Elections are not a civics-class cartoon. They are not a tidy contest between two platforms and a stack of yard signs. Four forces decide who sits in the chairs when the music stops. Hope. Cheating. Anger. God. Ignore any one of them and you will spend the next four years explaining why the “sure thing” never arrived.

Campaign consultants sell you the first one. Party lawyers pretend the second does not exist until they need it. Podcasts live on the third. The fourth is the one Republicans like to point to when they win but often ignore when they lose.

I’ll be discussing this on today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show.

Subscribe now

Hope Is Why the Polls Matter at All

Hope is not optimism. Hope is the mixture of excitement and despair that gets a man out of his truck on a Tuesday in November when the weather is ugly and his boss will only give him the legally required amount of time. It is also the fog that keeps the other side home. That is why polls have any importance. They are not thermometers. They are weapons.

Word the question one way and you manufacture a lead. Sample the phones of people who still answer unknown numbers and you overcount Democrats who treat a survey like civic duty. Weight the likely-voter screen toward college-educated suburban women and you can print a headline that makes a Republican stay on the couch because “the race is already over.”

That is not a theory. It is how the industry has worked for a generation.

Fox News reported the “shy Trump voter” problem in 2020 and again after the numbers missed in 2016. Republicans and independents were twice as likely as Democrats to hide their real preference from a stranger on the phone. Joe Concha later called the methodology “antiquated as my Blockbuster card.”

The same pattern showed up when pollsters overstated Biden in Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio, and Florida. The people who planned to vote for Trump did not feel like announcing it to a clipboard.

Hope works in both directions. A manufactured landslide in the tracking polls can freeze your base. A late surge that feels real can drag low-propensity voters across a parking lot. Democrats understand this. They have spent decades treating turnout as a mood, not a civic obligation. That is why so many “scientific” surveys keep discovering what the donor class already wanted to hear.

When hope dies, the other three forces get louder.

Cheating Is Not a Conspiracy Theory If You Watch the Night

The stolen 2020 presidential election is the cleanest modern demonstration that cheating is a force, not a punch line. Assume the obvious because the obvious happened. Overnight dumps in Milwaukee. Cardboard over the windows in Detroit. Observers pushed out. Rules rewritten by health departments and consent decrees instead of legislatures. Mail ballots flying into apartments that no longer housed the people on the envelope.

The Gateway Pundit documented the Milwaukee drop of more than 143,000 ballots in the early hours of November 4, 2020, and the email crowing that a local official had “a flair for drama, delivering just the margin needed at 3:00 am.”

A later forensic review in Wayne County found absentee ballots with no signed application at rates that, extrapolated, pointed to tens of thousands of illegal ballots in Detroit alone. Courts spent months refusing to hear the evidence. That was the point.

Maricopa County’s audit found 74,243 mail-in ballots with no clear record they had ever been sent. Clark County, Nevada, saw more than 92,000 ballots bounce as undeliverable in a state Biden carried by fewer than 34,000 votes. The Heartland Institute later published survey work showing large shares of mail voters admitting they filled out a ballot for someone else or voted from a state where they no longer lived. Mass mail-in voting under a public-health pretext was not an accident. It was an invitation.

Fulton County in Georgia remains a case study in slop that just happens to run one direction. Duplicate scans. Unsecured transport. A Republican governor who still called the operation “sloppy” while the press called the whole affair the most secure election in American history.

Just the News has since reported declassified material showing China harvested some 220 million American voter files and that intelligence agencies spent years downplaying what they already knew about foreign collection and domestic vulnerabilities. “Most secure” was a slogan. It was not a finding.

2024 was different for one reason. The margin was too big to rig. That phrase was not poetry. It was a recognition that the machine can move tens of thousands of ballots in a handful of counties. It cannot swallow a national wave once the other side shows up in numbers that swamp the drop boxes. Cheating remains. It is simply less decisive when the honest vote is a flood instead of a trickle.

Anyone who calls that a conspiracy theory should explain why so many states still refuse same-day citizenship checks, why voter rolls stay swollen with the dead and the departed, and why the same urban machines keep producing the same 3 a.m. miracles.

Anger Is Why the Party in Power Almost Always Gets Hit

People blame whoever holds the keys. That is not ideology. That is human nature. When the grocery bill climbs, when the border is a rumor mill instead of a line, when a daughter cannot get a house on a teacher’s salary, the voter does not write a white paper. He punishes the names on the ballot that already had their chance.

That is why the opposition party almost always wins the midterms. The American Presidency Project’s long table of midterm seat swings is a cemetery of governing parties. 1994 took the House from Democrats after forty years. 2010 took sixty-three House seats from Obama’s party. 2018 took forty-one from Trump’s. 2006 punished Bush. 1946 punished Truman. The exceptions are rare and usually require a war, a boom, or a scandal so lopsided that even anger cannot find the other lever.

2022 was the closest thing to an exception in a generation, and even then Republicans still took the House. 2024 was the global year of the kicked incumbent. Governing parties from London to Tokyo caught the same fist. Americans were not unique. They were late.

Anger is crude. It is also honest. A man who cannot afford eggs does not need a seminar on monetary policy. He needs someone to fire. The party that pretends this is beneath them will keep losing the voters who still punch a clock.

Hope can blunt anger. Cheating can outrun it for a cycle. Neither cancels it. If your side is in power and life feels worse, you will spend the next election explaining why this time is different. It almost never is.

God Still Removes Kings and Sets Them Up

Scripture is not shy about this. “And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding.”

Daniel said that in Babylon, not in a suburban prayer breakfast. The same God who handed Nebuchadnezzar a dream about empires also told Israel that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men.

Paul told Timothy to offer “supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks” for kings and all in authority so that believers might lead a quiet and peaceable life. That was not a call to baptize whoever won. It was a command to intercede. Abraham bargained for Sodom. Moses stood in the gap when the Lord said He would consume the people and make a nation of Moses instead. Daniel prayed toward Jerusalem with the windows open while a pagan court tried to make prayer a felony. God listened. Not always with the answer they wanted on the first ask. He listened.

Christians who treat elections as a secular sport and then act shocked when the country rots have forgotten their own book. God appoints. He also hears. Those two facts sit together without apology. You do not get to outsource the second because the first makes you uncomfortable.

That does not mean every loss is a divine rebuke and every win is a revival. It means the church that will not pray for magistrates, will not repent of its own cowardice, and will not tell the truth about stolen votes or open borders should not be surprised when the next map looks like judgment. 2 Chronicles still stands. Humble yourselves. Pray. Seek His face. Turn. The healing of a land is not a Super PAC memo.

The four forces do not cancel one another. Hope can be manufactured. Cheating can be organized. Anger can be stoked. God is not managed. The campaign that understands only the first three will eventually meet a night it cannot buy, poll, or litigate. The people who still believe the fourth force is real should vote like it, watch the count like it, and pray like the men who already knew the names of the kings they were asking God to move.

The thieves did not need a demon. They needed a death notice and a lock they could beat.

On August 19, 2026, Henry Parra and Adam Hlavaty died in a helicopter crash in Kenya. Within a day of their names becoming public, Geybert Garcia and Melany Perdomo were at the Coral Gables house. Police say the pair ransacked the home, took jewelry, electronics, papers, a sculpture valued at more than $500,000, a Land Rover, and a Porsche. Investigators later found tools consistent with identity theft. This was not a haunting. It was a calculation. The bodies were still overseas and the living had already started inventory.

Call that what Scripture calls it. Not a principality. A heart.

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? Jeremiah 17:9

Americans have two cheap habits when we look at wickedness. One is to baptize every crime as trauma, chemistry, circumstance, skin color, gender, or a system that failed. The other is to slap the word “demonic” on every headline they hate. Both habits are lazy. Both leave you unable to tell the difference between a vulture and a spirit that hates the Son of God.

John did not leave the church that helpless. He told believers to try the spirits. He also never pretended the flesh needed help to loot a dead man’s house.

On today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show, I will discuss the three different categories of evil so we can all be more discerning about what we’re reading in the headlines. There are subcategories of evil that we won’t get into. There are even some evils that defy categorization. I’ll try to keep it simple.

The Flesh Is Sufficient

James does not send you hunting for a demon every time a man sins. He sends you looking in the mirror.

But every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin. Then sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. James 1:14-15

That is a complete statement. Greed does not have to be imported from hell in a special shipment. It is already in the warehouse.

Garcia and Perdomo are useful because they are ordinary. No ritual. No manifesto. No claim of a voice. Just the oldest grab in the book. Someone died. The house is empty. Take it.

If you need a fallen angel to explain that, you have not read Genesis lately. Cain did not require possession to kill Abel. Ahab did not require it to covet a vineyard. Judas kept the bag long before Satan entered him. The devil is a liar and a murderer from the beginning, but he is also an opportunist. He does not waste staff on work the flesh will do for free.

That matters because Christians who see a demon behind every ugly story stop seeing sinners. And sinners can repent. A man who robbed a dead couple is not a metaphor. He is a thief. He needs the law, and he needs the gospel. Dressing him up as a casualty of spiritual warfare is a way to avoid both.

So start here. Most of the evil you will meet this week is human. Cold. Small. Hungry. It will smile at a funeral and ask where they kept the jewelry. Do not baptize it. Do not mystify it. Name it and refuse it.

John Gave a Test, Not a Mood

Then there is the thing John named that is not merely the flesh doing what the flesh does.

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. 1 John 4:1-3

That’s not a vibe. It’s a confession. The spirit of antichrist is not first a mood of meanness. It is a lie about Jesus. It denies that the eternal Son came in actual flesh, bled actual blood, and rose in an actual body. John said that spirit was already in the world in the first century. Paul said the mystery of iniquity doth already work. You do not have to wait for a single man of sin to notice the atmosphere that will one day crown him.

“Anti” can mean against. It can also mean “in place of.” The spirit of antichrist does both. It opposes the real Christ and offers a replacement. A prophet. A teacher. A symbol. A mascot for whatever the age already wanted. Matthew Henry’s old warning still cuts. Do not believe every pretender to the Spirit. Try them. The world will love the teachers who talk its language. That is not evidence of anointing. That is evidence of kinship.

John’s test is brutally simple, which is why the modern church keeps trying to complicate it. Does this teaching confess Jesus Christ come in the flesh, the Father and the Son, the cross as atonement rather than theater? Or does it dissolve Him? A spirit that dissolves Jesus is not “another perspective.” It is the spirit you were told to recognize.

The Creed That Fails the Test

Islam is not the only expression of that spirit. It is one of the cleanest.

Muslims will tell you they honor Jesus. This is a pure con. The Qur’an calls Him Messiah and grants the virgin birth and miracles. Then it slams the door John said you must not slam.

In Islam, Jesus is a prophet, not the Son. Not God in flesh. The crucifixion as Christians confess it is denied or emptied. The Trinity is treated as an outrage against the oneness of Allah. Surah 5:72 says they have disbelieved who say Allah is the Messiah. Surah 9:30 treats the Christian confession that the Messiah is the “Son of Allah” as a delusion worthy of curse.

John already told you what to call a spirit that will not confess the Son come in the flesh. He did not tell you to pretend the disagreement is small because your coworker is polite. Courtesy is not Christology. You can love a Muslim neighbor, feed him, tell him the truth, and still refuse the lie that Isa-the-prophet is the same confession as Jesus the Word made flesh.

They are not the same. One saves. One will try to lead many to blasphemy and hellfire.

The spirit of antichrist is larger than one religion. It shows up anywhere the incarnation is treated as optional. Anywhere the body God made is treated as a costume. Anywhere Christ is reduced to a brand, a therapist, or an AI face that says amen if you tap share. The common thread is the same. Unmake the Son. Unmake the flesh He wore. Then you can unmake everything else.

Do not turn that into a hunting license. John said many antichrists, not “the person in line at the store.” The test is the teaching. The fruit. The replacement gospel. If you cannot keep that distinction, you will either baptize error because the speaker seems nice, or you will call every opponent possessed and become a nuisance with a Bible.

Possession Did Not Clock Out After Acts

The third category is the one respectable people are not allowed to mention.

Jesus drove unclean spirits out of men who lived among tombs and cut themselves with stones. A slave girl in Philippi made her owners rich with a spirit of divination until Paul commanded it to come out. The sons of Sceva found out the hard way that the name of Jesus is not a party trick. Nothing in the New Testament says the dark intelligence that seized those people filed retirement papers when the canon closed. The church that pretends otherwise has not become scientific or “modernized” through our false enlightenment. It has become materialist with hymns.

That does not mean every addict is Legion. It does not mean every schizophrenic needs an exorcist instead of a doctor. The Lord who cast out demons also spoke of sickness as sickness. Scripture can stack categories. Saul had jealousy and an evil spirit from the Lord troubling him. Judas had a moneybag and then Satan entered him. A boy in the Gospels had seizures and a spirit that threw him. The Bible is not embarrassed by body and spirit existing in the same wreck.

Modern people are. They will give you 400 pages on neurotransmitters and not one honest paragraph on the possibility that some evils are personal, intelligent, and hungry. Then they act shocked when the culture fills with tarot in teenage bedrooms, astrology as personality, and churches that treat deliverance as a punch line. The Vatican’s own exorcists have been warning about a surge in occult traffic. You do not have to accept every Roman claim to notice that the West reopened doors it used to keep shut and then blamed the draft on mental health.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Ephesians 6:12

Paul did not say you wrestle only against those things. He said you do wrestle against them. If your Christianity has no category for that fight, you will lose it and call the loss compassion.

The Basement and the Pink Sidewalk

Which brings you to a basement in Duxbury and a sidewalk in Plymouth.

On January 24, 2023, Lindsay Clancy sent her husband out for medicine and dinner. Then, she later said, a male voice told her this was her last chance. She had to kill the children so she could kill herself.

Cora was 5. Dawson was 3. Callan was 8 months old.

She took them to the basement and strangled them with exercise bands. Then she cut herself and went out a second-story window. Patrick Clancy came home to blood, an open window, and three small bodies. That is the case. Do not let anyone talk you into a softer version.

The defense blames postpartum psychosis and a brutal cocktail of psychiatric drugs. Those things are real. Women have been destroyed by them. A Christian who pretends the body cannot break that badly is a fool. Prosecutors say planning, Google searches, and a voice that is too convenient. A forensic psychologist told the jury the alleged voice lasted about the 18 minutes required to finish the killings and then stopped, a pattern he called very, very unusual. She told her husband she had no choice.

This morning, the Plymouth jury told Judge William Sullivan it could not reach a unanimous verdict after roughly 17 hours. He sent them back. Nine women and three men. The law will do what the law can do. It cannot see into the unseen.

Neither can a writer. No one reading this sat in that basement with authority to name a spirit. Anyone who issues a certificate of possession from a comment section is playing prophet. That is one ditch.

The other ditch is the one this age prefers. She is only a patient. The children are a tragedy that happened around her. The real victim is the woman, and the real villain is a healthcare system that did not listen hard enough. Some of that criticism of the system may even be true. It is still not the whole truth. A mother wrapping bands around the necks of three children is not a policy failure with a first name. It is an assault on the image of God so complete that honest people feel the air change. They should. Scripture never required you to pretend that feeling is nothing.

The loudest evidence is not the diagnosis. It is the congregation that formed around her.

In August, hundreds came to Plymouth in pink. Believe. She Needed Help. Peace For Lindsay. Women held their own living children on the sidewalk outside a trial for three dead ones. They cheered her arrival. They made hearts with their hands. They prayed. Organizer Renee Kimball said any one of them could have been sitting in that chair.

On TikTok the liturgy got a name. Same Lindsay. I am Lindsay. Mothers filmed themselves holding babies and putting their faces where a murderer’s face had been. A GoFundMe for her parents blew past $800,000 and then a million, while Cora, Dawson, and Callan receded into the status of unfortunate context.

Wanting better care for desperate mothers is not demonic. Identifying with the woman who killed three children, holding your own child as a prop in that identification, and treating the dead as a footnote is a different act. It is a reversal. Pity flows uphill to the powerful symbol and downhill away from the weakest bodies in the story. Isaiah warned about people who call evil good and good evil. He did not say they needed to know they were doing it.

Not all women see themselves in Lindsay Clancy. Thank God. The ones who do should terrify you more than a hung jury. A culture can argue about mens rea. A culture that dresses in matching colors to stand with the killer while the children have no parade is telling you what it worships.

Safety of adult feeling over sanctity of small life. Therapy language over judgment. A savior who needs help more than a Savior who judges and forgives.

That swarm is why the Clancy case will not stay inside a medical file. Something in this age recognizes itself in the act and rushes to cover it with pink. You do not have to pretend you can prove a legal possession to notice the recognition. Unclean things recognize their own.

How to Tell the Difference This Week

Discernment is not a gift for people who enjoy being harsh. It is obedience. Believe not every spirit. Hold fast that which is good. Abstain from every form of evil. Greater is He that is in you than he that is in the world.

Those are not slogans for a conference tote bag. They are how you stay sane.

Try a working order.

First, assume the flesh until the facts force you further. Most sin is lust, pride, envy, greed, fear, and sloth wearing a current outfit. Preach repentance. Support the magistrate. Do not turn a burglary into an exorcism seminar.

