. Going to CAIR. From California. That's according to their attorney general.

Wow!

That's pretty remarkable, huh? How does that happen?

It's not just the coast. It is also happening to the Midwest, the South, the Mountain West. Every state hosting its own CAIR action fundraising page, complete with the donate now and become a member portal, despite no trace of the legal filings required to operate. That's bad!

Now, here's where the stakes rise.

Because CAIR action presents itself openly, as the political arm of CAIR National.

Investigators are now warning that any unauthorized fundraising or political activity.

Could become CAIR's national responsibility as well.

So, in other words, the parent, CAIR itself, might be held responsible.

Meaning, this is want just a rogue subdivision.

This could implicate the entire National Organization of CAIR.

Now, this is happening at the same time it's coming under national scrutiny. It's also Texas.

And I think Florida have designated the group a foreign terrorist organization. Members of Congress are now asking the IRS, the Treasury, the Department of Education to investigate all of its partnerships, all of its financing, all of its influence operations. I mean, I think they're going to be in trouble.

How long have we been saying this?

But every time, I have pointed out anything about CAIR, I have been called an Islamophobe, which shuts everything down. That is a word, developed by people like CAIR, to shut people down, so you'll never look into them.

So what happens next?

First of all, the reports have to hold up.

Regulators now have an obligation. Not a choice. An obligation to act!

State attorneys general in these 22 states, they might pursue fines, injunctions, criminal referrals.

All of them need to take action!

The IRS, needs to take action. Investigate tax exempt fraud. Treasury Department may review foreign influence or money flow violations.

Anything coming from overseas.

Oh, I can't imagine it. They're so buttoned up, right now.

DC regulators may determine whether CAIR actions entire fundraising operation has been unlawful from the beginning.

But here's the deeper question. And it's not bureaucratic. This one is constitutional.

Can the United States tolerate an influence machine, that operates outside of the legal framework, designed to prevent corruption, foreign leverage, and untraceable money?

If I hear one more time, talking about how AIPAC has just got to be investigated. Fine. Investigate.

I'm not against it.

Investigate.

Why aren't you saying anything about CAIR?

It feels like it might be a tool in the hands of a foreign operation.

Why aren't you saying anything about this?

Because here it is! It's not like, hey. I wonder why.

This is it! This is it! This isn't about silencing CAIR. Muslim Americans are -- that are full citizens, they have every right to speak. Every right to vote. Every right to organize. Participate in public life. No question! They can disagree with me, all they want.

But no organization. None! Not mine. Not yours. Not theirs. None. Should operate a nationwide political network, in the shadows and be immune from all of the guardrails that every other group must follow!

That's called a fourth branch of government!

That's how a fourth branch goes.

By the way, CAIR has placed all kinds of people in our Department of Homeland Security. Et cetera, et cetera. This organization has done it!

This is -- you cannot have a fourth branch of government.

They must abide by the laws.

No -- you can't have a branch that nobody elected. Nobody oversees.

Nobody holds accountable.

We talked about this yesterday, on yesterday's podcast. So what needs to happen is total transparency. CAIR action has to release its filings. Its donor structure. Its compliance records, if they exist. Equal enforcement under the law. I don't want them prosecuted in special ways.

Look, if AIPAC is doing the same thing. AIPAC should be prosecuted exactly the same way.
I want it equal. I want constitutional rule.

If conservatives, if Catholics, pro-Israel, environmental, Second Amendment groups, if they have to comply by the state law, so does CAIR action.

And if CAIR action has to do it, so do the Second Amendment groups and environmentalists, and pro-Israel and conservative groups. The law cannot be selective. It can't be!

I don't know how that's controversial in today's world. But somehow or another, they will find a way.

The Feds have to review all of this. If the report is accurate, the IRS and the Treasury have to determine whether false statements or unlicensed interstate solicitations have occurred.

Americans deserve to know what exactly, who is influencing our elections. Who is shaping our policy? Who is raising money in their state?

Especially physical the organization claims political authority, that it doesn't legally possess.

