Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Dennis Prager Talks Google, YouTube Lawsuits Over ‘Ideologically Driven Censorship’

October 25, 2017
Staff

WRITER

PragerU, a website that promotes conservative ideals in pithy 5-minute video clips, is suing Google and YouTube for content policies that the company says are overly vague and used to censor “conservative political thought.”

Founder Dennis Prager joined Glenn today to talk about the lawsuit over YouTube’s restrictions on their videos. The lawsuit claims that PragerU videos have been arbitrarily marked “inappropriate” for younger views and demonetized, or cut off from generating ad money.

“I really did believe all my life that there was one thing that did unite Americans,” Prager said. “And that is … free speech. But I was wrong. The left in particular does not believe in free speech because it threatens their power.”

Get the full story with our explainer of the PragerU lawsuit.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: There is a chill wind blowing across the First Amendment. And it is happening from all sides. When we have conservatives talking about limiting free speech and free press, it's disturbing.

But there's something else that's going on right now with the -- with all of the big -- I would call them, you know, railroad companies. They're -- the rail lines of communication, they've all been laid now. And so now, these rail companies of Google, Apple, YouTube, which is Google, Facebook. They're going to start dictating exactly what's heard and what's not heard. And it's -- we're entering a very dangerous phase.

I wanted to bring on Dennis Prager. Because Dennis and Prager University have just filed a lawsuit against Google and YouTube. And we have a story up on TheBlaze.com that lays this all out very clearly. And you need to pay attention to this, because we have information from the dark web, where Media Matters was -- was hiding out their plan for the future, that shows what's happening to Dennis Prager was planned and coordinated. And this is their MO moving forward, to silence any voice on YouTube or Google or Apple or Amazon, that disagrees with Media Matters.

Welcome to the program, Dennis Prager.

DENNIS: What a joy to be with you. I'm in Israel. And wherever I am, it's good to talk to you.

GLENN: Thank you, sir. Dennis, I have tremendous respect for you and what you guys are doing. You are making these five-minute videos. And it's educating a lot of people in a very entertaining way. You are approaching your billionth view, if I'm not mistaken.

But YouTube has now removed or demonetized several of your videos and have blocked them because they say that it violates some sort of standard that you can't figure out.

DENNIS: Right. They're inappropriate. I think that's the term. And it's -- we are putting up the lawsuit actually on our website, so that anybody can read it. It's so devastating that it portrays an America that you and I never really thought would -- would take place. If there was one thing, I guess I was naive.

I really did believe all of my life that there's one thing that did unite Americans. Because I don't -- I never buy the unity issue, as you probably know.

I think there's too big a division in the country. But I did believe there was one, a common belief. And that is in free speech. But I was wrong.

The -- the left in particular does not believe in free speech because it threatens their power.

The more people know, the less left they will be. I would -- I bank my life on that belief. I devote my life to that belief. Prager University is devoted to it, my radio show, et cetera. And that's why they're very afraid of us. They have every reason to be afraid of us. We have 500 million views this year. And we change a lot of minds, in a very sophisticated manner. Just for your audience's knowledge, I think it's important that they understand these are five-minute videos on every subject outside of the natural sciences. We're not going to teach botany in five minutes. We understand that. Or mathematics or something like that.

And four of our presenters are Pulitzer prize winners. We have professors from Stanford, Yale, Harvard, UCLA, et cetera, et cetera.

We have liberals like Alan Dershowitz. It is -- it's an extremely sophisticated teaching operation. There is no yelling. There is no slamming. There is no anger. There are five had an minute intellectual presentations. And that's why they change minds. Because they're geared to the mind and not to the emotion. Yeah, go ahead.

GLENN: Is Alan Dershowitz's video on Israel, is that one of them that has been banned?

DENNIS: That's correct. That is correct. It was. They have been recently -- yeah, it was.

GLENN: Alan Dershowitz, in TheBlaze story was asked about it, and he said This is one of the most disturbing things that has happened to him.

DENNIS: Yeah.

GLENN: I mean, here's a guy -- here's a guy on the left whose voice is being silenced by YouTube.

DENNIS: Right. Right. Well, let me then venture forth a very important point that I make I think almost daily.

There is nothing in common between leftism and liberalism. They have nothing in common.

GLENN: Yes.

DENNIS: And liberals used to understand this. They no longer do. And so many side with the left, even though it violates everything they stand for. For example, liberalism begins in integration, the melting pot, and that race means nothing. The left believes that race is important, the first ideology since the Nazis to believe that. They have separate graduation exercises at Harvard for black graduate students. They have dorms for black students all over the country at universities. That was called segregation when I grew up. Liberals would have found that to be the antithesis to everything that a liberal stands for. And I'm trying to show -- so I'm trying to show people like Dershowitz are liberals, not leftists. And I think he would even agree to that. Because he spends more of his time now, to his great credit, attacking the left than attacking the right. This is a Hillary Clinton voter.