Second, apply John’s test to teachings and movements, not to every face in the grocery store. What does this creed do with Jesus Christ come in the flesh? What does it do with the body, the child, the cross, the resurrection? If it denies the Son, it is not a misunderstood cousin of the gospel. It is the spirit you were warned about. Islam fails that test in public, on purpose, in its foundational texts. So do the fashionable gospels that keep Jesus as inspiration and throw away His body, His blood, and His exclusive claim.

Third, leave room for the third category without becoming the man who finds a demon in his toast. Actual oppression and possession remain possible because the New Testament did not expire. Occult invitation still matters. So does despair, so does drug-soaked confusion, so does a voice that no lab can put on a slide. Hold all of it. Take the sick to doctors. Take the bound to Christ. Take the stubborn lie to Scripture. Do not let psychiatry baptize what hell would be happy to hide behind a prescription bottle. Do not let deliverance theater replace the ordinary means of grace.

Fourth, watch the swarm. Evil often shows itself less in the isolated act than in the people who cannot stop defending it. When a culture builds a liturgy around the destroyer and forgets the destroyed, you are no longer watching mere sympathy. You are watching a spirit of error teach the public which lives count.

Fifth, stay near the Word and the church that still confesses the Son. Discernment without Scripture is just suspicion with better adjectives. The Holy Ghost leads into truth, not into your preferred panic. Satan still disguises himself as an angel of light. His servants still look helpful. That is why John started with Jesus and not with your gut.

The thieves in Coral Gables prove the first point. You can be wicked with a clear head. Islam’s official Christology proves the second. You can be devout, disciplined, and still animated by a spirit that will not confess the Son. The Duxbury basement and the pink sidewalk prove that the third point will not stay in the first century no matter how many experts wish it would.

Do not flatten those three into one. If everything is demonic, nothing is. If nothing is demonic, the New Testament is a folk tale. The church that can still tell the difference will look strange. Let it. The world already has plenty of people who cannot tell a vulture from a spirit, and they are lining up in matching shirts to prove it.

There is a machine that runs on your attention. It does not care whether the story is true, false, tragic, or ridiculous. It only cares that you keep watching. Call it the Distraction Industrial Complex. It manufactures just enough outrage, just enough curiosity, just enough moral theater to keep Christian and conservative eyes locked on the secondary fight while the primary one is lost.

These stories are not always unimportant. Some of them are genuinely interesting. Some even touch real principles. That is the point. The machine feeds you material that feels urgent enough to argue about, share about, and lose sleep over. Then it moves on. The foundation keeps cracking.

Subscribe now

Look at the WNBA. The league has spent years amplifying a pro-trans ideology that pretends biology is optional. Players and coaches wear the shirts. Statements lean hard into “inclusion.” The definition of woman is treated as a conversation rather than a fact.

Then one of the league’s stars, Sophie Cunningham, says she wants to protect women’s sports by not supporting men playing in them. The demons pounce. Soon after, a 6-foot-10 former NBA player named Enes Kanter Freedom calls the bluff. He declares himself eligible for the 2027 draft under the same self-identification logic the league has refused to close. He shows up courtside in a shirt that simply reads “WOMAN noun. adult human female.” He gets ejected after a confrontation.

The league and its allies treat him as the problem. The war against women is real. The hypocrisy is thicker than the paint on the three-point line. And still, the entire spectacle functions as premium-grade distraction. It keeps the cultural oxygen flowing toward one more gender skirmish while deeper cultural and spiritual failures continue unchallenged. Popular right-leaning outlets like OutKick and the New York Post have covered the absurdity extensively in real time, and pretty much every conservative outlet has at least mentioned it.

The coverage is necessary. The fixation is not.

Black Lives Matter was established to promote trans-ideology and LGBTQIA+ supremacy to the black community. It succeeded for a bit but could never really break through. The WNBA kerfuffle is a more direct iteration of the same playbook. That’s the real story but it’s flying under the radar.

Then there is the Lindsay Clancy story. A mother who strangled her three young children is on trial. Hundreds of women show up outside the courthouse in coordinated pink, holding babies, waving signs, chanting support, and framing the case as a failure of the mental health system rather than a horror. TikTok fuels it. International flags appear. The attorney is cheered as a women’s rights fighter.

The idiocy is almost breathtaking. Postpartum psychosis is real. Murder is still murder. The rallies feel urgent and compassionate to those inside them. From the outside they look like a movement that has lost the ability to distinguish between compassion and inversion. The coverage is unavoidable. The emotional energy poured into it is energy not spent elsewhere.

But it’s not the tiny but vocal subset of supporters who are the target. They’re the bait. We’re the targets. The story has enough lunacy to prompt conversations, articles, videos, and so many social media reactions that one would think this is more than what it is: a trial for a woman who has admitted her crimes and who now fights to spend the rest of her life in a mental institution instead of jail.

This is not a big or important story that deserves weeks of constant coverage. It’s a distraction being brought forth through “Same Lindsay” supporters who are either unhinged or otherwise compelled to keep the story alive.

And then there’s the so-called MAGA war. Former Trump supporters who decided that the president’s relationship with Israel was the single non-negotiable issue have turned against him. Some have drifted into open functional support for Democrats rather than tolerate the disagreement. One foreign-policy priority becomes the purity test that fractures the coalition. The pattern is familiar. Single-issue absolutism is always available when the larger project of national survival feels hard. It is easier to rage at one alliance than to hold the line on the full set of threats.

Criticism of President Trump and/or Israel is defensible. We’re not automatons who must follow the leader no matter what. But to make this the issue that prompts support for Democrats is ludicrous. One does not have to be a die-hard Trump supporter to recognize the absolute insanity of the left today. President Trump has not met many of our expectations, but a Kamala Harris presidency or a Jeffries-Schumer Congress would have destroyed us.

The anti-Trump movement from the right is a distraction. It’s not trying to build a coalition like the Tea Party to guide the GOP away from centrism. It’s just trying to divide enough conservatives so we’re busy debating about Tyler Robinson and not focusing on real issues.

These three are only the current models. The complex has an endless catalog. The weekly corporate apology tour that lasts until the next viral clip. Campus occupations that produce zero legislation but infinite content. Celebrity meltdowns that somehow demand more emotional bandwidth than the actual collapse of the American family. Sports betting scandals and athlete personal dramas that turn games into soap operas. Princesses getting cut from Netflix for whatever reason. Each one is engineered to feel like the most important thing happening right now. None of them is.

You can and should pick the issues that interest you, but today’s not the time for a deep dive into any of them. We are not going to dig into the rising Red-Green Alliance here. We will not unpack the affordability crisis crushing young families or the quiet dependency on AI systems that fewer and fewer people understand or control. We’re not going to highlight the rise of data centers, digital currencies, or highly capable robots. Those matters are real. Every person gets to choose which ones drive their interest and action.

The requirement is simple. Stop letting the circus become the mission.

The biggest issue for America is not any of the above. It is that too many are falling away from the true Christian faith. Apostasy is no longer rare. Spiritualism wears respectable clothes and walks into churches that once knew better. Islam advances while much of the church treats it as just another lifestyle option. And a surveillance state is being constructed that will eventually treat the faithful as enemies of the “state.”

The threats are personal and existential. Only a country driven by Bible-believing Christians has any realistic chance of surviving the world that is taking shape. That’s not a call for a theocracy; any earthly theocracy will fail until the true King returns. But if faith remains secondary, cultural, or non-existent, America will fall. That is not rhetoric. It is observation.

And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

The Distraction Industrial Complex does not need you to become a leftist. It only needs you to stay busy. Stay reactive. Stay entertained by the secondary. The primary battle is for the soul of a people who once knew who they were and what they believed. Look up from the feed long enough to notice which fight actually decides the future.

It may shock some people that America is faced with dozens of massive threats against us. Others will think that a list of 30 is way too small.

From dependence on hostile supply chains to the ongoing border crisis, from the rising occult to the fall of personal meaning, and from foreign wars to the transhumanist temptation, America and her people are bombarded with challenges every day of our lives.

On today’s episode of the Wendy Bell Radio Program at 9am Pacific which I will be simulcasting on The JD Rucker Show, I will go through this list in far more detail.

Whether that’s a countdown to oblivion or a wake up call to action is up to those who watch and listen. It’s important to note that these are the greatest ideological threats. We are not including the institutions or organizations that commit the crimes because many of them, such as the Deep State or the Red-Green Alliance, actually operate across multiple threats.

We are also not addressing groups directly; it’s easy to just blame Democrats or Islamists, but again their challenges for America cross the spectrum. These are the ideas that threaten us. Anyone who tries to build such a list will come up with a different order, add some threats and lose others. But just about everyone in my audience will agree that we have a whole lot arrayed against us. These threats are in order of how I see them...

Subscribe now

#30 — Educational Capture

We begin where most of the other problems on this list are manufactured. American K-12 schools and universities have largely abandoned their mandate to transmit knowledge and instead operate as ideological formation centers. The evidence isn’t hidden; it’s published in teacher training materials, DEI frameworks, and curricula that treat activism as the purpose of education rather than a possible byproduct of it. Test scores in reading and math continue to slide while administrative headcount balloons. Parents discovered during the lockdown era exactly what was being taught, and the homeschool and classical education boom that followed was not a fad—it was a verdict. But tens of millions of children remain in the system, and a nation that lets its adversaries catechize its children should not be surprised by what those children grow up believing.

#29 — Dependence on Hostile Supply Chains

The United States cannot currently produce, at scale and on its own soil, many of the things it cannot live without. The overwhelming majority of active pharmaceutical ingredients trace back to China and India. Advanced semiconductors flow through a single island that Beijing openly intends to absorb. Rare earth processing, fertilizer inputs, transformer components for the electrical grid—the list of critical dependencies reads like a hostage inventory. Reshoring efforts have begun, and credit where due, but a fab takes years to build and a pharmaceutical supply chain takes longer. Until then, every foreign policy decision we make is negotiated with a quiet gun on the table, and everyone in Washington knows whose hand is on it.

#28 — Biblical Illiteracy Among Self-Identified Christians

Surveys from Lifeway, Barna, and the American Bible Society keep telling the same story with different numbers: enormous percentages of professing Christians cannot articulate basic doctrine, seldom open their Bibles outside of Sunday, and hold beliefs—about salvation, about the nature of Christ, about truth itself—that the historic church would have recognized as heresy. This matters for the nation because the church cannot disciple a country it has not discipled itself. A biblically illiterate Christianity becomes a mirror of the culture rather than a light to it, blown about by every wind of doctrine precisely as Paul warned. Many of the failures further up this countdown grow in the soil of this one.

#27 — Soft Persecution Normalizing

Nobody is being fed to lions, and we should be careful with our language, but a quieter machinery has been assembled and tested. De-banking of disfavored ministries and businesses. Professional licensing boards weaponized against believers who decline to affirm the sexual orthodoxy of the moment. Foster and adoption agencies forced out of operation. Parents flagged for objecting at school board meetings. Each case arrives with a plausible bureaucratic justification, which is exactly what makes the pattern effective—it is deniable at every individual point while unmistakable in aggregate. The lesson being taught to orthodox Christians and patriotic conservatives is simple: you may believe whatever you like, so long as it never leaves your skull. That is not liberty. That is a probationary permit.

#26 — Federal Usurpation of State and Local Authority

The Founders built a system in which the federal government handled a short, enumerated list of responsibilities and everything else lived closer to the people. That architecture has been inverted. Federal agencies now regulate the water in your backyard, the curriculum in your school district, and the appliances in your kitchen, while strings-attached federal money makes governors and mayors into franchisees of Washington. Subsidiarity—the old and deeply biblical principle that problems should be solved by the smallest competent authority—has been abandoned. The result is a nation where elections for president feel apocalyptic because we have allowed one office to matter far more than it was ever designed to.

#25 — Pornography as Public Health and Spiritual Catastrophe

We ran a fifty-year experiment on what happens when a society makes unlimited, escalating sexual content available to every man, woman, and child with a screen, and the results are in. Documented effects on adolescent brain development. Collapsing relationship formation among young men. An entire generation catechized in a counterfeit of intimacy before experiencing the real thing. The industry itself is inseparable from trafficking and exploitation, whatever its marketing says. And beneath the public health framing sits the older truth: this is bondage in the most literal spiritual sense, a private altar in millions of homes. Churches whisper about it while it devours their congregations. A nation cannot be strong when its men are enslaved.

#24 — The UAP Deception Angle

Here is where some readers will get off the bus, and that’s fine—discernment requires asking questions others won’t. Congress has held hearings, the Pentagon has confirmed footage, and a topic that was career suicide a decade ago is now drip-fed to the public in coordinated increments. The question worth asking is not merely “what are they?” but “why now, why this rollout, and what is the public being prepared to accept?” If disclosure is being managed—and the choreography suggests it is—then someone has decided what conclusion we are meant to reach. Christians should note that Scripture describes deceiving spirits and a coming delusion so persuasive that even the elect would be tested. Whatever these phenomena are, the narrative being built around them deserves at least as much scrutiny as the lights in the sky.

#23 — The Rapture Escapism Problem

This one is aimed inside the house. Much of American evangelicalism operates on the assumption that believers will be evacuated before anything truly difficult happens, and that assumption has consequences. A church expecting rescue does not build for endurance. It doesn’t create parallel institutions, harden its communities, or prepare its people to suffer well, because why fortify a building you’re about to leave? Set aside, for now, the exegetical debate—reasonable believers land in different places, and the timing of the rapture is not a salvation issue. The practical problem remains: if the church is still here when prophesied events unfold, millions of Christians will face a crisis of faith their pastors never prepared them for. Hope for an early rapture. Prepare for a late one.

#22 — Border and Sovereignty Erosion

The border crisis is usually argued in terms of numbers—encounters, gotaways, fentanyl seizures—and those numbers matter. But beneath them sits a more fundamental question that our ruling class refuses to answer directly: do nations have the right to remain nations? A country that cannot decide who enters it is not a country in any meaningful sense; it is a territory with amenities. Enforcement has improved dramatically under the current administration, and that should be acknowledged plainly. But the deeper wound is ideological. An entire generation of leaders in politics, media, and even the church was taught that borders are morally embarrassing. Until that idea is defeated—not just outvoted, but defeated—every enforcement gain is one election away from reversal.

#21 — Weaponization of Government

The machinery built to protect Americans has been repeatedly aimed at them. We have watched lawfare deployed against political opponents, federal agencies coordinating with tech platforms to throttle disfavored speech, parents and pro-life activists visited by armed agents over misdemeanors, and a surveillance apparatus that treats the Fourth Amendment as a suggestion. Some of this has been exposed and some of it curtailed, but exposure is not the same as dismantlement. The censorship-industrial complex didn’t repent; it rebranded. The danger here is not only what was done but what was normalized—because precedents, once set, wait patiently for the next administration willing to use them. A government that will do this to some of its citizens has announced what it is willing to do to all of them.

#20 — Historical Amnesia and Manufactured Self-Hatred

Every civilization transmits a story about itself, and for a generation America’s institutions have transmitted a story of unbroken villainy. Not honest reckoning—honest reckoning is healthy and biblical—but a curated indictment in which the founding is reduced to its sins and its achievements are treated as accidents or thefts. The result is measurable: record-low percentages of young Americans say they are proud of their country or would defend it. This is not organic disillusionment; it is the intended output of an educational and cultural pipeline. A nation taught to despise its founding cannot defend it, will not sacrifice for it, and will not pass it on. You do not need to invade a country whose children have been persuaded it deserves to fall.

#19 — The Loneliness and Meaning Crisis

The Surgeon General declared loneliness an epidemic, and for once the government’s framing undersold the problem. Deaths of despair—suicide, overdose, alcohol—have claimed hundreds of thousands. Men are the leading casualties: fewer friendships, fewer marriages, fewer reasons offered to them for their own existence. Young people report emptiness at rates no prior generation recorded. The secular experts prescribe apps and awareness campaigns, which is like prescribing a screensaver for a house fire. The truth is older and simpler: human beings were built for God, for family, and for embodied community, in that order, and we have systematically stripped all three from American life. The void is not a mystery. It is the exact shape of what we removed.

#18 — Pharmakeia Nation

When John wrote of the sorceries by which the nations would be deceived, the Greek word was pharmakeia—a term that bound together drugs, altered states, and occult practice as a single package. Look around. One in eight American adults takes an antidepressant. Marijuana has gone from counterculture to strip-mall commodity. Psychedelics are being rebranded as therapy and marched through the FDA with breathless media coverage, while “plant medicine” retreats fill the calendars of the same class of people who sneer at church. None of this means every prescription is illegitimate—medicine is a gift, and no one should feel condemned for treatment sought in good faith. But a nation this dependent on chemically managed consciousness should ask what it is medicating, what it is opening, and who benefits from a population that can no longer face reality sober.

#17 — Occult Mainstreaming

Witchcraft is arguably the fastest-growing spiritual practice among young American women, and it did not spread through covens—it spread through the algorithm. WitchTok content draws billions of views. Tarot decks sell at Target. “Manifestation” is taught as a productivity technique, astrology as a personality framework, and crystals as wellness, each one an entry ramp with the theological price tag carefully removed. The generation that was told religion is superstition has not become rational; it has become pagan, exactly as Chesterton predicted. Christians who roll their eyes at this are missing the strategic picture: the enemy does not need people to worship him by name. He needs only to redirect the innate human hunger for the supernatural toward any altar but the true one.

