Jerome R. Corsi's Blog, page 35

2 vastly different views on free speech: Radical Left vs. classical Western

Read Hanne’s The Herland Report.

In the raging war over free speech, a clear definition is often lost. Are we to follow the Marxist-progressive definition of free speech or the conservative, historic definition of freedom of expression? Let us look at the difference between the two views.

Since the early cradle of Western civilization, plurality of voices and opinions has characterized political debates. The aim of public discussions has been to find the best possible solutions to problems in society. Yet, free speech was never an amoral principle that allowed citizens to say whatever they wanted – without moral constraints. Words uttered had to be rational arguments in a debate, political speeches in a parliament, acknowledging that the concept of tolerance implies the need to respect others’ right to differ in opinion.

Christian philosophy believes that man is capable of both good and evil. This is why nation states need to be governed by laws that restrain man from doing harm to others. Christian moral principles therefore lay down the limits of modern free speech: You are not allowed to lie about opponents, slander their names with falsehoods, willfully twist their message so to demonize them, call opponents all types of foul names. You are to treat your opponent with respect, even in the harshest debates with raging differences, and uphold the Christian ideal of civility, politeness and justice.

The advent of Marxism changed all this. The radical, Marxist left practices a vastly different type of “free speech” than what was found in the original, Western tradition. In fact, they hated the classical freedom of expression that allowed diversity. Karl Marx (1818-1883) was very vocal about the need to destroy the traditional, Western capitalist system with personal freedoms, private property rights and its defining Christian values. This was to be done in bloody revolutions in which modern life would be destroyed completely. From the ashes would grow a utopian atheist, perfect society without God in which all would be happily ruled by the Marxist elite. The idea was to create fear among the population by clamping down on dissidents who opposed them, and remove all property rights.

When individuals are fired for celebrating a political assassination such as the public execution of the Christian leader Charlie Kirk, the historic definition of free speech is actually restored. Free speech was never the right to publicly support murder. The moral requirement of decency, civility and respect for others is upheld precisely by limiting bullying, defamation and demonization. For example, the group “Fired for Freedom,” that lists companies involved in firing, labels it “caving to white supremacy” to deny liberals the right to freely mock or celebrate the murder of Charlie Kirk. The Jimmy Kimmel debate reflects the same confusion about what free speech really is. Clearly, one should not be allowed to present lies under the disguise of comedy. This is how twisted the debate gets if the understanding of “free speech” is not properly defined. The current Marxist version of “free speech,” without the traditional, religious moral constraints was never a classic Western value.

The principle of modern free speech was initially introduced in the 1600s to the British House of Commons to ensure that speakers were not interrupted in the middle of a political argument, according to the required principles of Christian good manners, politeness and civility.

It was as late as in 1949, that freedom of expression was stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a human right. Article 19 states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression … to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” The immense intellectual flaw of this U.N. declaration is its influence by Marxist ideology; it simply does not define the ethical limits of free expression. The U.N. charter eloquently speaks of rights, but remarkably little of the historic requirements of personal duties and obligations.

“Communism abolishes all religion and all morality,” Marx writes. The Marxist definition of “free speech” is one with no moral standard, allowing deceitful, lying, cheating, manipulative or attributing statements to political opponents that one knows is a falsehood. Vladimir I. Lenin (1870-1924), the founder of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) describes it this way: “We must be ready to employ trickery, deceit, law-breaking, withholding and concealing truth … we must write in a language which sows among the masses hate, revulsion and scorn towards those who disagree with us.” This is the recipe for injustice and totalitarian control, not free speech.

Iranian president’s U.N. speech: Grotesque hypocrisy

Watching Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian address the United Nations General Assembly was not only nauseating but also infuriating for millions of Iranians. To hear a man with the blood of countless citizens on his hands lecture the world about human rights, equality and the rights of Gaza’s children is nothing short of grotesque hypocrisy.

If the U.N. were to replace its teleprompters with lie detectors when Iranian envoys speak, the results would shock the world. These representatives of the Islamic Republic do not come to promote peace or truth – they come to distort reality, present themselves as victims and whitewash their crimes to fool the world.