Because history will teach us one unchanging lesson. When a republic stops enforcing its own laws, someone else will always step in to fill that vacuum because power abhors a vacuum!

Unregulated, political power abhors a free people. So while it's about CAIR, it's not about Muslim Americans. It's not about religion.

As always, at least on this program, we try to make it about the rule of law.

One standard for everyone or no standard at all!

And that more than anything, will determine whether or not our institutions remain worthy of the freedom and responsibility that we have entrusted to them.

Glenn Beck WARNS Democrats Will Return with VENGEANCE in 2026 | Glenn TV | Ep 473

America is entering a year of historic upheaval from Charlie Kirk’s assassination and the spiritual shock that followed, to Trump’s tariff revolution, China’s rare-earth war, collapsing energy grids, AI displacement, and the looming fights over Taiwan and Venezuela. Glenn sits down with BlazeTV hosts ‪@deaceshow‬ and ‪@lizwheeler‬ along with his head researcher Jason Buttrill, to break down the biggest stories of 2025. Plus, they each give their most explosive prediction for 2026 that could shape our politics, economy, national security, and civil rights in ways Americans have never experienced before.

RADIO

Trump Just SHATTERED the “Expert Class” - And the Deep State is in Total Panic

For nearly a century, Washington DC has been ruled by an unelected “expert class” operating as an unconstitutional fourth branch of government — accountable to no one, removable by no president, and shielded from all consequences. Glenn breaks down why Trump’s firing of the Federal Trade Commissioner could finally dismantle the 1935 precedent that empowered technocrats, how Ketanji Brown Jackson exposed the Supreme Court’s embrace of expert rule, and why America cannot survive a government run by people who never face the voters and never pay for their failures.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So President Donald Trump fired the federal trade commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. Federal Trade Commission is an administrative position. I mean, this is under -- the head of the federal trade commission is a cabinet member.

And if the justices uphold Trump's firing of Slaughter, that will overturn a precedent that was horrible, that was set in 1935. Remember, 1935, we're flirting with fascism. You know, everybody thinks. Because they haven't seen the horrors of fascism yet.

Everybody thinks fascism is neat, blah, blah. So what they do is they say that this is an independent person. And the president can't fire them. Because they're, you know, an independent agency.

Well, wait. That would make a fourth branch of government. Our Constitution is really clear.

There is no such thing as a fourth branch of government. Right?

So that's what they're deciding. Now, here is Ketanji Brown Jackson, who is talking about how we really need to listen to the experts. Cut four.

VOICE: Because presidents have accepted that there could be both an understanding of Congress and the presidency. That it is in the best interest of the American people to have certain kinds of issues, handled by experts. Who, and I think you -- in your colloquy, Justice Kagan, have identified the fact that these boards are not only experts, but they're also nonpartisan. So the -- the seats are actually distributed in such a way, that we are presumably eliminating political influence because we're trying to get to science and data and actual facts, related to how these decisions are made.

And so the real risk, I think, of allowing non- -- of allowing these kinds of decisions to be made by the president, of saying, everybody can just be removed when I come in, is that we will get away from those very important policy considerations.

VOICE: We will get away from US policy considerations, and it will create opportunities for all kinds of problems that Congress and prior presidents wanted to avoid, risks that flow inevitably, just given human nature, the realities of the world that we live in.

GLENN: Okay.

Now, remember, what she's saying here is, we have to have experts.

We have to have experts. We have to have experts that don't really answer to anybody. Okay?

They're appointed. And then they're just there. This from a, quote, judicial expert, who cannot define a woman, because she's not a doctor.
She's not a scientist.

She needs an expert to define a woman.
That's how insane her thinking is. Okay?

Now, I would just like to ask the Supreme Court, when you want things run by experts, do you mean things like the State Department, or the counsel of foreign relations, that have gotten us into these endless war wars for 100 years?

Because these are the things that Woodrow Wilson wanted. He wanted the country run by experts.