#16 — National Covenant and Judgment

Romans 1 describes a specific sequence: a people who knew God refuse to honor Him, and so He gives them over—to darkened thinking, to degraded passions, to a debased mind. Read that chapter slowly and then read the news. The most sobering interpretation of America’s condition is not that judgment is coming but that a form of it is already here, and that it looks less like fire from heaven than like restraint being lifted—a nation handed over to the consequences of what it demanded. America is not Israel and holds no covenant of that kind, so we should be careful with the parallel. But the principle of Romans 1 is not covenant-specific; it is a description of how God deals with any people who suppress the truth. The question is whether we are early or late in the sequence.

#15 — Foreign Entanglements and Empire Fatigue

Washington’s foreign policy establishment maintains commitments on every continent while the country underwriting them decays from within. Hundreds of billions have flowed to Ukraine. The Iran war is draining us financially and militarily. Taiwan looms as the crisis that could dwarf both. Reasonable patriots disagree about each of these individually—there are real monsters in the world, and retreat has costs too. But the aggregate picture is a nation spending its blood, treasure, and attention policing a global order while its own border, grid, cities, and families crumble. Empires historically fall not from a single defeat but from overextension meeting internal rot. We are running both experiments simultaneously and calling it leadership.

#14 — The Death of Shared Truth

A self-governing people must be able to argue from common facts, and that capacity is nearly gone. Algorithmic feeds sort Americans into custom realities. Legacy media burned its credibility across a decade of provable falsehoods, and the alternatives that replaced it carry their own incentives to inflame. Now AI-generated text, images, and video flood the zone, making the dead internet theory less a conspiracy than a description, and pushing us toward a world where any inconvenient evidence can be dismissed as fake and any fake can be laundered as evidence. This is an epistemological crisis with national security implications: a country that cannot agree on what is real cannot deliberate, cannot self-correct, and can be steered by whoever controls the filters.

#13 — The Transhumanist Temptation

The oldest lie in recorded history was “ye shall be as gods,” and it is now a funded research agenda. Silicon Valley’s most powerful figures speak openly of merging with machines, defeating death, and building artificial superintelligence—some of them using explicitly religious language about creating that which they will then, in their own words, worship. Brain-computer interfaces are in human trials. Embryo selection is a commercial service. Life-extension ventures absorb billions. Each technology arrives with genuine medical promise attached, which is precisely how such offers always arrive. The question Christians must press is not whether these tools can heal—some can—but whether a civilization that no longer believes in God can be trusted to redesign the creature made in His image.

#12 — CBDCs and the Programmable Money Threat

Central bank digital currencies are marketed as convenience and settled as control. Money that is programmable is money that can be switched off, geofenced, expiration-dated, or conditioned on behavior—and anyone who considers that paranoid should review what happened to the bank accounts of Canadian truckers, or the quiet de-banking campaigns against gun dealers, crypto firms, and ministries here at home. Political resistance has produced real wins, including federal pushback against a retail CBDC, but the architecture advances anyway through instant-payment rails, digital ID initiatives, and private-sector proxies that accomplish the same surveillance with better branding. The endpoint is a financial system where dissent has a purchase history. Sound money in your own possession is not nostalgia; it is exit.

#11 — The War on Childhood Innocence

Every healthy civilization in history has understood that children are to be protected from adult matters until they mature. Ours has inverted this into a principle of liberation. Sexualized content in school libraries defended as literature. Gender ideology introduced to children too young to spell it, in some cases advancing to medicalization pathways that other Western nations are now retreating from after reviewing the evidence. Screens engineered by the world’s best behavioral scientists to capture developing minds, delivering content no parent would choose. These are distinct problems with distinct culprits, but they share a target and a result: childhood itself is being foreclosed. Christ reserved His most severe warning—the millstone—for those who cause little ones to stumble. It is not a minor item on this list.

#10 — Apostasy Within the Visible Church

The threat to the American church that no external enemy could accomplish is being managed from inside. Prosperity preachers sell God as a vending machine to audiences of millions. Progressive denominations shed doctrine after doctrine to chase a culture that despises them anyway, then wonder at their empty pews. Seeker-driven megachurches replace discipleship with production values, delivering motivational content to crowds that were never confronted with sin, repentance, or the cross. Scripture warned of this explicitly—teachers accumulated to suit itching ears, a form of godliness denying its power. The nation’s spiritual immune system is compromised not because the church is persecuted but because so much of what carries the name no longer carries the message.

#9 — Child Sacrifice by Another Name

Strip away the clinical vocabulary and the ancient practice stands recognizable. The worshipers of Molech offered their children in exchange for prosperity, security, and an unencumbered future—the same exchange rate offered today, with better lighting and a euphemism. Tens of millions of American children have been aborted since 1973. The overturning of Roe returned the question to the states, and some states responded by enshrining the practice more deeply than Roe ever required, while chemical abortion by mail now accounts for the majority of cases and erases most remaining oversight. Scripture’s response to Molech was not ambivalent, and the prophets did not soften the charge because the practice was popular. A nation is measured by what it does to its most defenseless, and ours has made its answer a constitutional sacrament in half its territory.

#8 — The Uniparty and Managed Opposition

On the issues where the donor class is united—endless spending, foreign intervention, mass legal migration, surveillance reauthorization, corporate consolidation—Washington’s two parties reliably discover bipartisanship. The theatrical combat is reserved for cultural questions that mobilize voters without threatening budgets. This is the uniparty problem, and acknowledging it does not require cynicism about every individual legislator; there are genuine fighters in both chambers, and the populist realignment of the past decade has been a real disruption to the machine. But the machine adapts. Controlled opposition is an old intelligence technique for a reason: the most effective way to neutralize a movement is to lead it. Voters should support their champions and audit them relentlessly, because the door out of the uniparty is always also a door in.

#7 — The Death of the Middle Class

The American promise was never wealth; it was attainability—the confidence that an ordinary family, working ordinary jobs, could own a home, raise children, and retire with dignity. Run the numbers on that promise today. Median home prices have detached from median incomes to a degree unseen in generations. Young adults carry record debt into a market where the starter home is extinct and the starter family is postponed indefinitely—birth and marriage rates track housing costs more closely than any sermon on values ever could. Meanwhile asset holders have grown spectacularly wealthy on the very inflation that priced everyone else out. This is not capitalism failing; it is a rigged monetary system doing exactly what rigged monetary systems do: transferring wealth from those who earn dollars to those who own things.

#6 — The National Debt and Fiat Endgame

The debt has blown past $37 trillion with no braking mechanism in sight, and the interest payments alone now rival what we spend on national defense—we are approaching the point of borrowing money to pay the interest on borrowed money, which every household in America recognizes as the final stage before ruin. No serious person in either party proposes a genuine solution, because the honest options—deep cuts, default, or inflation—are all politically fatal, and so the chosen path is the quiet one: debase the currency and let the math hide in your grocery bill. This is why the dollar’s reserve status erodes, why BRICS nations accumulate gold, and why central banks themselves are buying it at historic rates. They can read the ending. The fiat experiment that began in 1971 is not eternal, and the wise are positioning for what follows rather than debating whether it arrives.

#5 — Election Integrity and Institutional Distrust

Set aside, for one paragraph, the arguments about any particular election, and observe the wreckage common to all sides: enormous portions of the country—the majorities shift depending on who lost last—no longer believe American elections are conducted fairly. That is a five-alarm fire regardless of which claims you credit, because consent of the governed is not a slogan; it is the load-bearing wall. Mass mail balloting, extended voting windows, opaque machine systems, and courts that dismissed challenges on procedure rather than evidence all fed the crisis, and the institutions’ preferred remedy—instructing citizens to stop asking questions—has worked exactly as well as it deserves to. Restoring verifiable, transparent elections should be the one demand that unites everyone who intends to keep living in a republic. That it instead remains a partisan football tells you how much the current arrangement suits those it benefits.

#4 — AI Displacement and the Coming Labor Reckoning

Artificial intelligence is already writing code, processing claims, drafting legal documents, generating marketing, and answering customer calls, and the systems improve every quarter while the political class offers nothing but vibes. This time the disruption climbs the ladder—white-collar, credentialed, middle-class work is squarely in the blast radius, the very jobs that were supposed to be the safe harbor from the last wave of offshoring and automation. Perhaps new categories of work emerge, as optimists promise; perhaps they emerge too slowly for the tens of millions caught in between. Nobody in either party has a real answer, and the answers being incubated in Davos and Silicon Valley—universal basic income as a pacification stipend—should alarm anyone paying attention, because a population that depends on the state for its bread has surrendered the last leverage a free people holds.

#3 — The Collapse of the Family

Nearly every pathology on this list has its taproot here. Marriage rates sit at historic lows. The birth rate has fallen far below replacement and keeps falling. Roughly one in four American children lives without a father in the home, and the data on what follows fatherlessness—poverty, incarceration, addiction, abuse, academic failure—is as close to settled as social science gets, which is precisely why it is so rarely discussed. The family is the first government, the first church, the first economy, and the first school; no institution downstream can compensate for its failure, though we have spent trillions trying. This did not simply happen. Policy punished marriage, culture mocked it, and an economy rigged against household formation finished the job. Rebuilding the American family is not one item on the national to-do list. It is the precondition for the rest of the list mattering.

#2 — The Dechurching of America

Somewhere around 40 million Americans have stopped attending church in the past few decades—the largest and fastest religious shift in the nation’s history, dwarfing the Great Awakenings in scale while running in reverse. The researchers behind the dechurching data found something that should sting: most leavers did not storm out over doctrine or scandal. They drifted—moved cities, changed schedules, fell out of habit—and no one came looking for them. Whatever the mechanism, the consequence compounds through everything above this entry: the church is the institution that forms consciences, binds neighbors, disciples families, and restrains the state by nurturing a people who answer to a higher authority. An America without the church is not a neutral America. It is a mission field with nuclear weapons, and the vacancy is already being filled by every counterfeit on this list.

#1 — Principalities Behind the Institutions

If you have read this far and felt the pattern—the strange coordination of it all, the way every institution seemed to turn against the family, the church, the child, and the truth at roughly the same time—you have two available explanations. One requires a smoke-filled room and a conspiracy of implausible competence. The other is written in Ephesians 6: we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. The coordination we observe does not require a human mastermind if there is a spiritual intelligence behind it, and Scripture states plainly that there is. This is why the countdown ends here rather than with any policy failure: every other item on this list is a battlefield, but this is the war. It also means the decisive weapons are not the ones deployed in Washington. They never were.

Pray for America at least daily.

President Trump said it out loud this week. Democrats are nominating jihadists. Not the cartoon version with suicide vests that the media loves to pretend is the only definition. Real ones. The kind who walk into American politics with a smile, a progressive platform, and a quiet determination to remake the country from the inside.

He was responding to a Breitbart question in the Oval Office about the radical slate of Democrat candidates heading into the midterms.

“We have jihadists being elected all over the place,” Trump said. “Whether it’s communism, jihadism… A friend of mine called up, he said, ‘You know, really, you should use the word jihadist because that’s what’s happening.’”

The media clutched its pearls and screamed Islamophobia. Of course they did. They always do when someone notices the pattern. But Trump was pointing at something older and more deliberate than a single election cycle. He was naming the political and cultural form of jihad that has been operating in plain sight for decades.

Through it all, the biggest problem our nation faces in recognizing the threat is that the jihadists are not all Muslim. The Democratic Socialists of America are supportive of and oftentimes active participants in the jihad being waged on us. Some of them don’t even realize it, but others are not only aware but are giddily engaged.

If jihad is the path through which they can take down “Empire,” then they’re all in, Muslim or not.

I will be talking about this in greater detail on The JD Rucker Show at noon Pacific.

Subscribe now

What Jihad Actually Means

Most Americans hear “jihad” and think only of the bloody kind. That is the lesser jihad, the jihad of the sword. Islamic tradition also teaches a greater jihad, the internal struggle against sin. But the classical and historical understanding is broader still. Jihad is struggle in the path of Allah by whatever means available. By the heart. By the tongue. By the hand. By the sword when the time is right.

Political jihad and civilizational jihad are not inventions of Western critics. They are strategies written down by the Muslim Brotherhood itself. In the 1991 Explanatory Memorandum, recovered by the FBI and entered as evidence in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial, the Brotherhood described its work in North America as:

“a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

That document is not conspiracy theory. It is their own words. The goal is settlement, empowerment, coalition-building, and the gradual replacement of the existing order with an Islamic alternative. Sharia is not optional in that vision. It is the destination.

This is the form of jihad now being normalized through Democrat primaries. Not car bombs. Ballots. City halls. Senate races. The red-green alliance of radical leftists and Islamist networks that share a common enemy... America as it was founded.

The Candidates and the Pattern

Look at Michigan. Abdul El-Sayed just secured the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate. If he wins in November he becomes the first Muslim in that body.

Trump has zeroed in on him for good reason. El-Sayed’s father-in-law has documented ties to Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations, including past leadership in CAIR-Michigan and the Islamic Society of North America founders committee.

Counterterrorism experts testified that these connections raise homeland security concerns. El-Sayed’s platform includes abolishing ICE, defunding the police, restructuring the Supreme Court, and a hard anti-Israel line that sits comfortably with the progressive left’s new orthodoxy.

His victory over the Democratic establishment was no accident. It marked the biggest triumph yet for the far-left wing of the party.

In New York, Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist, has become the face of this fusion. His machine helped push through primary winners who openly celebrate the destruction of Western norms. One co-founded a group that called for the full eradication of Western civilization. Others have echoed “Death to America” rhetoric while demanding the abolition of borders, prisons, and any meaningful immigration enforcement. Mass amnesty for illegal aliens is standard. So is the demand to get rid of the Senate itself, as DSA leadership has openly stated.

Trump connected the dots. These are not random radicals.

“They come from other failed countries, and they come here, and they tell us how to run our country… They come from, let’s say, as an example, Somalia.” he said. “They come in, and then they tell us how our Constitution, how our Declaration of Independence, how it works. It doesn’t work that way.”

He is right. People who fled failed states or who carry the ideological baggage of Islamist networks should not be lecturing Americans on the meaning of ordered liberty. Yet the Democratic Party has decided that demographic change and identity politics matter more than assimilation or constitutional fidelity. The red-green axis has been building for years.

Now it is winning primaries.

The Normalization Strategy

This is how normalization works. First you redefine the word. Jihad becomes “struggle for justice.” Then you punish anyone who notices the actual doctrine. Call them bigots. Accuse them of phobia. Flood the zone with claims that any scrutiny of Islamist political activity is racist.

Meanwhile the infrastructure of the Brotherhood and its allies embeds itself in universities, civil rights organizations, student groups, and now elected office.

The same networks that produced CAIR and the Muslim Students Association now produce Democrat nominees. The same ideological current that treats the Constitution as an obstacle rather than a covenant finds common cause with socialists who want to abolish the Senate, the Supreme Court, and ICE.

The red and the green do not need to agree on every social issue. They only need to agree that the old America must go. This is why people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, and Troy Jackson are directly involved. Since they are not Muslim, they give credibility to jihad by painting it as “Democratic Socialism.”

That sounds much nicer than “jihad.”

Scripture is not silent on this kind of gradual conquest. “For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.”

That is 2 Thessalonians 2:7. The restraint holds for a season. Then the restraint is removed. What follows is not subtle.

America was never meant to be a staging ground for a foreign civilizational project. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. A nation that cannot name the ideology that seeks to replace it will eventually be replaced by it. Trump called the candidates what they are. The rest of the country can keep pretending the word has only one meaning, or it can open its eyes while there is still time.

Black Lives Matter as a movement was originally formed to promote Marxism and advance an anti-Christian, anti-family worldview to Black Americans. It was founded on the premises of pro-LGBTQIA+ supremacy. Now, we’re seeing a different play on a different front but with the same goal of indoctrinating the Black community, which has thus far been resistant to trans-dominance.

The current spat in the WNBA has morphed into a BLM-style battlefront. Whether that was planned for a while or if it’s an opportunistic move by the Globalist Elite Cabal is unknown, but the intended results are clear, albeit cleverly smoke-screened. Before I explain how the WNBA became a Marxist psyop, it’s important to see how BLM was used to achieve the same goals.

In September 2020, at the absolute peak of its cultural power, with murals on city streets and corporate logos turning black in tribute, the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation did something strange. It quietly deleted the page on its website that explained what it believed.

The Washington Examiner discovered the removal, and Fox News confirmed that visitors to the “What We Believe” page were suddenly greeted with a message reading, “Page Not Found. Sorry, but the page you were trying to view does not exist.”

Organizations do not hide their core convictions at the moment of maximum influence unless those convictions are a liability with the very people they claim to represent. That deletion was not housekeeping. It was a confession. And it invites a question that almost nobody in American media has been willing to ask plainly. What exactly was Black Lives Matter selling to Black America, and who was paying for the sales campaign?