Pezeshkian began his speech with slogans about equity and justice. Yet under his rule as a puppet of the ayatollahs, there is no trace of equality in Iran. Women, in particular, remain second-class citizens. They are beaten and arrested for defying the compulsory hijab laws, as in the tragic case of Mahsa Amini, killed at the hands of Iran’s so-called “morality police.” Women are denied basic rights: Their testimony in court is worth half that of a man, they cannot travel without the permission of a male guardian, and they are barred from activities as simple as cycling, singing, or dancing in public. Divorce laws strip them of custody rights over their children. This misogynistic system is deeply entrenched in the Islamic Republic’s laws.

In his U.N. speech, Pezeshkian even dared to quote Jesus: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” But Christians in Iran face relentless persecution. Many have been arrested, imprisoned, or even executed for their faith. I know from personal experience. In 2009 I was arrested and sentenced to death for my faith in Jesus. Throughout my imprisonment, interrogators threatened me with torture, death and threatened my family unless I would deny my faith in Jesus.

Today, hundreds of Christians languish in Iranian prisons solely because of their beliefs. Any Iranian who comes to faith as a Christian faces the death penalty for the “crime” that the Islamic regime calls apostasy. A friend was recently executed. And Christians are persecuted and denied any religious freedom.

For Pezeshkian to reference Jesus at all is a mockery of biblical proportions.

Pezeshkian blamed Israel for the loss of life in Gaza, yet conveniently ignored the Islamic Republic’s own atrocities, much less their funding of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, which are the ones actually responsible for all the death and suffering in Gaza. In the 1980s, the regime executed 30,000 political prisoners in one of the most shocking mass killings of the century. During nationwide protests, the brutality continues: In November 2019, security forces gunned down 1,500 people in just three days. Countless children such as Kian Pirfalak, Nika Shakarami, Mahsa Amini and Sarina Esmailzadeh are among the innocent lives claimed by this regime.

At the U.N., Pezeshkian displayed pictures of dead children in Gaza, accusing Israel of barbarity. Yet Iranians know that their own rulers are the true butchers of children – executing minors, silencing dissent and spreading terror at home. They also know that the death and suffering in Gaza is not only the result of Hamas, but is funded by the Islamic Republic with funds stolen from them, average Iranians.

Pezeshkian accused others of depriving Gazans of food, water and medicine, while millions of Iranians themselves go hungry. Despite Iran’s vast natural resources, ordinary citizens endure daily power outages, dry water taps and soaring poverty. Videos circulating on social media show households receiving mud instead of water through their pipes. Farmers face crippling drought as lakes like Urmia and rivers like Zayandeh Rood dry up due to decades of mismanagement. Meanwhile, billions are spent funding foreign wars and terrorist proxies. Any value the rial once had has now crashed.

In his interview with Fox News, Pezeshkian denied Iran’s involvement in Middle Eastern terrorism. Yet the evidence is overwhelming: The regime has trained, armed and funded Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis and Iraqi militias for decades. It supplies drones to Russia for its war on Ukraine. Most damningly, Tehran’s fingerprints were all over the October 7th massacre in Israel, where innocent civilians – including women and babies – were slaughtered.

The regime openly admits its goal: the annihilation of Israel. This ideology is rooted in its extremist theology, which portrays the destruction of Jews as a prerequisite for the return of the so-called Islamic messiah, the Mahdi.

Contrary to Pezeshkian’s claims, Iranians do not rally behind the regime in its crusade against Israel. On the contrary, many celebrated when Israel struck military bases and nuclear facilities belonging to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Millions of Iranians view Israel and the West not as enemies, but as allies in the fight against their real oppressors and common enemy: the clerical dictatorship in Tehran.

For more than four decades, the Islamic Republic has terrorized its own people, destabilized the region and deceived the international community. Its leaders pose as defenders of justice while committing atrocities at home and abroad. When Pezeshkian holds up pictures of Gaza’s children, the world should remember the thousands of Iranian children whose lives were stolen by the same regime.

The Iranian people reject this tyranny. They long for freedom, justice and peace – not the lies and oppression of men who masquerade as statesmen while behaving like criminals. It is time for the international community to stop being fooled, stop giving the Islamic Republic any platform to spread its extremist ideology and propaganda, and instead hold it accountable for its crimes against humanity.

How did Oct. 7 become a distant memory?

After Hamas’ horrific Oct. 7, 2023, massacre of 1,200 Jews and the seizure of 250 Jewish hostages, the headlines cried out in shock, anger and astonishment. The New York Times wrote, “As world leaders condemned the attacks – and questions arose about how Israeli intelligence had been so surprised – ordinary citizens tried to make sense of what was happening.”