Okay. So is it like the Council of Foreign Relations, that keep getting us into these endless wars.

Or is it more like the Fed, that directs our fiscal policy, that has driven us into $38 trillion of at the time. We have all powerful banks. That strangely all belong to the fed. And endless bailouts for those banks. Are those the experts that you're talking about?

Or are you talking about the experts that are doctors, that gave the country sterilizations, lobotomies, transgender surgeries. You know, or should we listen to the experts, like the ones that are now speaking in Illinois, to get us death on demand like Canada has, with their MAID assisted suicide, which is now the third largest killer in Canada. MAID, assisted suicide, third largest killer in Canada. Experts are saying, we now need it here, and they're pushing for it in Illinois. Or should we listen to the experts? And I think many of them are the same experts strangely, that brought us COVID. Yeah. That was an expert thing. They were trying to protect us. Because they need to do this for our protection. So direct from the labs in China with the help of the American experts like Fauci. We almost put the world out.

Should we listen to those guys?

Or the experts that brought us masking, and Home Depot is absolutely safe. But Ace Hardware wants to kill grandma. Which are the experts that we want? That we want to make sure that we have in our lives? That they don't answer, or can't be fired by anybody. Because I'm pretty full up on the experts, myself. I don't know.

But you're right. These experts would keep the president in check, and they would keep Congress in check. And you in check!

And the Supreme Court, which would be really great. You know, and you know who else they would keep in check? The people.

So, wow, it seems like we would just be a nation run by experts, and our Constitution would be out the window, because that's a fourth branch!

And if you don't believe me, that, you know, these experts never pay a price. Can you name a single expert?

Give me a name of an expert, that gave us any of the things that I just told you about.

Give me the name. I mean, give me the name of one of them. Give me the name of one of them that went to jail. Give me the name of one expert that has been discredited.

You know, where your name will be mud in this town. Do you know where that came from?

Your name is going to be mud. It's not M-U-D. It's M-U-D-D, that comes from Dr. Samuel Mudd. Okay? He was a docks man. He was an expert. He was that set John Wilkes Booth' broken leg. He made crutches. He let him stay there for a while. He claimed he didn't know him, but he did know him.

In fact, one of the reasons they proved it.

Is because when he pulled the boots off -- when he pulled both of his boots off, right there, in the back, you couldn't have missed it. It said "John Wilkes Booth."

He's like, I have no idea who he was.

Yeah. Well, you knew him in advance. This was a predetermined outpost where he could stay. It's clear you could know him.

The guy was still discredited, we still use his name today. Your name will be mud in this town.

And we think that it's like dirt, mixed with water kind of mud. No, it's M-U-D-D, Dr. Mudd. The expert that was so discredited, went to jail, paid for his part of the assassination of -- of Lincoln.

Give me the name of one of the experts in the last 100 years, that has brought us any of the trials and the tribulations. The things that have almost brought us to our knees. Give me the name of one of them. Can't!

Because once an expert class, they don't answer to anyone. So they never go to jail.

Wow! Doesn't that sound familiar. People never going to jail!

There's a rant that's going around right now, that I did in 2020. And everybody is like, see. He's talking about Pam Bondi.

No, no. I got to play this for you, a little later on in the program. But I want to get to the experts and what the Constitution actually says about that. Because you don't need my opinion. What you need are the actual facts. So you can stand up and say, yeah. I think Ketanji Brown Jackson is an idiot. Okay?

And she's really not an expert on anything. Especially the Constitution. You need the facts, on what the Founders said. Because the Founders would be absolutely against what they did in 1935.

Because that just -- what does it do?

It just sets up a fourth branch of government.

RADIO

EXPLAINED: Why the Warner-Netflix/Paramount Merger is DANGEROUS for All of Us

The biggest media merger in modern history is unfolding, and Glenn Beck warns it’s the most dangerous consolidation of power America has faced in decades. With six corporations already controlling 90% of the nation’s news and entertainment, a Warner-Netflix or Warner-Paramount megacorporation would create an unstoppable information cartel. Glenn exposes how “too big to fail” thinking is repeating itself, how global elites and “experts” are tightening their grip, and why handing our entire cultural narrative to a handful of companies is a direct threat to freedom. The hour is late — and the stakes couldn’t be higher.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: By the way, it's never good when you consolidate power. It's never good.