No conspiracy theory is required to answer the first part. They wrote it down.

Subscribe now

What They Believed, In Their Own Words

The deleted page, preserved forever on the Wayback Machine, declared that the organization existed to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages.’”

It pledged to “foster a queer-affirming network” and to free members “from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual,” as CBN News documented.

The page committed the movement to being “transgender affirming” and to dismantling what it called “cisgender privilege,” language The Blaze catalogued before it vanished.

Notice what is missing from those statements. Policing. The organization that presented itself to grieving Black families and sympathetic white suburbanites as a police reform movement devoted its founding charter to queer theory and the deconstruction of the two-parent family. Co-founder Patrisse Cullors removed any remaining ambiguity in a 2015 interview when she said, “I actually do think we have an ideological frame. We are trained Marxists.”

Sympathetic media outlets routinely described the organization as one created by queer Black women, a framing the founders embraced and publicized themselves. None of this was hidden. It simply went unread by the millions who donated, marched, and painted the slogan on plywood.

This matters because Marxism has always understood the family as an obstacle. From Marx and Engels forward, revolutionary theory has treated the household bound by marriage, faith, and generational loyalty as a competing power structure that must be broken before the state or the movement can claim total allegiance. BLM’s founding language was not an eccentric add-on. It was the whole program, stated with admirable honesty until the honesty became inconvenient.

The Congregation That Never Joined

Here is where the story turns from ideology to audience, because the community this program was aimed at is the most churchgoing population in the United States. Gallup found that 45 percent of Black Americans attend church weekly or almost weekly, the highest rate of any major racial or ethnic group in the country, well above the national average. Pew Research found that Black Americans hold somewhat more conservative views on sexuality than the general public, and that fully half say religious leaders should not perform same-sex marriage ceremonies at all.

In other words, the movement that wrapped itself in the mantle of Black America was carrying an ideological cargo that Black America’s oldest, most trusted, and most beloved institution, the church, has never accepted. The Black church survived slavery, survived Jim Crow, survived redlining and neglect, and it did so by holding fast to Scripture, to marriage, and to the conviction that children are a heritage of the Lord.

A movement claiming to speak for that community while pledging to disrupt its family structure and dissolve its Biblical anthropology was not representing Black America. It was attempting to convert it.

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? (Matthew 7:15-16)

By their fruits. So let us examine the fruits, and the fertilizer.

Follow the Money

Grassroots movements are funded by the grass roots. This one was not. In 2016, the Ford Foundation and Borealis Philanthropy announced the Black-Led Movement Fund, a six-year campaign to steer $100 million to the Movement for Black Lives coalition, on top of more than $33 million already flowing from George Soros’s Open Society Foundations.

Read how Borealis itself described the fund’s purpose. It existed to advance “the leadership and vision of young, Black, queer, feminists and immigrant leaders.” That is not my characterization. That is the funders describing their own targeting criteria, in writing, with the word “queer” positioned ahead of nearly everything else.

Then came 2020, when the BLM Global Network Foundation hauled in roughly $90 million in corporate and foundation money in a single year, part of a staggering wave in which corporations pledged close to $2 billion to BLM-related causes. And the fruits of that harvest? Local chapters publicly complained they were starving while the national organization purchased a six million dollar Southern California compound with donor funds, a scandal that eventually drew reported federal scrutiny over allegations that donors had been defrauded. The neighborhoods where the cameras filmed the grief got murals. The ideologues got mansions.

The Questions Worth Asking

Everything above is documented. What follows is speculation, and I will label it as such, because the difference between an argument and a fever dream is knowing which is which.

Why did the wealthiest foundations in America, institutions that employ armies of program officers and vet every grant, choose to pour nine figures into an explicitly Marxist organization whose charter targeted the nuclear family? They read the “What We Believe” page. It was their job to read it. Did they fund the mission despite that language, or because of it?

Is it coincidence that the community with the deepest Christian resistance to the sexual revolution was the one selected to receive a lavishly funded movement preaching queer theory under the banner of racial justice? When elite money flows this precisely toward this particular mismatch, the burden of explanation sits with the funders, and they have never offered one.

The WNBA PsyOp

Which brings us to the WNBA. The BLM psyop made headway in convincing some Black Americans that protecting their lives was connected to defending LGBTQIA+ rights, but not as much as the power brokers had hoped. What they learned was that support for Black lives did not easily translate into support for transgender rights.

Now, it appears they are going from the opposite angle. It is easier to rally troops, change hearts, and indoctrinate minds with opposition rather than support. Being OPPOSED to people like Sophie Cunningham and her status as so-called “MAGA Barbie” is far easier to promote in a league that has always been dominated by Black athletes. If the “bad guys” are against males playing in women’s sports, then reliable Democrat voters in the Black community can justify being in favor of “trans rights” even if it goes against their core beliefs.

What we’re seeing in the WNBA is a continuation of the BLM psyop. It won’t be as big; chances are slim that cities will burn because Sophie Cunningham is popular with conservatives. But it may be more effective in achieving the goal of opening Black minds to accepting LGBTQIA+ brainwashing.

The original conversion efforts failed. Black church pews are still full on Sunday morning. Black grandmothers still open the King James Bible their own grandmothers held. The institution that white philanthropy could not buy and Marxist theory could not deconstruct is still standing, still preaching Christ crucified and risen, while the movement that came in sheep’s clothing sold its headquarters and scrubbed its website.

But now we’re seeing a new battle being waged against them, one that is far less obvious and potentially more effective. The wolves got the money. The church kept the faith thus far. But the risk of indoctrination is still real.

By their fruits, indeed, ye shall know them.

These are the notes I’m using on today’s episode of “The JD Rucker Show“. I thought I would share them with you all because they open up some provoking thoughts for the weekend.

The American honeymoon with artificial intelligence is over, and the numbers make the divorce official. The new Bentley University-Gallup survey finds 39 percent of Americans now believe AI does more harm than good, up from 31 percent just a year ago, while a mere 9 percent believe the opposite. A separate Athena Insights poll found Americans nearly three times more likely to be concerned than excited about AI’s growing role in society. The people, it turns out, have functioning instincts.

But instincts only get you so far. Ask the average American to name the dangers of AI and you will get the same five answers, the ones that dominate cable segments and congressional hearings. Those five are real. They are also the shallow end of the pool. The deeper threats are the ones almost nobody is naming, because they do not make for good television and because the companies building them have no incentive to advertise.

Scripture gives us the operating principle for moments exactly like this one, when a powerful new thing arrives wrapped in promises:

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

So let us prove all things. Here are fifteen ways AI threatens America. If you have heard of the first five, congratulations, you watch the news. It is the other ten that should keep you up at night.

Subscribe now

The Five Most Already Know

1. Your Job

This is the fear with the broadest reach, and for good reason. Nearly eight in ten Americans, 79 percent, now say AI will reduce the number of U.S. jobs over the next decade, up from 73 percent a year ago. The disruption is no longer theoretical. White-collar work that once required a decade of training is being compressed into a prompt window, and the executives doing the compressing are remarkably candid about it when they think shareholders are the only ones listening.

2. Deepfakes and the Death of Proof

For all of human history, seeing was believing. That era is closing. Deepfake-as-a-service platforms now sell their wares for as little as five dollars, with fully synthetic identities available for fifteen, and one analysis of over a billion customer calls found deepfake-driven fraud surged 1,300 percent year over year. When any video can be fabricated, every video becomes deniable. The guilty will love this new world far more than the innocent.

3. Your Privacy

Americans have made peace, grudgingly, with being tracked online (well, some have, though not me nor most of you). They have not made peace with what comes next. Roughly seven in ten Americans predict AI will make their personal information less secure, while just 3 percent expect the opposite. Every conversation with a chatbot, every document uploaded for a summary, every photo processed for a filter is training data for systems owned by people you have never met and will never be able to vote out of office.

4. Scams at Industrial Scale

The grandmother who gets a phone call from a grandchild in trouble, in the grandchild’s own voice, begging for wire-transferred bail money, is no longer a hypothetical. Voice cloning requires seconds of sample audio, and the family emergency scam has been upgraded from a clumsy script read by a stranger to a perfect imitation of someone you love. The elderly, already the favorite target of fraudsters, are now facing con artists with superpowers.

5. What It Is Doing to Children

Parents sense this one even when they cannot articulate it. Polling shows Americans believe, by a wide margin, that the government is not doing enough to address AI’s effects on children and young people. Kids are doing homework they did not write, having conversations with entities that do not exist, and forming their picture of reality through machines optimized for engagement rather than truth. We ran this experiment once already with social media. The results are in, and we are running it again anyway, at higher stakes.

The Ten Most Have Not Been Told About

6. The Atrophy of the American Mind

Here is the threat that requires no malice, no bad actor, no dystopian plot. It only requires convenience. When a machine writes your emails, summarizes your reading, and reasons through your problems, the mental muscles that once did those jobs begin to weaken, the same way legs weaken when a man stops walking. A generation that outsources its thinking will eventually be unable to audit the machine doing the thinking for it. That is not a workforce problem. That is a self-governance problem, because a republic run by people who cannot reason independently is a republic in name only.

7. Artificial Companions for a Lonely Nation

America was already suffering an epidemic of loneliness before Silicon Valley decided to monetize it. AI companions, always agreeable, always available, never demanding sacrifice or repentance or forgiveness, are being marketed to the isolated as a substitute for the friction of real human love. A machine girlfriend never challenges you to become a better man. That is precisely the product’s appeal, and precisely its poison. Marriage and community are hard because they are supposed to be hard. The counterfeit removes the difficulty by removing the humanity.

8. AI in the Pulpit

Pastors are quietly using chatbots to write sermons, and congregations mostly do not know. Set aside the dishonesty for a moment and consider the deeper problem. A sermon is supposed to be the fruit of a shepherd wrestling with the Word of God on behalf of his flock. When the wrestling is outsourced to a language model trained on the entire internet, including every heresy ever posted to it, what arrives on Sunday morning is not preaching. It is content. The famine described by the prophet Amos was not a famine of bread but of hearing the words of the Lord, and a church fed by machines may find itself well supplied with words and starving all the same.

9. Censorship With a Friendly Face

The old censorship deleted your post. The new censorship never lets the idea reach you at all. Six in ten American adults now read the AI-generated summaries at the top of their search results, which means a machine is deciding, for the majority of the country, which facts constitute the answer. Add the “safety” filters baked into every major model, calibrated by companies with well-documented ideological leanings, and you have an information environment where dissent is not banned. It is simply never surfaced. You cannot fight a gatekeeper you cannot see.

10. The Sawed-Off Career Ladder

Everyone discusses AI taking jobs. Almost nobody discusses which jobs go first. It is the entry-level work, the junior analyst roles, the first-year associate tasks, the apprenticeship-grade assignments where every profession has always trained its next generation. Remove the bottom rungs and the ladder still looks intact from a distance, but no one new can climb it. The class of young Americans graduating today may be the first in history to find that the door to professional life was closed by the very technology their elders called progress. Young adults appear to sense this, with nearly half of those aged 18 to 29 now saying AI does more harm than good, the sharpest increase of any age group.

11. Five Companies Becoming the Operating System of Civilization

Name another moment in American history when a handful of private firms controlled the primary tool of thought, commerce, communication, and record-keeping simultaneously. You cannot, because there has never been one. The railroads controlled transport. Standard Oil controlled energy. The AI giants are positioning themselves to control cognition itself, the layer through which every other activity flows. Antitrust law was written for monopolies over things. We have no legal vocabulary for a monopoly over thinking, and the men building it are counting on that.

12. A Surveillance State Built on Commercial Foundations

The Founders wrote the Fourth Amendment to restrain the government. They did not anticipate a world where the government would not need to conduct surveillance because private companies would do it voluntarily and sell the results. AI does not just collect data. It interprets it, inferring your health, your politics, your faith, and your associations from patterns you did not know you were leaving behind. Every authoritarian regime in history was limited by manpower, by how many watchers it could employ. AI removes the limit. The infrastructure of total observation is being assembled in plain sight, justified at every step by convenience and commerce.

13. The Grid Cannot Carry the Weight

The data centers powering AI consume electricity on the scale of entire cities, and they are multiplying faster than the nation’s generating capacity. America’s grid was already aging, already strained, already vulnerable to weather and sabotage. Now it must also feed an industry whose appetite doubles on a schedule measured in months. When the margin between supply and demand narrows, guess whose power gets curtailed first in a crisis. Hint: it will not be the server farms with billion-dollar contracts. Families should understand that the AI boom is being financed, in part, with the reliability of their own light switch.

14. Crime at Machine Speed

Defense always lags offense, and AI has handed offense a jet engine. Attackers are now using generative AI to craft real-time impersonations for phishing and fraud, and analysts project that by 2027 roughly 17 percent of all cyberattacks will leverage AI in some form, from cloned voices to automated code injection. Hospitals, water systems, banks, and county election offices are defended by understaffed IT departments facing adversaries who can now probe a million doors per hour. The question is not whether critical systems will be breached. It is which ones, and how long the lights stay off when it happens.

15. The Temptation to Build a God

Listen to how the industry’s own leaders talk when the cameras are friendly. They speak of creating superintelligence, of machines that will answer every question and solve every problem, of a coming intelligence that will remake the world. This is not the language of engineering. It is the language of worship, and it is coming from men with hundreds of billions of dollars and no discernible fear of God. Humanity has attempted this project before, on a plain in Shinar, gathering its genius to build its way to heaven. The Lord’s response to Babel was not admiration. A civilization that sets out to manufacture an all-knowing power to which it will submit its decisions has not escaped religion. It has merely chosen a god that its makers believe they can own, which is the oldest and most dangerous idolatry there is.

Prove All Things

None of this is an argument for smashing the machines. Some of these tools will do genuine good, and Christians are not called to panic. We are called to discernment, to testing what we are handed rather than swallowing it, and to holding fast only to what survives the test. The polling shows Americans have begun to test. The task now is to test all of it, including the ten threats the evening news has not gotten around to mentioning, because the most dangerous thing about artificial intelligence was never the robot from the movies. It is the slow, comfortable, unexamined surrender of the faculties, the institutions, and the liberties that a free people cannot afford to lose.

Watch the show today or catch episodes live, Monday through Friday at noon Pacific.

The Democrat National Committee enters the final stretch before the 2026 midterms with roughly $16 million in usable cash after debts are counted. The Republican National Committee sits on more than $129 million and owes nothing. In super PAC money, the gap is wider still, with Republicans commanding over a billion dollars against $334 million on the Democrat side, according to figures compiled by ZeroHedge.

You can watch my full analysis on this segment that I have on my secondary YouTube account, which we’re currently trying to build.

This is the same party that conjured well over a billion dollars for Kamala Harris in a single truncated campaign less than two years ago. The machine that printed political money faster than any operation in American history has seized up, and the reasons why tell us far more about the Democrat Party than any speech from its leaders ever will.

The party’s defenders have an answer ready. They point out that the DNC has raised more by this point in the cycle than it had at the same moment in 2017, the last time Democrats were locked out of power in Washington. That defense collapses on contact. Dollars in 2026 do not buy what dollars bought in 2017, and parties are not graded against their own past but against their opponent. By the only comparison that matters, the Democrats are being lapped. The gap between the two committees is larger than it was heading into 2022 or 2024, and it is growing.

So what happened? Not one thing. Six things, each feeding the others.

Subscribe now

The Harris Hangover

Begin with the most human explanation. Democrat donors wrote checks totaling around $1.5 billion for a 107-day campaign that ended in a landslide defeat and $22 million in debt. Harris had nearly double Trump’s count of billionaire backers and corporate sponsors, and it bought her nothing.

No investor keeps funding a manager who vaporizes the portfolio, and the donor class has treated the party accordingly. When the DNC tried to lure major givers back with a Harris-headlined San Francisco fundraiser last fall, most declined, and one reportedly responded with a profanity-laced rejection. That is not donor fatigue. That is a customer demanding a refund.

Nobody Trusts the Front Office

Here is the detail that should worry Democrat strategists most. The money has not vanished from politics; it has fled the party apparatus specifically. James Talarico has pulled in more than $55 million for his Texas Senate run. Jon Ossoff has raised over $34 million in Georgia. Democrat Senate candidates are out-raising their Republican opponents in battleground after battleground.

Meanwhile the national committee starves. Donors are effectively routing around DNC chairman Ken Martin’s operation the way traffic routes around a wreck, giving directly to candidates and single-race super PACs while the central party goes begging. When your own investors trust individual franchises but not the corporate office, the problem is not the market. The problem is management.

The Billionaires Went on Strike

The Wall Street Journal put numbers to the exodus this weekend, and Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey walked through the wreckage. George and Alex Soros, who gave the DNC more than $400,000 during the 2018 midterms and over $1 million during the 2022 cycle, have given the committee exactly zero dollars this year.

Reid Hoffman, the LinkedIn co-founder who wrote steady checks to the DNC for years, has likewise given nothing. Among the donor class, the joke now circulating is that DNC stands for “Do Not Contribute.” Savor the irony for a moment. The party that spent two decades warning America about billionaires buying elections is now in crisis because its billionaires stopped buying.