On Oct. 7, 2023, New York Times columnist Bret Stephens wrote: “Thanks to defensive systems like Iron Dome, Hamas’s punches, while frequent and menacing, rarely landed. For Israelis, Gaza seemed relatively contained. That was, until this weekend. Whatever happens next in the current war, this concept (to borrow another term from the Yom Kippur War era, related to Israel’s confidence that it wouldn’t be attacked) has clearly failed. Israel has a clear interest not just in punishing Hamas but also in ending its rule for good.”

For much of the world, this was the reaction – at least at first: Hamas must go – and must go by force given its refusal to live in peace next to Israel. But soon Israel stood accused of “genocide” because of the unavoidable deaths of civilian noncombatants in Gaza. Hamas “fights” by putting military installations in, beneath or around hospitals, schools and mosques to guarantee the killing of civilians. Meanwhile, many of Hamas’ leadership reside far from the battlefield in Qatar and Turkey.

The strategy is working. Consider this exchange between influential podcaster Joe Rogan and commentator Coleman Hughes:

Rogan: “I’m saying that when you’re killing 30,000 innocent civilians in response to something that killed 1,200 innocent civilians, and you’re continuing to bomb an area into oblivion, which is what it looks like when you’re looking at Gaza. There are many people that have made the argument that is at least the steps of genocide or a form of genocide. You’re destroying thousands and thousands of people’s homes and killing them.”

Hughes: “So, Hamas says 32,000 people have been killed, civilians and soldiers. Israel says 13,000 soldiers have been killed by Israel. So, if you just – well, let’s not doubt either number. They could both be inflated. But if both of those numbers are accurate, which they may or may not be, that would be 13,000 soldiers killed, 19,000 civilians killed. Which for urban combat in the Middle East is a very normal ratio.”

Rogan: “But it’s mostly women and children that are dying, that are dying because they’re in a place where these terrorists are.”

Hughes: “Because the terrorists on purpose embed themselves with the civilian population, which is a war crime. … (T)errorists have found the perfect solution, which is that you can cross the border, go house to house, slaughtering your enemies, and then hide behind your own people, and they can do nothing about it. It’s a perfect strategy. Can we live in a world where we allow that to be an acceptable strategy? I don’t think so.”

After this exchange, Rogan appeared to have a greater understanding of Israel’s dilemma. But this moral problem Israel attempts to navigate does not stop Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and others from accusing Israel of committing genocide.

Genocide? Accepting Hamas’ numbers of Gazans killed by Israel, which does not separate combatants from civilians, this “genocide” represents 3% of the population of Gaza. According to the Holocaust Encyclopedia, “By 1945, most European Jews – 2 out of every 3 – had been killed.” Human Rights Watch estimates that the Rwandan mass slaughter of the Tutsis eliminated as much as 77% of their population.

President Donald Trump recently offered Hamas a plan to end the “genocide.” Even Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, one of many Western countries choosing to recognize Palestine as an independent country, said, “Hamas has no choice but to immediately release all hostages and follow this plan.”

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and ex-U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair back Trump’s plan for ending the war in Gaza – as do Israel, Qatar, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the European Council.

So, the ball’s now in Hamas’ court to end the “genocide.” Don’t expect much. Terrorists terrorize.

Is the shutdown the best way to shrink the federal behemoth?

Both the Right and Left seem fine with a government shutdown, so let the drama unfold. Republicans in Congress proposed a clean funding bill that continues the Biden-era spending levels through November with no additional expenditures, while Democrats demand far more.

With Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., retiring next year and no longer acting as a Senate leader, his Chicken Little predictions of political disaster for Republicans from a shutdown ring hollow. Many in MAGA supported the reelection of Trump for the purpose of shutting down the government, and this appears to have been the primary goal of mega-donor Elon Musk.

Liberals use false spin for their benefit by insisting that a shutdown always hurts the Republican Party the most. The Republican Congress shut down the government for 21 days in late 1995 through early 1996, and in fact gained two Senate seats in the subsequent election, despite the Democrat Bill Clinton prevailing over the weak Republican nominee, Bob Dole, at the top of the ticket.