GLENN: Yeah. I know several people who would have voted for Hillary Clinton in days gone by, who now say that their own party has gone so far off the rails, they're more afraid of their side, the leftists, than they are of the Republicans and the people on the right.

DENNIS: Well, there's nothing to fear from us. We don't want power. I always make this point.

Conservatives, basically run on the doctrine, vote for me. I want less of your money. And I want less power over you.

So --

GLENN: Well, I think that's -- I think that's --

DENNIS: We're only in danger to the left.

GLENN: I think that's generally true. Not as true as I thought it was. You know, we are seeing people talk about, you know, how the government should regulate the free press. I don't want the government involved in the press at all. Period.

DENNIS: I agree with you. But who said that?

GLENN: The president has talked about, maybe it's time to regulate NBC.

DENNIS: Oh, really? I don't really him saying that.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah.

DENNIS: I believe you. Because you're an honorable man. It's hard for me to believe even he believes in that. But, anyway, obviously none of us believe it. So it doesn't matter.

GLENN: Yeah. So, Dennis, tell me some of the -- tell me which videos are being taken down. See if there's a pattern.

DENNIS: Well, the list is on -- I believe the list is in the indictment. I should have it in front of me. But off the top of my head, I'll give you a few examples.

GLENN: Yeah.

DENNIS: This is my favorite, okay? I think there are about 40 out of 250. But I'll give you -- this is my -- I'm laughing because it's actually hilarious.

I did -- I personally -- I only do 15 percent of the videos. About 85 percent of them are by other people. But I did the videos because we do a fair number. You know, about 10 percent of our videos are on religion. Because we think a godless United States is not what the Founders wanted. In any event, so I did 11 videos on the Ten Commandments, one on each of the Ten Commandments and one introduction.

Believe it or not, they actually took down my video much thou shalt not murder.

GLENN: Why? Why do you think --

DENNIS: I don't know. I don't know. To be honest, to this day, I don't know. That's how absurd -- we're talking about the realm of the absurd.

GLENN: So the videos that TheBlaze is talking about, there are 40 that have been restricted. Many of them have also been demonetized, which means you can't make any money on them. Among the restricted videos, why America must leave. Ten Commandments, do not murder. Why did America fight the Korean War, which is unbelievable. Everyone should see that one. The world's most persecuted minority, Christians. Another unbelievable video. And -- and there's no answer.

DENNIS: By the way, that's really -- that tells you something about the -- Google's morality. That the persecution of Christians in the Middle East would be taken down, would be restricted. It shows you, they're not -- they're not merely totalitarian. They're bad.

I mean, only a bad person would find it objectionable -- and I'm a Jew saying this. Calling -- calling the world's attention to the removal of Christian communities in Middle Eastern countries.

GLENN: Genocide, yeah.

So you are suing them. There's no damages so far that you're going for. What is your -- what's your plan for?

DENNIS: The plan is to win. And thereby bring down the greatest threat to free speech perhaps in world history, or in the history of the existence of freedom of speech. Because they control -- they are the conduit to free speech on earth. You can't -- there's no alternative.

GLENN: So, Dennis, doesn't that make them a utility? Aren't they a private --

DENNIS: That's correct. That's right. It does make them a utility. And the entitlement makes it clear that -- I will use these words. It's not in the indictment. They are a fraud because they -- utterly misrepresent themselves. They say they are a completely open forum. That is as pure a lie as exists. And Prager University is the living proof of the lie that it is. They are not an open forum. And if we don't prevail, it's over for free speech, until there will be an actually open Google. And I don't know how you rival Google at this time.

One day, it may happen. But in the meantime, it's critical to understand --

GLENN: I don't think so.

DENNIS: That this is what is happening.

STU: Dennis, isn't it consistent though with conservative principles that it's their website and they get to do what they want with it?

DENNIS: No. That's very important.

I have actually asked that. The indictment shows law after law after law in California. And it's not an indictment, by the way. That's a technical term. It's a complaint. So just for the record. But, in any event, the -- the -- we show law -- the lawyers -- by the way, that's important that you know who they are. It was actually the suggestion of former California governor Pete Wilson, who was -- I'm greatly honored to know, is a great fan of Prager University. And he is the one who has one of the most prestigious law firms in the country. He is leading this. And it was his idea actually. And they are -- they are truly helping out. I mean, it's very expensive to have lawyers, as you well know, as everybody knows in America.

GLENN: Especially against Google --

DENNIS: Yes, exactly. Unlimited funds, like the government.

But, anyway, they list law after law. This is not a -- this is not a new idea. This predates Google. It predates us. It predates my existence on earth, where the Supreme Court has established that there has to be free speech, where there are claims to be free speech in the private sphere. So it's not merely government cannot -- cannot suppress speech. Now, obviously in the case, let's say of religion. If you have a Christian school and it teaches that -- you know, that -- you know, that a Catholic school teaches that abortion is immortal sin. A teacher says, no, you know, I think that Catholicism welcomes abortion. Obviously, a religion can teach a certain thing. By the way, in that regard, it would be very interesting. I wonder, I don't have the answer to this myself. I'm posing a question to me.