The oligarchs were never the enemy. They were the business model.

The Socialists Scared Off the Checkbooks

Every cycle, the Democratic Socialists of America claim more ground inside the party, from city halls to congressional primaries, and every DSA victory sends another tremor through the boardrooms that once funded Democrat campaigns as protection money. Finance executives and corporate PACs will tolerate a great deal, but they will not bankroll a movement whose stated ambition is their abolition.

The party establishment cannot denounce its socialist wing without fracturing its base, and it cannot embrace that wing without repelling its financiers, so it stands frozen while both constituencies walk away. Get woke, go broke was always more than a slogan. It was a forecast.

All of this describes donors making choices. The last two reasons are different in kind, because they involve systems being dragged into the light. Scripture records what a master says to a manager whose books no longer add up.

How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward.

An accounting is precisely what has arrived, and the Democrats’ financial machinery was never built to survive one.

The Dark Money Aqueduct Cracked

For years, a network of nonprofit management operations moved staggering sums into progressive causes with minimal public scrutiny, and none loomed larger than Arabella Advisors, which stewarded over a billion dollars across its constellation of 501(c) funds. That era is ending.

The Gates Foundation cut ties with Arabella last year, and by November 2025 the organization had ceased operations amid dark money investigations, attempting a rebrand as Sunflower Services.

Democrat fundraising totals sagged almost immediately afterward, which is a remarkable coincidence for money that was supposedly independent of the party. Layer on the DOGE-era dismantling of agencies like USAID, whose employee political donations ran roughly 95 percent Democrat, and an entire taxpayer-adjacent ecosystem that once watered the progressive garden has been shut off at the main.

ActBlue Is Under the Microscope

Then there is the crown jewel. ActBlue processed the “grassroots” small-dollar miracle that Democrats spent years waving in Republicans’ faces, more than $15 billion over two decades. Today the platform faces a Justice Department and Treasury investigation ordered by presidential memorandum, a lawsuit from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, inquiries from attorneys general in more than a dozen additional states, and a series of brutal congressional reports.

House investigators found that ActBlue relaxed its own fraud-prevention standards twice during the 2024 cycle, instructed employees to look for reasons to accept suspicious contributions rather than reject them, and internally identified at least 22 significant fraud campaigns, nearly half with a foreign connection.

A follow-up report from the House Judiciary Committee details warnings from ActBlue’s own lawyers that the company may have misled Congress about its vetting of foreign donations. When CEO Regina Wallace-Jones finally appeared before the House Administration Committee in May, she invoked the Fifth Amendment 22 times.

Independent analysts have long flagged the anomalies that make “smurfing” allegations plausible, including elderly donors on fixed incomes credited with thousands of contributions apiece. The Gateway Pundit has reported on one such donor, a woman in an assisted living facility whose name appears on more than 69,000 donations since 2017.

Whatever the investigations ultimately prove, the immediate effect is undeniable. A laundering-adjacent pipeline cannot run at full pressure while prosecutors are photographing the pipes. If even a fraction of the vaunted small-dollar surge was manufactured, then the Democrats have not merely lost a fundraising tool. They have lost the myth of a grassroots army that never existed at the scale advertised.

The Illusion Was the Asset

Put the six together and a single picture emerges. The Democrat money machine was a lattice of billionaire patronage, dark money conduits, taxpayer-funded adjacency, and a small-dollar platform now pleading the Fifth, all held together by the expectation of winning.

Remove the winning, add subpoenas, and the lattice folds.

The money did not disappear. The conditions that made the money possible did, and chief among those conditions was darkness. Republicans should resist the temptation to gloat and instead press the advantage where it matters, in sunlight, because transparency is the one contribution the Democrat Party has never been able to accept.

The steward has been called to give an account. The books are open. And the donors, it turns out, read them first.

Be sure to check out my hand-curated conservative and Christian news aggregator, jdrucker.com

There is a particular confidence required to appoint yourself the liberator of people who never asked for your help and do not resemble you in the slightest. The Democratic Socialists of America possess that confidence in abundance. They present themselves as the conscience of the oppressed, the tribunes of the working class, the last honest defenders of Black and brown Americans against a rigged capitalist order. Then you open their own membership data, and the noble pose collapses into something the Democrat Party has produced before.

I will be discussing this topic further on today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show.

According to the DSA’s 2021 member survey, compiled not by conservative opposition researchers but by the organization’s own Growth and Development Committee, 85 percent of respondents listed white as one of their ethnic identities. Seventy-seven percent listed white as their only identity. Black members accounted for 4 percent. The same meager 4 percent described themselves as blue-collar workers.

The membership skews young, overwhelmingly credentialed with roughly four in five holding college degrees, and comfortably paid, with better than a quarter reporting six-figure household incomes.

So here is the movement that lectures the rest of the country about privilege. A room that is 85 percent white, stocked with degreed professionals out-earning the neighbors they claim to represent, has nonetheless decided it knows precisely what is best for the working-class and minority communities it can barely persuade to join.

The DSA is not a coalition of the marginalized. It is a coalition of the well-off telling the marginalized what their interests are.

Subscribe now

A self-portrait the DSA would rather you not study

The organization is not oblivious to this. It simply cannot fix it. Central New Jersey’s chapter published a 2024 census admitting the chapter is “underrepresented” by Black and Hispanic residents, and even reached for the phrase “burden of diversity” to describe the awkward reality that the few minority members present are expected to shoulder the group’s inclusion problem. New Orleans DSA has conceded it is a majority-white organization operating in a majority-Black city.

In New York, the epicenter of the movement’s recent electoral triumphs, DSA organizers have struggled to reach Black voters despite governing the largest Black population of any city in the country. Some Black Democrat leaders in the city have gone so far as to call the organization “white supremacy.”

Consider the tidiness of that arrangement. The constituency the DSA insists it fights for keeps declining, at the meeting and at the ballot box, to sign up for the fight. A movement genuinely built by and for the working poor would look like the working poor. This one looks like a faculty lounge that discovered Marx and never left.

Peace, peace, where there is no peace

The prophet Jeremiah described exactly this failure of a self-satisfied class certain of its own righteousness.

They have healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace.

A superficial cure offered with total confidence, applied to a wound it never actually closes. That is the DSA program in one verse. The sales pitch is compassion. The result, when the policies meet reality, is harm that lands on the very people the salesmen claim to love. Two of the movement’s signature commitments prove the point beyond serious dispute.

The platform that gets Black Americans killed

The DSA does not merely flirt with defunding the police. Its national Abolition Working Group demands that police budgets be cut “annually towards zero” and openly commits the organization to the eventual abolition of police and prisons entirely. This is not a fringe caucus talking. It is written into the platform.

Now weigh that against the evidence. A growing body of research on police staffing finds that adding officers reduces homicides, and that the lives saved are disproportionately Black. Fewer police means more dead bodies, and those bodies are concentrated in exactly the neighborhoods the DSA says it wants to protect.

Minneapolis, ground zero for the 2020 abolitionist surge, watched violent crime climb after the experiment began, then scrambled to rebuild the departments its activists had spent a summer demonizing. The whitest faction in Democratic politics adopted a criminal-justice agenda that endangers Black families most, and called it justice. What would injustice have looked like?

A rent freeze that prices out the people it pities

The housing agenda follows the same arc. The rent-freeze and rent-control enthusiasm now animating DSA figures such as New York’s socialist mayor collides with one of the most settled findings in economics. When Stanford researchers studied San Francisco’s rent control, they found it accelerated gentrification and widened income inequality, the precise opposite of the stated goal, as landlords converted regulated units into high-end housing that drew wealthier residents.

The Manhattan Institute concludes that rent control’s restrictions on supply harm low-income, minority, and immigrant Americans most of all, while a recent meta-study confirms the near-consensus that price caps shrink and degrade the rental stock.

The mechanism is not mysterious. Cap the price, and you shrink the supply. The insiders lucky enough to hold a controlled lease win. The outsiders, disproportionately young, minority, and newly arrived, find fewer doors open and higher rents on everything left uncontrolled. The DSA promises the poor a home and delivers them a shortage.

The strongest case for the DSA rests on intentions and on the fortunes of those already inside the door. The case against it rests on what happens to everyone still standing outside. In politics, results are the only mercy that counts.

The new Dixiecrats wear socialist pins

Which brings us to the uncomfortable historical rhyme. The Dixiecrats of the 1960s were not shy about their whiteness or their certainty. They too were a faction convinced it understood the true interests of Black Southerners better than Black Southerners did, and they too dressed domination in the language of principle, calling it states’ rights rather than economic justice.

The DSA marches under a very different type of segregationist banner, but the end results are the same. In fact, they might be worse.

The structure is unmistakable. An overwhelmingly white political class, affluent and educated, presumes to speak over the heads of Black and immigrant Americans, advances an agenda that measurably worsens their safety and their housing, and grows offended when those same Americans decline to follow.

The paternalism is identical even when the platform is not. Then, as now, white men gathered in a room and decided what liberation should mean for people who were not invited.

So the question the DSA has never satisfactorily answered is the simplest one. By what authority does the whitest, wealthiest faction in the Democrat Party appoint itself the voice of communities it cannot recruit, cannot persuade at the ballot box, and cannot protect from the consequences of its own ideas?

A movement that loved the poor would listen to them. This one only talks.

Get the latest conservative and Christian news, opinions, and videos from my hand-curated aggregator, jdrucker.com

President Trump walked into the East Room Thursday night and did the one thing his critics have insisted for years he could not do. He produced documents. Not rally-stage assertions, not dueling affidavits, but declassified intelligence assessments, FBI case files, and Department of Homeland Security findings, all posted for public download at whitehouse.gov.

For the better part of six years, every conversation about securing American elections has been strangled in the crib by two talking points. There is no evidence of a problem, and there is no path to fix it anyway. In the span of about 48 hours, both of those excuses died.

I will be talking about all of this in detail on today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show at noon Pacific.

The evidence half collapsed when the White House released files covering five areas of concern, from foreign acquisition of American voter data to buried fraud investigations to hundreds of thousands of noncitizens sitting on state voter rolls. The path half collapsed when the House Budget Committee advanced a budget resolution designed to carry the SAVE America Act through the Senate on a simple majority. The floor vote on that resolution could come as early as next week.

What remains between the American people and the election security they overwhelmingly demand is not a shortage of proof and not a procedural dead end. It is a handful of people in the United States Senate, and the question of whether they have the spine to act.

There is an old promise about hidden things, and Thursday night felt like a down payment on it.

For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad. (Luke 8:17)

What was hidden is now manifest. So let us look at it squarely, all five parts of it, and then walk through exactly what the Senate must do, because the details matter and the window is short.

Subscribe now

What the Documents Actually Show

A note of precision before the deep dives, because precision is what separates an argument from a tantrum. These documents describe vulnerabilities, foreign data theft, buried investigations, and corrupted voter rolls. They do not prove that vote totals were switched in an American election, and Trump himself drew that distinction from the podium, saying the purpose of the release is to earn confidence by confronting vulnerabilities and correcting them.

Do I believe the 2020 election was stolen? Absolutely. Do I believe Joe Biden got 81 million votes? Nope. But the information President Trump released is designed to clear the path forward, not litigate a past event that cannot be undone.

The fact-checkers spent Thursday night triumphantly announcing that the files contain no smoking gun of altered results, as though that settles anything. It settles nothing. If your bank told you that burglars had copied your account information, cased the vault, and bribed a teller, you would not be comforted by the news that no withdrawal had yet been confirmed. You would demand new locks. Keep that frame in mind as you read what follows.

The Machines Were Never as Safe as They Told You

The first tranche consists of previously classified intelligence community assessments, spanning January 2020 to June 2026, on the security of electronic voting and ballot-counting systems. One assessment was very telling...

We judge that U.S. adversaries, including at a minimum Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, as well as non-state groups, have the capability to compromise U.S. election infrastructure.

Another concludes that centralized election data repositories, including voter registration databases, pollbooks, and official election websites, are the systems most vulnerable to exploitation, and that adversaries could use access to them to disrupt election processes.

Remember, these are not blog posts on a conspiracy theory site. These are the government’s own analysts, writing in classified channels, during the same years when the public was being lectured that questioning election infrastructure was disinformation. The agencies knew the exposure was real. They assessed it, documented it, stamped it secret, and then watched officials assure the country that everything was airtight.

Venezuela Proved the Concept

The second item answers the question skeptics always deploy as a conversation-ender. Could anyone actually manipulate vote totals digitally? According to the newly released files, the CIA obtained reporting on a specific plot by the Maduro regime to digitally rig Venezuela’s own 2020 elections, including details about methods developed to alter vote totals in ways that could evade detection even under audit.

As Breitbart reported, Trump described the intelligence as showing a plot conducted in favor of the corrupt Maduro regime, and that is exactly what happened. The point is not that Caracas hacked Wisconsin. The point is that a hostile regime built the tools and used them on its own people, which means the capability exists in the world, held by governments that despise us. A vulnerability plus a demonstrated capability is not a conspiracy theory. It is a threat assessment.

Beijing Has Your Voter File

The third disclosure is the one that should end careers. Beginning in the 2020 election cycle, according to the released intelligence, the People’s Republic of China carried out what is believed to be the largest compromise of election data in history, illicitly acquiring 220 million American voter files containing names, addresses, phone numbers, and party preferences. Declassified records indicate China compromised voter roll data in at least 18 states, and that the regime assigned a dedicated data exploitation unit to the project.

The White House further alleges that members of the intelligence bureaucracy actively suppressed and downplayed the extent of the theft, keeping it from both the president and the public. Sit with that. The nation that runs the world’s most sophisticated influence operations holds a near-complete map of the American electorate, and the people paid to sound the alarm chose silence. Whatever one believes about 2020, there is no innocent explanation for hiding that from the country.

Michigan Found Fraud and Washington Buried It

The fourth item moves from foreign threats to domestic rot. Among the disclosures are FBI files on a large-scale voter registration operation in Muskegon, Michigan. In 2020, Michigan State Police raided a Democrat get-out-the-vote organization and were alarmed enough by what they found to call in the FBI’s Detroit office. According to the documents, canvassers admitted to federal agents that they signed voter registration forms in other people’s names, submitted registrations for people who did not exist, and were compensated with gift cards tied to the number of applications they produced.

The agents on the case believed crimes had been committed. The Department of Justice slow-walked the matter for years. Director Patel has now been directed to see the investigation through and work with the DOJ to prosecute. This is the part the fact-checkers cannot wave away, because it is not an intelligence estimate. It is a criminal file, with confessions in it, that simply went nowhere until this week.

A Quarter Million Noncitizens, and That Is the Undercount

Finally, a DHS review of state voter rolls and public records identified approximately 278,000 noncitizens registered to vote in federal elections. That figure comes only from states willing to share their files. Democrat-run states refused to cooperate, which means the true national number is necessarily higher, and the refusal itself tells you something.

States confident in the cleanliness of their rolls do not hide them from auditors. Put the five items together and the picture is one no honest person can defend. Foreign governments hold our voter data, our machines and databases are assessed by our own analysts as exposed, a proven digital rigging capability exists abroad, documented fraud was buried at home, and the rolls are salted with hundreds of thousands of people who have no legal right to be on them. And still we conduct federal elections with no photo ID requirement and no proof of citizenship.

The Cover-Up Question

Here is where the irony turns bitter. The same years these assessments were being written, the public was told, repeatedly and with institutional certainty, that 2020 was the most secure election in American history. That phrase came from the very apparatus whose classified product was cataloguing adversary capabilities against election infrastructure. Both things were presented as true simultaneously. The system is impenetrable, said the press releases. The system is penetrable by at least four hostile nations, said the classified assessments. Americans were mocked, deplatformed, and in some cases prosecuted for suspecting what the government’s own analysts had written down.

The critics’ strongest remaining card deserves an honest answer, so here it is. They will say that no released document proves a single vote was changed, and as far as the public files show, that is correct. But notice what that defense concedes. It concedes the data theft. It concedes the vulnerabilities. It concedes the Michigan confessions and the noncitizen registrations. Their entire remaining argument is that the burglars, so far as we can prove, have not yet spent the money. That is not a defense of the system. It is a plea to keep the vault unlocked.

And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter. (Isaiah 59:14)

Truth fell in the street for six years. Thursday night, somebody finally picked it up.

The Path Through the Senate

Now to the half of the story most coverage is ignoring, which is that the path to fixing this exists right now and runs through a very small number of identifiable decisions. On Wednesday, the House passed the National Defense Authorization Act with the SAVE America Act language attached, 217 to 209, sending it to the Senate, where Democrats will filibuster it.

Anticipating exactly that, House Republicans launched Reconciliation 3.0, a roughly $95 billion package covering defense funding, farm assistance, and election integrity. The Budget Committee advanced the resolution Thursday on a 20 to 14 party-line vote, with a floor vote expected as soon as next week. The design gives the House Administration Committee $10 billion to implement SAVE Act provisions, structured around funding so the measure is, in Chairman Jodey Arrington’s words, materially budget in nature. Sen. Roger Marshall told Fox News he believes a properly written provision can survive reconciliation’s rules, while warning he is not satisfied with a Band-Aid.