Clinton failed to garner a majority in the popular vote after that shutdown, and Republicans held onto their majority in the House of Representatives. Republicans also maintained their large majority in state governorships, without any net loss.

Google AI says that Republicans received most of the blame for that 1995-96 shutdown but, even if true, that was decades before MAGA and the growing public opinion that the federal government needs to be shut down. The federal debt at the end of the 1995 fiscal year was only $5 trillion, while today it is grotesquely more than 7 times that amount, at a monstrous $37.5 trillion.

Public contempt for the federal government and officials in Congress is sky high. The leadership of both political parties on Capitol Hill has disapproval ratings greater than their approval ratings, in another indication that the American public would be just fine with unplugging their lavish salaries and benefits.

A recent Gallup poll found that only 23% of Americans have a favorable opinion of the federal government, while 61% have a negative view. These approval and disapproval ratings are worse than those of every other sector, including pharmaceuticals, oil and utilities.

The federal government is plainly broken in many other ways, too. Federal workers are almost unanimously anti-Trump, and their one-sided verdicts against Trump supporters in court cases in D.C. have been appalling.

Foreign aid has continued to flow to prop up regimes in faraway lands and to fund warfare. Trump has taken laudable steps to end USAID and other foreign spending that spreads liberal harm around the world, but shutting down the federal government may be the only foolproof way to end this.

Eight months into the Trump administration, many in MAGA conclude that it is impossible to clean house in the Swamp. Shutting down the federal government is the only viable way to end injustices wrought by the feds.

Democrat leaders in Congress may be supporting a shutdown to appease their base of the far Left. Zohran Mamdani, a self-described socialist, is leading by a landslide in the polling for the next New York City mayor to be elected in five weeks.

Progressives complained loudly and bitterly about the Democrat leadership who agreed to the Republican bill last March to continue federal spending, because it led to trimming Medicaid funding. Progressives indicate that they may challenge the Democrat establishment next year based on their capitulation to Trump.

Meanwhile Trump’s brilliant director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, has devised a clever plan to lay off much of the federal workforce permanently, in what is called a reduction in force (RIF), if Democrats continue the shutdown. Democrats are squawking because these federal workers are overwhelmingly anti-Trump, but this has not yet caused the Dems to budge on their unreasonable demands.

Liberals fulminate about how it is unprecedented to conduct RIFs during a government shutdown, but this ingenious approach is likely to succeed. While federal agencies have not traditionally implemented RIFs during shutdowns, the law is clear that they have the discretion to do this if they abide by the rules as Vought is explaining to them.

Democrats can restart the government by enacting a clean funding bill, but instead insist that Republicans provide free health care to migrants whom Biden wrongly reclassified as “lawfully present.” Trump properly revoked that special status, which appropriately renders them ineligible for free health care, and Republicans are right to protect Americans against the medical costs of illegal aliens.

Out on a limb

Gettin’ er done

‘This is shocking’: FDA approves new abortion drug

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved a new abortion drug.

The drug, which is a generic version of the abortion pill mifepristone, was quietly rubber-stamped by the agency in a letter Tuesday, with reports only surfacing of its approval on Thursday.

The drug’s approval took many by surprise, as it followed Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Sep. 19 announcement that the FDA would be reviewing mifepristone’s safety.

“This is shocking. FDA has just approved ANOTHER chemical abortion drug, when the evidence shows chemical abortion drugs are dangerous and even deadly for the mother. And of course 100% lethal to the child,” wrote Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., on X just minutes after news of the drug’s approval leaked.

This is shocking. FDA has just approved ANOTHER chemical abortion drug, when the evidence shows chemical abortion drugs are dangerous and even deadly for the mother. And of course 100% lethal to the child.

— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) October 2, 2025

“The Trump Administration’s approval of a generic chemical abortion drug is a complete betrayal of the pro-life movement that elected President Trump,” former vice president Mike Pence said in a statement on X.

“President Trump must immediately reverse this decision. RFK must resign and give President Trump the opportunity to appoint a new Secretary of HHS who will protect the sanctity of life.”

The Trump Administration’s approval of a generic chemical abortion drug is a complete betrayal of the pro-life movement that elected President Trump.

Earlier this year, I opposed RFK’s nomination because he was unfit for the role and particularly over the concern that he would… https://t.co/B1rRgkF5iO

— Mike Pence (@Mike_Pence) October 2, 2025

“This decision by the FDA to quietly approve a new generic abortion drug just as the government was shutting down is really reckless and disappointing,” Kelsey Pritchard, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America’s director of state public affairs, told The Daily Signal Thursday. “This is not MAGA. This is not MAHA.”