And what is going on now, with this Netflix Warner Brothers paramount stuff, I don't care if Larry Ellison is a conservative or not.

No one should have that much power.

I did a show, gosh, four years ago. I don't even remember when I did it.

We looked it up. In the 1980s. 19 percent of American media was owned by over 50 companies.

Forty years later, 90 percent of the media is watched and controlled by six companies.

National Amusements, the Red Stone Family controls CBS, CMT, MTV, Nickelodeon, gaming and internet. Simon & Schuster Books. That's all one.

Disney, ABC, ESPN, History Channel, Marvel, Star Wars, video games and print.

TimeWarner controls CNN, Warner Brothers, HBO, Turner, video games, internet, and print media like TIME. Comcast, MSNBC, NBC.

CNBC, Telemundo, the Internet.

New Corp. Fox. National Geographic. Ton of others. Sony, with a ton of movies, music and more. The big six. They're valued at nearly $500 billion.

Now, this is something I put together five years ago. So I don't even know. This is probably not even valid even today.

And now we're talking about Netflix, Warner Brothers. Paramount, into all of these one giant corporation. It's wrong! It's wrong!

We can't keep putting all -- everything into the hands of just a few! It's what's killing us!

We've got to spread this around. We can't -- the government cannot okay mergers like this.

They're big enough he has

What happened -- what happened when the banks went under, or almost went under in '08. What did they say the problem was?

They said the banks are too big to fail.

Too big to fail.

Because they were providing all of the services, everybody needs. All the time. And there's only a handful of them.

So if they fall, then everything falls.

Right?

That was the problem. So what did we do to fix it?

We made them bigger!

We let them merge with other banks, and gobble up other things!

And started taking on the local banks.

And so now, your banks that were too big to fail. Are now even bigger. And their failure would be even worse!

What is wrong with us?

Seriously, we're not this stupid.

We're not this stupid.

I think we're just this comfortable.

We just think the experts have a plan. No. The experts don't have a plan.

Their plan is stupid. Their plan is to make it bigger.

Every time it fails. Make it bigger. Push it up.

Make it more global.

No. Haven't you seen what the entire world is like?

The entire world is over-leveraged. The entire world is on the edge.

The entire world is being redesigned.
So what do we do? We don't allow them to make things bigger! We need to start taking more individual and local control of things. They're making it bigger. Which will make the problem bigger. And make the problem so big, you won't be able to do anything about it, because all the experts. All of the heads. They'll all -- there will be six of them. And they will all be sitting in one room.

And they will all be making the instigations. And with them, making those decisions will be all the heads of all the countries around the world, that you're not going to have a say in any of that. They're already trying to do it with the WEF.

But if -- if the Supreme Court says, no, experts matter. And the president can't fire them. You will not have any control over anything!

We're at this place, where we can back out. We can turn around.

We can do it.

It's not too late. But the hour is growing very late.

I don't know about you, I don't like being this.

Up to the edge, you know what I mean?

I would rather have lots of breathing room, between me and the edge of the cliff.

But we don't have that anymore.

Everything has to be done right.

And we have to pay attention.

And the worst thing we can do is make things bigger.

Dream big, think small.

Glenn's Show Prep

Feminism Run Amok: So-called 'Rape Culture' Redefines and Trivializes Real Rape

Has THIS Islamist organization BROKEN state laws for YEARS?!

Transcript

Glenn Beck WARNS Democrats Will Return with VENGEANCE in 2026 | Glenn TV | Ep 473

Trump Just SHATTERED the “Expert Class” - And the Deep State is in Total Panic

Transcript

EXPLAINED: Why the Warner-Netflix/Paramount Merger is DANGEROUS for All of Us

Transcript