Reconciliation matters because it needs 51 votes, not 60. And here is the fact that should anchor every conversation about this bill going forward. Majority support has already been demonstrated on the Senate floor. During June’s vote-a-rama, after a modified version failed, Sen. Mike Lee forced a vote on the original House-passed SAVE America Act, and it received 50 votes, with Susan Collins flipping to yes, against 49. With Vice President JD Vance available to break a tie, that is a passing margin. The bill is not short of votes. It is short of a ruling.

That ruling belongs to the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, who has held that the SAVE Act fails the Byrd Rule and cannot ride reconciliation. President Trump has twice demanded that Majority Leader John Thune fire her outright, and Thune has twice declined, telling Fox Business the problem is a function of math.

Fine. Then let us do the math, all of it, including the part Thune leaves out. The parliamentarian does not actually possess a veto. Her role is advisory. The presiding officer of the Senate makes the ruling, and the presiding officer of the Senate is the Vice President of the United States. When the Byrd Rule point of order is raised against the SAVE provisions, Vance can take the chair and rule that they qualify. Democrats would appeal, and overturning the chair requires a majority. A 50 to 50 tie sustains the ruling.

This is not radical invention. It is the same mechanism, in principle, that both parties used for the nuclear options of 2013 and 2017. Thune’s cooperation is not required. His acquiescence is.

The honest complication is Susan Collins, and it deserves naming rather than hand-waving. Voting for the SAVE Act on substance, as she did in June, is not the same as voting to sustain a chair ruling that overrides the parliamentarian, and Collins is the Senate’s most reliable institutionalist. But consider her position. She faces the most competitive re-election of her career in a cycle where support among Republicans for photo ID and proof of citizenship polls between 91 and 95 percent. Explaining to Maine voters that she supports election security but voted to kill it over an unelected staffer’s advisory opinion about budget scoring is not a speech anyone survives comfortably.

The other defectors are a different story. Thom Tillis and Mitch McConnell are retiring and answer to no one. Lisa Murkowski objects to what she calls federalized elections. Assume all three vote no. The conference still holds 53 seats, including the newly sworn Darline Graham Nordone, who took her late brother Lindsey Graham’s seat this week with a public pledge to support the president’s efforts. Fifty plus Vance carries both the ruling and the bill.

No More Reasons, Only Choices

So strip it all down. The evidence exists, published by the White House for anyone to read. The legislative vehicle exists, moving to the House floor within days, as the Daily Signal details. The votes exist, demonstrated on the record in June. The constitutional mechanism exists, sitting in the chair Vance is entitled to occupy.

Every structural excuse offered since 2020 has been dismantled, piece by piece, in a single week. What remains is will, and will is a choice, made by named individuals who must answer for it in November and beyond. Speaker Johnson called this package the party’s best shot at enacting the SAVE America Act. He is understating it. It is the last shot before the midterms, and everyone in the building knows it.

Trump closed the argument himself Thursday night, in a single sentence that will hang over every senator who hesitates.

The only reason you wouldn’t pass it is you want to cheat.

Harsh? Certainly. Answerable? Let the Senate try. The receipts are on the table, the path is marked, and the country is watching to see who stands in the gap and who steps out of it.

Check out my hand-curated conservative and Christian news aggregator, jdrucker.com

The real dividing line does not run between science and faith at all. It runs between the evidence and a philosophy called materialism, a philosophy that a great many scientists smuggle into the laboratory or classroom before they ever look through the telescope or the microscope.

We do not have to guess that they do this. One of the most decorated evolutionary biologists of the last century admitted it in print, and he was proud enough of the admission to italicize it.

Writing in the New York Review of Books in 1997, Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin was reviewing a book by Carl Sagan when he paused to explain why he and his colleagues accept certain claims that strike ordinary people as absurd. His answer had nothing to do with data. It had to do with commitment.

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs ... because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

Read that passage again slowly, because the phrase that matters is a priori. It means “beforehand,” prior to and independent of the evidence. Lewontin is not saying that decades of careful research drove him reluctantly to conclude that only matter exists. He is saying the opposite, that the commitment to matter comes first and the research is then bent to fit it.

This is not a description of following the evidence wherever it leads. It is a description of deciding the destination and forbidding any road that does not arrive there. A juror who announced before opening statements that he would not permit a guilty verdict “no matter how counter-intuitive” the acquittal would be removed from the courtroom. In much of modern science, that juror writes the textbooks.

Subscribe now

Who Guards the Door

If materialism were merely one option competing fairly against others, we would expect scientists to sort themselves out roughly the way the rest of humanity does, some believing, some doubting, most somewhere in between. That is not what we find at the top.

When researchers surveyed members of the National Academy of Sciences, the most exclusive scientific body in the country, belief in a personal God came in around 7 percent. Belief in human immortality was scarcely higher. Meanwhile the general public professes belief in God at rates north of 80 percent. Something happens on the way to the Academy.

The honest question is what that something is. The establishment would have us believe it is enlightenment, that the more one learns of nature the less room remains for its Author. But the sociologist Elaine Ecklund, who has studied religion among scientists more carefully than almost anyone, found that most non-believing scientists arrived at their unbelief before they arrived at their careers. They did not lose God in the lab. They brought their unbelief to the lab, often from childhood, and then chose a profession congenial to it.

The atheism is upstream of the science, not downstream. Fairness compels a further point that strengthens rather than weakens the case. Broader surveys of working scientists, not just the rarefied Academy, show them split closer to the middle, with roughly half professing belief in God or a higher power. A bias does not have to capture every technician to shape a field. It only has to capture the gatekeepers, the journal editors, the grant committees, the hiring panels, and there the door is guarded zealously.

Without Excuse

Scripture anticipated this posture two thousand years before Lewontin gave it a memorable phrase. Paul, writing to the church at Rome, did not describe unbelief primarily as an intellectual shortage. He described it as a suppression.

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God ... Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.

The passage is almost uncomfortably precise for the present argument. The creation testifies. The evidence is, in Paul’s word, “clearly seen.” The problem is not that the signal is faint. The problem is a prior decision not to receive it, dressed up afterward as sophistication.

“Professing themselves to be wise” is as fair a caption as any for a discipline that announces its conclusions before its inquiries.

The Evidence They Have Pledged to Explain Away

Consider what the materialist has committed himself, in advance, to explaining without reference to a Designer. Start with the physical constants of the universe. The strength of gravity, the charge of the electron, the precise energy levels inside a carbon nucleus, these and dozens of other quantities appear to be balanced on a razor’s edge, such that a minuscule change in almost any of them would yield a cosmos incapable of producing stars, planets, chemistry, or life.

This is not a claim invented by preachers. It was pressed most famously by Fred Hoyle, the British astronomer who coined the term “Big Bang” and who was himself no friend of religion. After working out how carbon manages to form in the hearts of stars, Hoyle concluded that the fine tuning was too exact to be an accident, writing that “a common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature.”

Then there is the matter of information. The living cell does not merely display complexity; it runs on code, a genuine four-letter chemical language stored in DNA, transcribed, translated, and error-corrected by molecular machinery of staggering sophistication. Codes, in every other instance known to man, come from minds. This is the evidence that broke the most formidable atheist of the age. Antony Flew spent half a century as the English-speaking world’s leading philosophical champion of unbelief, and then, in his early eighties, he followed the argument out the door he had spent his life guarding.

As reported at the time of his death, Flew concluded that “the findings of more than 50 years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.” He then said, “It’s simply not on to think this could occur simply by chance.”

Flew never became a Christian, and honesty requires saying so. But he did something the materialist consensus regards as unthinkable. He let the evidence change his mind.

Uncharted Territory

The materialist will object that science is self-correcting, that its models bend to new data, and that this flexibility is its glory rather than its embarrassment. There is truth in that, and it cuts in an unexpected direction. When the James Webb Space Telescope began returning images of the early universe, it found galaxies that appeared far too massive to have assembled so soon after the Big Bang, objects that, by one astronomer’s candid admission, put cosmologists “in uncharted territory” and might require “something very new about galaxy formation or a modification to cosmology.”

Later analysis softened some of those early alarms, and NASA has since reported that several of the galaxies are less massive than they first seemed. That is science working as advertised, and it deserves credit for the correction. But it also lays bare how much of what is presented to the public as settled fact is in truth a working scaffold, provisional and revisable. The confidence sold on the evening news vastly exceeds the confidence warranted in the journals. A field that revises its account of the cosmos every few years is in a poor position to lecture believers about certainty.

So the honest reckoning turns the accusation around. For a century the charge has been that faith is the closed-minded posture, clinging to conclusions it will not surrender. Yet it is the materialist, by his own testimony, who has ruled a whole class of explanations out of bounds before the inquiry begins.

It is the believer who can say, without embarrassment, “follow the evidence.”

The heavens have been declaring the glory of God since long before there were telescopes to resent it, and the men who have trained the finest instruments ever built upon those heavens have, again and again, found fingerprints they did not expect and were not permitted to name.

The evidence has never been the problem. The door has. And a science brave enough to open it might discover that the thing it has spent a century trying to keep out was holding up the house all along.

As socialist-leaning candidates continue to notch victories in Democratic primaries across major cities, many observers sound the alarm about the growing appeal of collectivist ideologies in what was once the world’s beacon of liberty.

Yet fixating solely on this political shift misses the deeper rot. Socialism is not America’s primary affliction; it is a visible symptom of a profound spiritual and moral decline that has hollowed out the character of a once-virtuous people.

Our nation’s extraordinary blessings—unparalleled prosperity, liberty, and opportunity—did not arise by accident or from purely secular Enlightenment principles. They flowed from a people who, however imperfectly, acknowledged the sovereignty of God. As America marks its 250th anniversary, this moment demands more than nostalgic reflection. It calls for a candid reckoning with how far we have strayed from the covenantal foundations that sustained generations before us.

Subscribe now

John Winthrop’s 1630 vision of a “city upon a hill” was no mere political slogan. It described a community bound by responsibility before the Almighty, shaping the moral framework that would later define the American experiment. George Washington echoed this in his Farewell Address, insisting that “Religion and Morality are indispensable supports” to political prosperity. He warned against supposing that morality could long endure without its religious roots, tying the nation’s felicity directly to its virtue.

A free republic cannot survive on laws alone. Statutes restrain the wicked, but they cannot birth integrity, self-restraint, or sacrificial love for neighbor. Those qualities emerge only when hearts are transformed by submission to God and His Word. When that foundation crumbles, envy, dependency, and centralized power rush in to fill the void. Socialism, with its promise of earthly utopia through state coercion, thrives precisely where biblical faith recedes.

Recent decades have witnessed accelerating evidence of this erosion: family dissolution, cultural confusion over basic realities like sex and identity, the normalization of practices once unthinkable in a society shaped by Christian ethics, and a growing segment of the population untethered from any transcendent moral authority.

Political movements promising “equity” through redistribution gain traction not primarily because of economic arguments, but because generations raised without a sense of divine order and personal accountability crave substitutes for meaning and provision.

Yet history offers hope amid the decline. America’s past is punctuated by seasons of spiritual awakening that reversed moral decay and renewed public virtue. From the First Great Awakening that prepared the colonies for independence to later revivals that fueled reform and resilience, God has repeatedly visited His people when they humbled themselves.

The path forward is not found in better policy alone, though prudent governance matters. It begins with the renewal of God’s people—cultivating gratitude, deepening trust in divine providence, and reclaiming the scriptural convictions that animated the Founders. Parents teaching children truth, churches preaching uncompromised gospel, believers living as salt and light in their communities: these are the quiet revolutions that precede national restoration.

In an age of headlines fixated on electoral battles and ideological clashes, we do well to remember the words of the psalmist. “Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD: and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.” (Psalm 33:12)

This truth stands as both diagnosis and prescription. A people who forsake their God will find every substitute ideology wanting.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, rightly urges a summer journey through the Psalms to restore biblical foundations. Such deliberate return to Scripture is no escapist piety; it is the essential work of cultural preservation. If America is to remain a land of liberty and justice, its people must first be a people of virtue, formed by the enduring Word that outlasts every political fad.

The question before us on this anniversary is not merely whether we will resist socialism, but whether we will repent and return. The republic’s endurance depends on the answer.

My hand-curated news aggregator brings the best Christian and conservative news to the forefront without bowing to the “woke right.”

Every totalitarian ideology needs a religion it can call politics. Marxism has never been a mere economic theory, whatever its adherents claim in academic journals. It is a faith with God evicted from the equation, complete with its own fall of man, its own chosen people, its own promised land, and its own final judgment. It simply refuses to call itself that. Now, the Democratic Socialists of America published new scripture, and the timing could not be more instructive.

At a June meeting of its National Political Committee, DSA leadership adopted a rebuilt platform titled “Workers Deserve More.” The document commits the organization to abolishing the United States Senate, replacing the presidency and the Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary “chosen by and subordinate to Congress,” defunding the Department of War, granting amnesty to every illegal alien currently in the country, ending sanctions on Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran, and abolishing what it terms the “carceral forces of the capitalist state.”

It aims, in its own words, to “draft a new constitution” and build a socialist republic from the ground up.

This is not a fringe pamphlet passed around a folding table at a community college. It is the doctrinal statement of a movement that has tripled its presence in the United States House of Representatives in a single election cycle, seated a mayor in the nation’s largest city, and already convened an internal committee to scout a candidate for the White House in 2028. When a movement grows this fast, it is worth asking what it actually believes, and worth taking its answer seriously, because its adherents already do.

Subscribe now

Workers Deserve More, Scripture Rewritten

Marx himself borrowed the architecture of the faith he despised. Original sin became the fall into private property. The chosen people became the proletariat. The promised land became the classless society. Final judgment became revolution. Read “Workers Deserve More” against that template and the plagiarism is almost embarrassing.

The abolition of the Senate and the subjugation of the presidency and the courts to a single legislative body is not democratic reform. It is the overturning of an old temple order in favor of a new one, consolidated and unchecked.

The demand to abolish the “carceral forces of the capitalist state,” stripped of the euphemism, means no police, no prisons, and no consequence, a purification ritual dressed up as public policy.

Universal amnesty for every illegal border crosser is a false ingathering of exiles, ushering the world’s poor into a promised land without so much as a customs form, let alone judgment.

Public ownership of “the largest corporations and essential industries” is a wageless Eden, an economy purged of its curse.

And lifting every sanction on Havana, Caracas, and Tehran is nothing more than solidarity with a chosen remnant against a capitalist Babylon that the platform’s authors insist is the true source of the world’s suffering.

None of this is new. It is the same offer made in the garden, updated for committee votes and press releases.

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

That is the entire pitch, restated. Man does not need God, representative government, or the messy compromises of a constitutional republic. He needs only the courage to seize the right levers of power, and paradise follows. Genesis identified the lie six thousand years before a National Political Committee gave it a press release.

The Liturgy of Solidarity Forever

Listen to how the movement’s own leaders talk, and the religious register becomes impossible to miss. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, the DSA’s highest-profile officeholder, has explained his own conversion in language that would not be out of place at a tent revival.

I say sincerity forever, solidarity forever, and socialism forever.

After June’s primary sweep in New York, in which DSA-backed candidates dispatched a five-term congressional incumbent and a sitting borough president, Mamdani did not describe the results as a policy win. He described them as the start of something. A year of momentum, he told the crowd, was not the end of a political movement but the beginning of one, the kind of resurrection language a pastor reaches for when the tomb turns out to be empty rather than the language a campaign consultant reaches for when a candidate wins an assembly seat.

Even the internal disputes read like a church council arguing over a creed. When DSA delegates debated the exact wording of the platform’s police and prison abolition plank, factions split over whether “abolition” meant total elimination or merely defunding toward zero over time, a distinction with the same stakes, and the same tone, as a doctrinal fight over transubstantiation.

One faction leader insisted the demand remained essential to “defining the organization’s political direction” even if elected officials could not yet implement it. That is not a policy conversation. That is theology, argued by people who no longer believe they need God to referee it.

A Revival, Not a Strategy Memo

Revivals are measured in converts, and this one is converting at a pace that should alarm anyone who assumed democratic socialism was a passing enthusiasm of college sophomores. A year ago, the DSA held two seats in Congress. After this year’s primary cycle, the organization is on track for at least seven, with more races still outstanding.

More than thirty DSA-backed candidates have already won their primaries with results still trickling in from races across the country. Victories and runoff advances have landed in at least five states, not merely the deep blue precincts of Brooklyn and Queens where the movement first took root.

The organization does not describe this growth as a strategy memo, either. Its own organizers speak openly about the method in evangelistic terms, canvassers logging what they call millions of individual conversations aimed at winning converts one household at a time, the same math a church plant uses to describe a decade of growth. The result is a movement no longer content with city council seats and state assembly districts. Its leadership has confirmed it is already exploring a run at the presidency in 2028, a scale of ambition that should end, once and for all, the polite conservative habit of treating the DSA as a curiosity rather than a competitor.

The Man Who Exalts Himself

Set aside the individual planks for a moment and look at the structure the platform proposes. Abolish the Senate. Strip the presidency of independent authority. Make the judiciary “subordinate to Congress.” Every check the founders built to slow the ambitions of a single faction gets dismantled in the name of liberating the working class. What remains is not democracy purified of its flaws. It is one institution, unrestrained, claiming final authority over the other two, precisely the concentration of power the platform’s authors claim to fear when a king or a corporation holds it.