The new drug is produced by Evita Solutions LLC, which says its mission is to “normalize abortion care” and make it “accessible to all.”

“Medical abortion care is rife with medically unnecessary restrictions and social stigma in the United States,” the company’s website reads.

“Evita Solutions believes that all people should have access to safe, affordable, high-quality, effective, and compassionate abortion care, regardless of their race, sex, gender, age, sexuality, income, or where they live. We know that you can make the best choice for your body.”

.@HawleyMO says he has “lost confidence” in the FDA.

Evita Solutions LLC, the company which produced the new drug, says its mission is “to normalize abortion care” and make “care accessible to all.” https://t.co/5fDD49pNFl

— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) October 2, 2025

Abortion drugs accounted for 63% of all abortions in 2023, according to research from the Guttmacher Institute.

Research from the Ethics & Public Policy Center shows that 11% of women experience severe adverse effects like hemorrhaging, infection, and sepsis within 45 days of a mifepristone abortion.

“These dangerous drugs take the lives of unborn children, place women and underage girls at serious risk, empower abusers, and trample the pro-life laws enacted by states across the nation,” SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement Thursday.

Pritchard told The Daily Signal the group is “calling on the FDA to immediately reverse course.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services told The Daily Caller Thursday that the FDA has “very limited discretion” in deciding to approve a generic drug.

“By law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services must approve an application if it demonstrates that the generic drug is identical to the brand-name drug,” HHS Communications Director Andrew Nixon said.

[Editor’s note: This story originally was published by The Daily Signal.]

Unconstitutionally vague: IRS scheme used to attack conservative organizations struck down!

Former IRS tax-exempt chief Lois Lerner refused to testify about targeting conservative groups

Under Barack Obama’s regime, the Internal Revenue Service was weaponized to delay and deny required governmental permissions for conservative charitable organizations that wanted to sound off on his re-election campaign, which he won, to operate.

They were grilled over their donors, their beliefs, their prayers and much more. Applications were lost and required a second submission. Free speech was under fire.

That treatment was unlike other groups that promoted a liberal agenda

Eventually, the IRS was forced to confess, and it even settled a number of lawsuits over its actions.

But now a federal court has ruled that one of the components that appeared in that agenda is unconstitutional.

A report at the Washington Examiner points to a ruling from Washington, D.C., judge Jia Cobb.

The court found that a test used by the IRS, involving “facts and circumstances,” was unconstitutionally vague.

The ruling said an organization called Freedom Path could not be rejected by the IRS for its requested tax standing because of the failing in the federal process.

But it continued the case, as neither side, Freedom Path nor the IRS, had suggested a standard that could be imposed.

The judge said the IRS violated constitutional protections by denying the tax-exempt status the organization requested.

“The ruling held that the agency’s ‘facts and circumstances’ framework, an 11-part analysis derived from a 2004 IRS revenue ruling, fails to survive the heightened scrutiny required when government rules implicate First Amendment speech rights,” the report said.

Freedom Path, founded in Texas in during 2011, when Obama remained in control of the IRS, sought tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(4). Years later, the IRS denied the request.

The group then sued, explaining the test was so unclear it gave bureaucrats total discretion to punish political speech.

They are right, Cobb said. “The Treasury regulation and IRS Revenue Ruling that the IRS applied in denying Freedom Path’s application transgress the heightened vagueness standard applicable to civil regulations… that affect speech covered by the First Amendment.”

The report said Lex Politica represented Freedom Path and CEO Chris Gober explained the ruling vindicates concerns IRS rules have been used to “silence disfavored viewpoints.”

“This ruling is a victory not just for Freedom Path, but for every American who believes government bureaucrats shouldn’t be able to bully citizens into silence,” Gober said on social media.

During that time period, when the IRS targeted “right-leaning” groups, IRS official Lois Lerner publicly confessed the agency had been targeting any groups with names like “Tea Party” and “Patriot.”

Gober has explained a lot of those IRS officials still are in office, and still are using their schemes.