What if Google did announce, you know what, we are a left-wing organization. And we can't stand any left-wing idea that has any traction. And therefore we will shut it down. I wonder then --

GLENN: If they could get away with it.

DENNIS: Yeah. That would be interesting. Because that's what they are.

GLENN: Okay. Dennis, we'll have more on this tonight. Hope to have more on this tomorrow. We are big supporters. Thank you for everything that you're doing. And we will continue to help you get the word out on this. Anything that we can do, you know, that the audience can do?

DENNIS: Right. Well, yes, of course. First of all, they -- for no money whatsoever, they need to watch our videos. Because they are life-changing. They're meant to be. If their kid is in college, their kid is being indoctrinated.

GLENN: Yes.

DENNIS: And we are an antidote to that indoctrination. If they have to pay their kids in high school or college to watch it, or whatever, they should. And, obviously, if they want to help us in any other way, that's great.

GLENN: Okay. Dennis Prager, thank you very much from Prager University. This is worth your money and your time to help them out. Prager University.

Rage isn’t conservatism — THIS is what true patriots stand for

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

Conservatism is not about rage or nostalgia. It’s about moral clarity, national renewal, and guarding the principles that built America’s freedom.

Our movement is at a crossroads, and the question before us is simple: What does it mean to be a conservative in America today?

For years, we have been told what we are against — against the left, against wokeism, against decline. But opposition alone does not define a movement, and it certainly does not define a moral vision.

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

The media, as usual, are eager to supply their own answer. The New York Times recently suggested that Nick Fuentes represents the “future” of conservatism. That’s nonsense — a distortion of both truth and tradition. Fuentes and those like him do not represent American conservatism. They represent its counterfeit.

Real conservatism is not rage. It is reverence. It does not treat the past as a museum, but as a teacher. America’s founders asked us to preserve their principles and improve upon their practice. That means understanding what we are conserving — a living covenant, not a relic.

Conservatism as stewardship

In 2025, conservatism means stewardship — of a nation, a culture, and a moral inheritance too precious to abandon. To conserve is not to freeze history. It is to stand guard over what is essential. We are custodians of an experiment in liberty that rests on the belief that rights come not from kings or Congress, but from the Creator.

That belief built this country. It will be what saves it. The Constitution is a covenant between generations. Conservatism is the duty to keep that covenant alive — to preserve what works, correct what fails, and pass on both wisdom and freedom to those who come next.

Economics, culture, and morality are inseparable. Debt is not only fiscal; it is moral. Spending what belongs to the unborn is theft. Dependence is not compassion; it is weakness parading as virtue. A society that trades responsibility for comfort teaches citizens how to live as slaves.

Freedom without virtue is not freedom; it is chaos. A culture that mocks faith cannot defend liberty, and a nation that rejects truth cannot sustain justice. Conservatism must again become the moral compass of a disoriented people, reminding America that liberty survives only when anchored to virtue.

Rebuilding what is broken

We cannot define ourselves by what we oppose. We must build families, communities, and institutions that endure. Government is broken because education is broken, and education is broken because we abandoned the formation of the mind and the soul. The work ahead is competence, not cynicism.

Conservatives should embrace innovation and technology while rejecting the chaos of Silicon Valley. Progress must not come at the expense of principle. Technology must strengthen people, not replace them. Artificial intelligence should remain a servant, never a master. The true strength of a nation is not measured by data or bureaucracy, but by the quiet webs of family, faith, and service that hold communities together. When Washington falters — and it will — those neighborhoods must stand.

Eric Lee / Stringer | Getty Images

This is the real work of conservatism: to conserve what is good and true and to reform what has decayed. It is not about slogans; it is about stewardship — the patient labor of building a civilization that remembers what it stands for.

A creed for the rising generation

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

For the rising generation, conservatism cannot be nostalgia. It must be more than a memory of 9/11 or admiration for a Reagan era they never lived through. Many young Americans did not experience those moments — and they should not have to in order to grasp the lessons they taught and the truths they embodied. The next chapter is not about preserving relics but renewing purpose. It must speak to conviction, not cynicism; to moral clarity, not despair.

Young people are searching for meaning in a culture that mocks truth and empties life of purpose. Conservatism should be the moral compass that reminds them freedom is responsibility and that faith, family, and moral courage remain the surest rebellions against hopelessness.

To be a conservative in 2025 is to defend the enduring principles of American liberty while stewarding the culture, the economy, and the spirit of a free people. It is to stand for truth when truth is unfashionable and to guard moral order when the world celebrates chaos.

We are not merely holding the torch. We are relighting it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Getty Images / Handout | Getty Images

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

  • for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
  • for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
  • for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
  • for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
  • and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn’t cling to the past — he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still.

It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself.
This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of -- of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's -- it's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to find.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't -- we didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are -- we are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past, that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want.
They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -- we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for.

Do you?

How America’s elites fell for the same lie that fueled Auschwitz

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.