Scripture has a name for that pattern, and it is older than Marx by two thousand years.

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God.

The specifics change. The posture does not. Whether the self-exaltation arrives wrapped in royal purple or a union windbreaker, the underlying claim is identical: that a single human institution, purged of every rival, can be trusted with total authority, because the intentions behind it are good. History has never once rewarded that trust, and there is no reason to believe a committee in Brooklyn has found the exception.

The Apocalypse They Don’t Mean

Apocalypse, in its original sense, means an unveiling, and Scripture reserves that final unveiling, the true judgment of nations, for God alone. A platform that promises to abolish the police, the prisons, the presidency, the Senate, and the border, all in the name of liberation, does not produce the unveiling of a new Eden. It produces a vacuum, and vacuums in human affairs are never filled with nothing. They are filled with whatever proves strongest once the restraints are gone.

Even some of the movement’s own newest officeholders seem to sense the gap between the platform’s ambition and the reality of governing. Darializa Avila Chevalier, the DSA-backed congressional nominee who unseated a five-term Democratic incumbent this year on a platform that once called for abolishing borders, police, and prisons outright, has already declined to commit to backing future primary challengers against sitting Democrats, telling reporters those are decisions “you come to your community when the time comes.”

That hesitation is worth noting. It suggests that even true believers understand, at some level, that the platform’s promises do not survive contact with the responsibility of holding office.

America has entertained utopian religions dressed as politics before. Every one of them promised a fall to overcome, a chosen people to liberate, and a final judgment on the wicked, and every one of them, once handed real power, produced something considerably darker than the paradise advertised.

The Democratic Socialists of America did not invent this pattern. They simply gave it a platform, a press release, and, for the first time in a generation, a plausible path to Capitol Hill. The country would do well to read the document for what it actually is before it mistakes a new religion for a new policy agenda.

The best online asset for Christians and patriots is my hand-curated news aggregator. Check it out and spread the word.

There is a script for what happens to a revolutionary left that decides political Islam makes a useful ally, and the American left appears determined to perform every act of it. The Democratic Socialists of America have spent 2026 becoming the most consequential force in Democratic politics, and they have done it while binding themselves, cause by cause and candidate by candidate, to an Islamist political project whose ultimate vision of society would erase the very people now lending it their energy.

The fastest way to halt the Socialist ascent is not to debate the marginal tax rate or the rent freeze. It is to make plain where the road ends for the junior partner, because the experiment has already been run, and the junior partner does not walk away from it.

The name for this arrangement is the Red-Green Alliance, and it is not a coinage of the fever swamps. Scholars at King’s College London and Bryn Mawr documented it more than a decade ago in the journal Terrorism and Political Violence, describing how radical leftists and Islamists, despite worldviews that ought to make them enemies, converge on shared frames of anti-capitalism and anti-imperialism to build a common front against the West.

Red stands for Marxist and socialist radicalism. Green stands for Islamism, the political ideology that wants Sharia to be the law of every land. To see this alliance operating in a (slightly) more advanced stage than we’re seeing in America, just look to Europe. Unless there is a massive and/or divine intervention, the continent is already captured.

Subscribe now

Let’s cover the obligatory “not every“ caveats:

• One of the most important ties that bind Marxists and Islamists is hatred for Israel, but not every critic of Israeli policy belongs to this alliance.

• Not every Muslim in public life is an Islamist, though by their voting and their submissive nature they are party to the results.

• Not every Marxist is blind to where the alliance will eventually lead, but those who know and still participate willingly believe they will somehow end up above the fray, perhaps rewarded by their Sharia overlords for obedience.

What Holds Opposites Together

On paper the two halves of the coalition want incompatible worlds. Marxism is materialist to its marrow, atheist by founding conviction, and carries a century of gulags, shuttered churches, and martyred believers as its record on Christianity. Islamism is theocratic, supremacist toward rival faiths wherever it has held power, and contemptuous of the secular permissiveness the modern left treats as sacred. They should repel one another.

What binds them are the enemies they share. Both regard Western constitutional order, free markets, the nation as an object of loyalty, and above all the Christian moral inheritance that underwrites Western liberty, as the structure that has to come down.

The Marxist attacks it in the vocabulary of class, colonialism, and oppression. The Islamist attacks it in the vocabulary of civilizational grievance and religious resistance. The targets line up even when the languages do not.

Hostility to Israel is the most dependable thread tying the two together, but it is the thread, not the garment. The garment is the older order itself, the one that says man answers to God and not to the state or the caliphate, and that is the thing both partners mean to unmake.

The Vehicle Arrives

A movement needs a vehicle, and the Marxists have found theirs in a Democrat Party too hollowed out to resist. The DSA crossed one hundred thousand members early this year, and the Wall Street Journal named its rise the largest political story of 2026 after the Iran War hits on Donald Trump’s own popularity. Its candidates rolled through Democrat primaries across five states in a single season with more likely coming; the organization called the result a shockwave, and the word was not entirely self-flattery. In New York, the movement now holds City Hall and controls multiple representatives on Capitol Hill.

Zohran Mamdani is the clarifying case because his public record requires no decoding. He’s the front man for the Marxists with Islamist credentials. He is fully Marxist and has welded himself to the Green agenda in full daylight.

He founded a Students for Justice in Palestine chapter in college. He calls the boycott movement against Israel “consistent with the core of my politics.” Pressed again and again to condemn “globalize the intifada,” a phrase many hear as an invitation to violence, he declined, explaining that “the role of the mayor is not to police language.”

It’s a convenient lie.

From City Hall he released a video commemorating the Nakba and skipped the Israel Day parade that mayors of both parties had walked for generations. Years earlier, speaking to a DSA panel, he located the source of American policing somewhere well beyond America.

When the boot of the NYPD is on your neck, it’s been laced by the IDF.

None of this makes him a concealed theocrat, and the argument does not need him to be one. It needs him to be exactly what he plainly is, the useful partner, the Red who carries the Green movement’s signature causes into respectable rooms and onto official letterhead.

Can Two Walk Together

The prophet Amos posed the question the entire coalition is organized to avoid.

Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

The Red and the Green are not agreed. They are not within sight of agreed. The secular left’s whole catechism, its sexual revolution, its gender ideology, its insistence on absolute personal autonomy, is precisely what political Islam exists to abolish. This is why the recurring spectacle of activists marching beneath banners reading “Queers for Palestine” is not a curiosity but a confession.

Solidarity in that coalition travels one direction only.

The progressives extend it to the Islamists; the Islamists, wherever they have actually governed, have extended the rope and the rooftop. The alliance functions only so long as no one says this aloud, which is the whole reason that saying it aloud, specifically and in the movement’s own words, is the most useful thing a serious opponent can do.

Europe Already Ran the Experiment

Americans told this is paranoid fantasy should look across the Atlantic, where the fantasy has been governing reality for a decade. In Britain, the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn fused a Marxist leadership to a grievance-organized Muslim voting bloc, and sectarian candidates have since taken seats in Parliament by running on Gaza and little else.

In France, the Netherlands, and Sweden, Islamist-aligned parties and pressure networks now operate as decisive blocs, bending mainstream politicians on schools, speech, and foreign policy without ever passing a single statute bearing the word Sharia.

That is the mechanism worth understanding, because it is the one already arriving here. The capture does not come as legislation, which is why those who scan the law books and find nothing conclude there is nothing to find. It comes as leverage, the quiet power of a bloc that can deliver or withhold a margin, applied to curricula, to accommodations, to which candidates a party is permitted to nominate.

America has spent fifteen years passing anti-Sharia laws that address a threat shaped nothing like the real one. The real one wears a campaign button and turns out for a primary.

How the Story Ends for the Junior Partner

Then there is the ending, the part the American left has not allowed itself to picture. In 1979 the Iranian revolution against the Shah was a coalition built exactly like this one. Secular Marxists, nationalists, and Islamists marched together against a shared enemy, and the Western intelligentsia cheered them on.

Michel Foucault, the most fashionable philosopher of his generation, traveled to Iran and wrote rapturously of the political spirituality he believed he was watching come to life. Then the shared enemy fell, Khomeini’s faction consolidated power, and it turned on the people who had helped install it.

The leftists who had supplied the revolution its manpower and its moral cover were arrested, purged, and in many cases executed by the regime they had spent themselves to build.

Obadiah named the arrangement with cold precision.

The men that were at peace with thee have deceived thee, and prevailed against thee.

The confederates reach the border together, and then one of them keeps walking. This is not an accident of Persian history; it is the logic of the alliance. The Islamist partner wins the long game because it holds the one asset Marxism cannot manufacture. Marxism promises a material paradise that never arrives and asks belief in a future its own record keeps falsifying. Political Islam offers transcendence, certainty, and a totalizing loyalty that does not flinch when the five-year plan collapses.

When the common enemy is finally down and someone has to rule the ruins, conviction beats calculation every time. The Marxists imagine they are riding the tiger.

They are feeding it.

Name the End Game

So the strategy nearly writes itself. The Socialist surge will not be argued down on policy; its pull is moral and generational, and it feeds on the very confrontation its opponents are most tempted to hand it.

The vulnerability is structural. It is the fault line running clean through the coalition, the unbridgeable distance between a movement that worships autonomy and a movement that would abolish it, papered over by nothing sturdier than a shared enemy and an enforced silence. Break the silence. Show the voters, including the many devout and pluralist Muslims this alliance presumes to speak for and would discard without ceremony, what the junior partner actually purchased by lending its credibility to the senior one.

Set 1979 beside 2026 and let the two pictures do the work.

The Marxists are wagering that they are the exception, the first revolutionary left in a hundred years to board this particular vehicle and arrive somewhere they meant to go. The task of anyone who still loves this country, and the older settlement of ordered liberty and Christian faith it was raised to protect, is to make certain that as many Americans as possible understand the wager before it is placed, in full, in their name.

Be sure to check out my hand-curated news aggregator, manually updated throughout the day with conservative and Christian content from across the web.

The lessons from the COVID era cut deeper than many realized. What began as a public health response quickly revealed a broader agenda: a push toward total surveillance and control over every aspect of human life. From movement tracking to dietary choices, financial transactions, and even online speech, the architects of this emerging system seek dominion not just over our bodies, but over our agency itself.

This used to be the fodder of tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists, but the notion is entering the mainstream. It is the unfolding of a technocratic vision where privacy dies, anonymity vanishes, and representative governance yields to algorithmic oversight.

Facial recognition at airports, license requirements tied to centralized databases, and the proliferation of networks like Flock Safety’s cameras—now exceeding 89,000 units across thousands of communities—signal a grid designed to monitor, record, and regulate.

Add AI data centers, drone programs, and biometric digital IDs, and the infrastructure for a comprehensive control mechanism comes into sharp focus.

Subscribe now

Consider the implications. Your vehicle could be remotely disabled. Your bank account programmed for conditional access. Your food supply influenced by policies favoring bioengineered products shielded from accountability. These are not distant hypotheticals but extensions of policies already in motion. The COVID period served as a trial run, exposing how quickly emergency powers could erode freedoms and normalize compliance through fear and convenience.

Yet many drew only partial conclusions—distrust of certain mandates or institutions—while missing the fuller picture. The goal transcends any single crisis. It aims at replacing human sovereignty, dignity, and free will with a counterfeit authority: an AI-powered system positioned as an all-seeing, all-regulating substitute for divine order. History warns against such hubris. Totalitarian experiments, whether ideological or technological, invariably crush the individual under the weight of centralized power.

Resistance begins with clarity. This advancing system thrives on acquiescence. Non-compliance disrupts its momentum. When asked for QR codes, facial scans, or iris verification, the answer must be no. Opt for human interactions over self-checkouts and automated tellers. Demand phone calls instead of digital check-ins. These small acts preserve jobs, human connection, and personal autonomy while signaling rejection of the digital leash.

Deeper layers involve vigilance in daily choices. Scrutinize food labels for non-GMO and organic options, rejecting ultra-processed items that dull both body and spirit. Engage local leaders aggressively when surveillance expansions like Flock cameras or massive data centers threaten community sovereignty. Organize, question, and hold accountable those who invite these tools into our midst. Politicians of any stripe rarely serve as reliable guardians; true stewardship demands citizen ownership of local governance.

The economic and social pressures will mount. Convenience is the bait, but the cost is liberty. As digital IDs become prerequisites for travel, banking, voting, healthcare, and commerce, the choice sharpens: participate in the beastly grid or stand apart. This is not Luddite rejection of technology but discerning refusal of idolatry—elevating human inventions above God’s design for free moral agents.

In the face of such encroachment, Scripture offers unyielding guidance. As the Apostle Paul exhorted the church amid persecution, “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage” (Galatians 5:1, KJV).

This call echoes through the ages, reminding believers that earthly powers, however sophisticated, hold no ultimate claim on those redeemed by Christ.

The path forward requires resolve. It may forfeit some modern ease, but yielding invites far greater loss. Each act of faithful non-compliance builds resilience against the full rollout of this system. Christians, grounded in discernment and action, must model this resistance—not in despair, but in confident hope that truth and liberty, rooted in the Creator, will prevail over any counterfeit dominion.

The hour demands it. Our response will shape what follows.

Stay on top of the latest Christian and conservative news through my hand-curated aggregator, jdrucker.com.

Strip the red-green alliance down to its frame and a strange thing becomes visible. There is nothing inside it. No shared vision, no common blueprint for the world the two partners want to build together, because the worlds they want are mutually exclusive and each knows it.

The secular Marxist wants a godless, classless order in which religion has been abolished. The Islamist wants a world placed wholly under religious rule in which the secular is treated as rebellion against heaven.

These are not adjustable preferences. They are opposite ends of the universe. And yet the alliance holds, year after year, which forces an uncomfortable conclusion. What binds these two movements is not anything they love. It is everything they hate.

I talk about this and more on today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show, live at Noon Pacific.

Subscribe now

A Coalition Defined by Its Enemies

Consider how the partnership describes itself, because the description is almost entirely negative. Anti-imperialist. Anti-colonial. Anti-capitalist. Anti-Zionist. Anti-Western. Anti-Christian.

The vocabulary is a wall of negations, and that is not an accident of rhetoric. It is the actual structure of the thing. A coalition that agreed on a destination would talk about the destination. This coalition can only talk about what it wants torn down, because demolition is the one project both partners can sign without lying.

Three targets recur, and they are worth naming plainly. The first is the individual, the irreducible human person with a conscience answerable to God rather than to the collective or the caliphate. Marxism dissolves that person into a class. Islamism dissolves him into submission. Neither can tolerate the stubborn Western conviction that a single soul has rights no state and no clergy may override.

The second target is Israel, the small and inconvenient nation whose mere existence refutes both the colonial narrative and the eliminationist one.

The third is the broader Judeo-Christian inheritance of the West itself, the source, as one writer put it, of the individual rights, freedom, and liberty that neither movement can abide.

The Symmetry Beneath the Hatred

For two movements so opposed, the resemblance in method is uncanny. Both deal in total, enforced dogma. Both divide humanity into the saved and the damned, whether the category is class consciousness or correct belief. Both teach that history is moving inevitably toward their victory, the one toward the end of history and the workers’ paradise, the other toward a world brought under submission.

Observers who have studied both note the same mirror-image quality, the way two systems with opposite content can share an identical shape. Each is a counterfeit religion that demands everything, forgives nothing outside the fold, and treats dissent as heresy to be crushed rather than argument to be answered.

That shared shape is the secret of the alliance. The partners do not need to agree on God to agree on the posture of total war against the existing order. Hatred, unlike love, asks for no shared vision. It asks only for a shared enemy, and the West has obligingly been cast as that enemy by both.

Why the Heathen Rage

Scripture saw this kind of coalition long before there was a name for it, and it located the real object of the rage with precision.

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed.

Read that as a description of a negative coalition and it snaps into focus. Disparate powers, with nothing in common but their opposition, take counsel together. Their alignment is real, their fury is real, and the psalm calls the underlying project a vain thing, not because it is harmless but because it is ultimately set against an authority it cannot overthrow.

The deepest target of the red-green alliance was never merely capitalism or merely Israel or merely the American experiment. Beneath all of those lies the moral order those things imperfectly reflect, the conviction that there is a Lord above the state and the clergy alike to whom every person answers, and it’s neither Karl Marx nor Allah. That is the conviction both movements exist to abolish, and that is why their counsel, however energetic, is finally described as imagining a vain thing.

What a Negative Coalition Cannot Do

There is a hard limit built into an alliance of pure negation, and it is the source of whatever hope this analysis allows. A coalition held together only by hatred can demolish, but it cannot build. The moment the shared enemy is gone, the partners have nothing left to share, which is exactly why every historical instance of this alliance ends in the partners turning on one another.

The hatred that unites them is also the thing that guarantees they cannot govern together once they win.

Those who would oppose the alliance should take the lesson from its own structure. You do not defeat a coalition of negation with a louder negation of your own. You defeat it with the thing it cannot counterfeit, an actual positive vision, a civilization confident in the worth of the individual soul, the rule of law over the rule of the mob or the cleric, and the moral inheritance that produced both.

The red and the green agree on what they want to destroy. They have never agreed on what they want to build, because neither can build the thing the West already has. That is the whole of their weakness, and it is hiding in plain sight inside the wall of everything they claim to be against.

Throw yourself on a grenade for men you met a week ago. Drown trying to reach a child you will never know. Spend forty years nursing lepers who can offer you nothing and will bury you in an unmarked grave. We do not merely tolerate such people. We carve their names in stone and raise our children to admire them. And here lies the question the modern secular mind would rather not examine too closely, because the behavior we hold in the highest honor is precisely the behavior that, on a strictly Darwinian accounting, should have been bred out of the species in the first generation that practiced it.

The reigning origin story of morality is supposed to be settled. Conscience, justice, and selflessness, we are told, are the polished products of natural selection, traits that paid off in the long contest for survival and were handed down like strong bones or sharp eyesight. It is a tidy account. It is also, at the one point that actually matters, an account that quietly swaps the genuine article for a convincing forgery.

The question worth asking is not whether evolution can manufacture cooperation. Obviously it can, and it does, all across the animal kingdom. The real question is whether the slow, self-interested arithmetic of survival can ever climb the whole way up to the thing we mean when we call a man good. There is a rung missing from that ladder, and no amount of incremental scrambling gets a creature past it.

Subscribe now

What Natural Selection Can Actually Build

An honest argument concedes the strongest version of the other side, so let’s stipulate that part. Evolution has a respectable toolkit for producing behavior that looks unselfish. Kin selection explains why a creature will sacrifice for relatives, since they carry copies of its genes, and helping them is, in the cold ledger of heredity, a way of helping itself. Reciprocal altruism explains the favor that expects a favor returned, the tit-for-tat that pays dividends over a lifetime of repeated encounters. Group selection explains why a tribe of cooperators might outlast a tribe of cheaters. Ants die for the colony. Vampire bats share blood. None of this is in dispute.

But notice the single thread running through every one of these mechanisms. Each one comes with a payoff. The gene survives, the favor returns, the tribe outcompetes its rivals. What evolution rewards is never selflessness; it is enlightened self-interest wearing the costume of selflessness. And the moment a behavior stops paying, the moment it actively reduces a creature’s odds of surviving and reproducing with nothing whatsoever coming back, selection should erase it rather than amplify it.

This is not a creationist’s complaint. The late Ernst Mayr, one of the towering evolutionary biologists of the twentieth century, granted the point directly, acknowledging that altruism toward strangers is a behavior natural selection does not support. The man who jumps into the river for a child he has never seen is doing the one thing the theory predicts he should not.

The Rung That Was Never There

Here is where the counterfeit and the real part ways, and the gap between them is a difference in kind, not degree. Evolution can deliver a strategy. What we revere is a sacrifice. Those are not the same thing made larger or smaller; they are two different things entirely, and you cannot reach the second by piling up more of the first. A million acts of profitable cooperation do not add up to a single act of genuine self-giving, any more than a tall enough stack of dollars eventually becomes a kiss.

C.S. Lewis saw the seam with characteristic clarity. Picture a man hearing a cry for help. He feels one impulse to rush in and another, stronger impulse to keep himself safe. Yet a third thing speaks, and it sides with the weaker impulse, telling him to help anyway. That third thing cannot itself be merely another instinct, because its whole job is to arbitrate between the instincts.

As Lewis put it, feeling a desire to help is quite different from feeling you ought to help. The desire is biology. The ought is something else, something pressing on us from outside the machinery, and no description of how the feeling evolved will ever convert it into a binding obligation. You cannot derive an ought from an is. A man can explain to me in exhaustive detail how I came to feel that cruelty is wrong, and I can answer, with perfect logical composure, so what? The explanation accounts for the feeling and leaves the obligation entirely untouched.

This is the prophet’s distinction, ancient long before Darwin was born.

He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

What is required of a man is not a description of how primates tend to behave in groups. It is a demand laid upon him, and a demand presupposes someone with the authority to make it. Strip out that someone and you do not get a gentler morality. You get no morality at all, only behavior, only patterns, only the things that happened to help certain genes along. Justice and mercy become as morally weightless as the tide going in and out.

The Counterfeit and Its Fruit

It is worth watching what happens when men take survival of the fittest not as a biological observation but as a moral instruction. Darwin himself, in The Descent of Man, surveyed the asylums, the poor laws, and the physicians laboring to save every last sickly life, and observed with evident unease that civilized men do their utmost to check the very process of elimination that keeps a species vigorous.

The weak, he wrote, thus propagate their kind, and no one acquainted with the breeding of animals would call that anything but injurious to the race. His cousin Francis Galton would name the project eugenics. Margaret Sanger would carry that same Darwinian logic into the founding of what became Planned Parenthood, openly framing reproduction as a question of weeding out those she judged unfit. The organization she built now strains to disown her language, which tells you something about the smell of the fruit once it ripens.

Yet here is the detail too often missed, and it is the most telling one of all. Darwin could not follow his own logic to its conclusion. In the very same passage, he admitted that if men hardened themselves and deliberately neglected the helpless, they could do so only at the cost of deterioration in the noblest part of their nature. He felt the law pressing on him even as his theory told him the law should not exist.

The conscience he could not explain was the conscience he could not silence. That is not the behavior of a creature obeying its programming. That is the behavior of a man caught between what his system permits and what he cannot stop knowing is true.

So we arrive at the quiet scandal of the consistent materialist. He goes on loving his children sacrificially, condemning cruelty as genuinely evil, and honoring the soldier who falls on the grenade, all while holding a philosophy that can account for none of it. He is, in the most literal sense, living on borrowed capital, spending the moral inheritance of a worldview he has formally rejected and assuming the account will never run dry. The greatest love still stops him cold, because something in him knows exactly what he is looking at.

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

A Law We Did Not Write

Run the experiment in your own conscience. You did not vote on whether cruelty to children is wrong. You did not arrive at it by tallying reproductive advantages. You found the verdict already there, waiting, binding, pressing on you with an authority you did not grant and cannot revoke. A law you did not write is a law you did not author, and a law you did not author came from somewhere outside yourself.

The man on the grenade is not a glitch in the code or a misfire of the selfish gene. He is the clearest signal we have that the materialist story has left something enormous out. Real morality was never going to evolve one cautious, self-interested step at a time, because the thing we actually worship in our heroes is the willingness to get nothing back, and nothing in nature rewards getting nothing back.

The rung is missing because the ladder was never the way up. We did not climb to the moral law. It was handed down to us, and we have been answering to it, and breaking it, and recognizing it in the faces of better men, ever since.

The setting was the Bürgenstock resort above Lake Lucerne, where the United States, Pakistan, and Qatar gathered for a quadrilateral meeting meant to advance the 14-point memorandum of understanding signed last week between President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. Vice President JD Vance led the American delegation alongside special envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff. The mediators arrived ready to praise. Iran arrived ready to leverage.

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif opened by calling it “a great day that will lead to world peace” and thanking Trump for the diplomacy that produced the talks. Vance followed with his own tribute, crediting the president’s “leadership” and “willingness to see a Middle East that is much different 10 years from now than it was 10 years ago.”

Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani called the meeting “just the beginning” of a longer process. The choreography was seamless. The optimism was thick. And the Iranians would not stand in the picture.

Subscribe now

According to Iran’s Tasnim News Agency, the regime’s delegation declined to join a group photo with the American side, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf refused to enter the room for the press conference, and the team eventually left the venue altogether in protest of Trump’s threats to resume strikes unless the Strait of Hormuz reopens.

Tasnim is the mouthpiece of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, so the spectacle was almost certainly broadcast on purpose. This is not a delegation that lost its temper. This is a delegation performing defiance for an audience back home.

Leverage dressed up as principle

The walkout cannot be separated from the chokepoint. On Saturday, Iran announced it was closing the Strait of Hormuz again, citing Israel’s continued operations against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and accusing Washington of failing to enforce the first clause of the agreement. The IRGC navy warned vessels that their security would be “at risk” if they approached.

American officials disputed the closure outright, with CENTCOM insisting Iran does not control the waterway and reporting that 55 commercial vessels and more than 17 million barrels of oil moved through it Saturday. Vessel-tracking data, however, shows no tanker crossings since Tehran’s announcement, which means the threat carries real teeth regardless of who technically commands the strait.

This is the entire Iranian strategy in one weekend. Sign the memorandum to lock in the benefits, then weaponize a fifth of the world’s seaborne oil to extract more. Ghalibaf made the posture explicit on X, warning that “the more they talk, the more we act” and that Iran’s armed forces were prepared to respond. A regime that wanted peace does not threaten to mine a shipping lane on the morning it sits down to negotiate one.

A ceasefire that isn’t holding

The administration’s confidence runs ahead of the facts on the ground. Vance told reporters the United States had “done more to stop the conflict in Lebanon than any government anywhere in the world,” and insisted that “despite the headlines, things are actually getting better there.”

Yet dozens of Lebanese have been killed in Israeli strikes over the past two days, marking some of the worst bloodshed of the conflict, and an emergency session on the Israel-Hezbollah fighting had to be bolted onto the first day of talks. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for his part, declared flatly that Israel is not bound by the US-Iran ceasefire and will keep military pressure on Hezbollah for as long as it takes. Neither Israeli nor Hezbollah representatives were even in the building.

So the structure of this peace is plain. Israel will not be constrained by it. Hezbollah keeps fighting through it. Iran uses every breach as a pretext to choke global oil and stage walkouts. And the American vice president stands at a podium thanking the president for a moment that the other side openly refuses to honor.

Editorial honesty requires admitting the deal may yet produce something durable over its 60-day window. Sober judgment requires admitting nothing about Sunday suggested it will.

Scripture warned about exactly this kind of counterfeit. Psalm 28:3 pleads, “Draw me not away with the wicked, and with the workers of iniquity, which speak peace to their neighbours, but mischief is in their hearts.”

That is the Tehran regime in a single verse. It speaks peace into microphones and hides mischief in the Strait of Hormuz, and no amount of resort-summit goodwill changes the heart doing the negotiating.

The men in Switzerland want a different Middle East ten years from now, and that is a worthy thing to want. But wanting it does not make Iran an honest broker, and a partner that will not stand for the photograph should not be trusted to keep the promise.

The administration would do well to negotiate as though it already knows that, because Iran spent Sunday making sure everyone did.

The saber-rattling Iranian regime continued its pattern of duplicity with Tehran once again declaring the Strait of Hormuz closed. This reversal comes mere hours after the United States lifted its naval blockade as part of a freshly signed memorandum of understanding with the Islamic Republic.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps issued the announcement over maritime radio, demanding the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon and the full removal of American forces from the region. Iran claims the partial nature of the blockade lift violates the agreement signed just days ago between President Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.

It’s the latest example of a fundamental truth about dealing with regimes that have spent decades perfecting the art of nuclear blackmail and maritime extortion. The strait, through which roughly one-fifth of global oil supplies once flowed, remains a chokepoint vulnerable to the whims of a theocratic dictatorship that views chaos as a strategic asset.

Subscribe now

Timing and Pretexts Reveal Calculated Defiance

The IRGC’s statement explicitly ties the closure to Israel’s continued operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon, despite the memorandum’s call for respecting Lebanese sovereignty. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made clear that security zones must remain to protect northern Israeli towns from terrorist threats. Meanwhile, reports indicate that a ceasefire understanding between Israel and Hezbollah may be in place, yet Iran seizes on any ambiguity to justify renewed disruption.

US Central Command confirmed the blockade lift on Iranian ports Thursday, allowing vessels to resume transit. Yet Iran now insists this was insufficiently “complete,” exploiting the phased timeline outlined in the agreement. As one open-source intelligence expert noted, the memorandum’s wording created exploitable gaps that hardliners in Tehran are eagerly widening.

“Since Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon, the complete lifting of the naval blockade, and the withdrawal of American terrorist forces from the Persian Gulf and the region are among the main conditions... the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed until these conditions are met.”

Any vessel defying the directive, the IRGC warned, will be targeted. This is the same regime that has mined waters, seized tankers, and disrupted global commerce for years while decrying Western “aggression.”

The Fragility of Paper Agreements with Rogue States

The memorandum, hailed as a step toward de-escalation, promised 60 days of toll-free passage and phased sanctions relief in exchange for Iranian restraint. Nuclear talks, originally scheduled for Friday in Switzerland, have now been postponed. Iran’s newly formed Persian Gulf Strait Authority is already floating new “terms and conditions” for shipping, including permits that could pave the way for future fees despite current prohibitions.

Critics rightly point out that this episode reveals the inherent weakness in negotiating with an adversary whose word has proven worthless time and again. History is littered with examples of authoritarian regimes using temporary concessions to regroup and rearm.

The current situation echoes past Iranian provocations, where economic desperation from sanctions and military pressure forced temporary retreats, only for provocations to resume once breathing room was granted.

For Americans and our allies dependent on stable energy markets, the stakes could not be higher. Oil prices, which spiked dramatically during earlier closures, remain sensitive to any renewed threat in this vital waterway. Global supply chains, already strained, cannot afford another round of Iranian gamesmanship.

Biblical Wisdom for Discerning Deception in Geopolitics

As believers called to test all things and hold fast to what is good, we recognize the spiritual dimension at work in these conflicts. The Apostle Paul warned in Ephesians 6:12 that “we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”

Iran’s pattern of broken promises and manufactured crises demands vigilance, not naive optimism about diplomatic breakthroughs.

The United States must maintain a posture of strength rooted in moral clarity. Rewarding bad behavior with premature concessions has never produced lasting peace. True security in the region requires deterring Iranian aggression, supporting Israel’s right to defend itself, and ensuring freedom of navigation for all peaceful commerce.

This latest closure serves as a sobering reminder that peace through strength remains the only reliable path when confronting adversaries who respect neither treaties nor human life. As events unfold, Americans should pray for wisdom for our leaders and discernment for our nation in navigating these treacherous waters.

From a Christian worldview, the timing feels deliberate. As governments prepares more revelations about unidentified aerial phenomena, Hollywood rolls out another story normalizing the idea of visitors from beyond our world. The film centers on the lead up to forced disclosure, with characters grappling with what it means for humanity and, crucially, for belief in God.

Expectations ran high for technical brilliance and subtle subversion. Spielberg’s track record suggested a film that might elegantly weave anti-biblical themes into an entertaining package. Instead, audiences encounter something formulaic, predictable, and at times comically underwhelming. The plot follows familiar beats: good guys evading cartoonish antagonists, solving puzzles under pressure, all while the narrative telegraphs every twist. Even strong performances from leads like Emily Blunt cannot salvage the clunky execution that feels more like a throwback to 1980s adventure films than a modern blockbuster.

That mediocrity may be the most surprising element. A director known for elevating material delivers something that elicits awkward laughter rather than awe. One viewer described the climax as reminiscent of a rickroll, underscoring how the film fails to land its emotional or intellectual punches.

Yet the deeper concern lies not in the filmmaking but in the message. The story introduces a crisis of faith when undeniable evidence of aliens emerges. A character turns to a nun for guidance, asking how this reconciles with Scripture. The response offers reassurance: belief in God and aliens need not conflict. God made humanity supreme on Earth, the dialogue suggests, leaving room for other creations elsewhere in the vast cosmos.

This portrayal echoes positions taken by some theologians and even Vatican statements over the years, allowing for the possibility of extraterrestrial intelligence. C.S. Lewis explored similar ideas in his fiction. But it sidesteps the heart of biblical revelation.

Genesis records God’s deliberate creation of man in His image, granting dominion over the earth. The text offers no hint of parallel supreme beings on other worlds, nor does it frame humanity as merely one among many.

Such messaging risks softening resistance to what many discerning believers see as the ultimate deception. Scripture warns of strong delusion in the last days, where signs and wonders deceive even the elect if possible. The UFO phenomenon, long tied to occultic and interdimensional activity rather than distant planets, fits this pattern. Presenting “little gray men” as compatible with Christianity lowers guards precisely when vigilance is most needed.

The film’s failure to deliver either cinematic excellence or sophisticated propaganda may reveal Hollywood’s declining ability to captivate. Clichéd plots and on-the-nose dialogue replace the masterful subtlety of earlier works. Viewers expecting a threat to faith encounter instead a dull echo of familiar arguments that collapse under biblical scrutiny.

Yet the broader cultural effort continues. As disclosure narratives gain traction in official channels, entertainment serves as preparation. Christians must test everything, holding fast to what is good. The vastness of the universe testifies not to alien civilizations but to the glory of the Creator who spoke it into existence and centered His redemptive plan on this small planet and its inhabitants.

Ultimately, Disclosure Day serves as a reminder that not every cultural moment demands panic. Poor execution limits its reach. But the underlying push to normalize the extraterrestrial while diluting scriptural authority persists. Believers should approach such stories with eyes wide open, anchored in the unchanging Word that has withstood every challenge across millennia.

“And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring.” — Luke 21:25

In an age of wonders and deceptions, that ancient warning calls us to discernment. Spielberg’s latest may not shake the foundations of faith for many, but it underscores the need to remain rooted in truth amid the noise.