“In Freedom Path’s case, the IRS demanded donor information and evaluated the group’s advertisements and mailers under the disputed test. Ultimately, it found that more than half of the organization’s spending amounted to political campaign intervention and denied its exemption, a determination the court has now rejected as constitutionally flawed,” the report said.

 

.

LISTEN: White House phone recording has Karoline Leavitt explaining why no one can take your call

The White House is lit up during the 250th Anniversary of the U.S. Army Grand Parade and Celebration June 14, 2025. (Official White House photo by Andrea Hanks)

A wide range of government services and offices are shut down during the current partial government closure.

The situation developed following demands by Democrats that the government hand out some $1.5 trillion for health care benefits for illegal aliens, leftist propaganda machines, and more.

Republican majorities in Congress declined to take that money out of taxpayers’ pockets so Democrats responded by voting against a resolution that would fund the government for a few weeks.

One of the things shut down is the ability to have staff answer public calls to the government, including the White House.

HELLO, AMERICA’: Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt greets White House callers with a sharp shutdown message, criticizing Democrats who “care more about funding healthcare for illegal immigrants than they care about serving you, the American people.” pic.twitter.com/OgqrWQU1jv

— Fox News (@FoxNews) October 2, 2025

There, a recorded message explains, “Thank you for calling the White House comment line. Hello America, this is White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. Democrats in Congress have shut down the federal government because they care more about funding health care for illegal immigrants than they care about serving you, the American people.

“Until Democrats vote for the clean Republican-backed resolution to reopen the government, the White House is unable to answer your call or respond to your questions.

“We look forward to hearing from you again very soon. In the meantime, know that President Trump will never stop fighting for you.”

Such recordings apparently appeared on a multitude of recordings government-wide, sending Democrats into a fury.

Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., sent a letter demanding an investigation.

He complains it’s a violation of a rule limiting political activity by government officials.

He pointed out Republicans control the White House and have majorities in both houses of Congress.

He blamed them for not “taking responsibility for their shutdown,” and acquiescing to Democrat demands, for which they would have been rewarded with Democrat votes to keep the government running.

Garcia accused the Trump administration of using government sites for their “political agenda.”

It was at the Small Business Administration that a template for an out-of-office email said, “I am out of office for the foreseeable future because Senate Democrats voted to block a clean federal funding bill … leading to a government shutdown.”

A GOP House Oversight official told the Washington Examiner that the recordings simply state the facts, and do not mention elections or campaigns, suggesting they are perfectly legal.

Under the administration of Joe Biden, then-Education Secretary Miguel Cardona blamed “Republican elected officials” for court rulings in a widely distributed email to student loan borrowers, and that was not ruled to be a violation of the Hatch Act.

 

‘Inspiring’: New book is a ‘love song to America’

“I love America. Warts and all and with no apologies. I love her land, people, culture, history, literature, poetry – all of it”” So begins Michael Finch’s new book, “A Time to Stand: The Dire Hour to Defend American Beauty,” a collection of essays that serve as a testament of one man’s deep and abiding love for his homeland. It is a love rooted in recognition of America’s unique place in history as the world’s foremost defender of human liberty, individual rights, the rule of law, limited government, free enterprise, and freedom of thought. Indeed, these are precisely the principles to which Mr. Finch, as the longtime president of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, has passionately devoted so much of his life.

But in recent decades, this beloved land has been afflicted by what Finch calls a “cultural crisis” and a “rot in our soul,” as evidenced by a proliferation of “people adrift, alone, lost connections, rising drug addiction, mental illness, depression.” Observing how these hallmarks of spiritual atrophy manifest themselves visibly on the streets of urban America, Finch writes that “the ‘uglification’ of American culture” is now routinely emblematized by “massive amounts of trash, filth, … burned buildings, graffiti, [and] boarded-up businesses.”

The cities where such totems of societal decline abound are almost all controlled politically by leftists, whose “insatiable lust for power” Finch decries. The power they crave is one that aims to “reshape, remake and reeducate the reactionaries, the retrograde, the masses” – all in pursuit of the “utopian ideal” of an “ever-progressive heaven upon this earth.” Finch observes that, tragically, the hearts of countless well-meaning, unsuspecting people have been charmed and captivated by the Left’s fanciful, grandiose pledge to “make perfect what is flawed” and “cure all that ails” the presumably benighted masses.

“How easily we succumb,” the author laments, “seduced and drawn into these illusions” – illusions that commonly ensnare those who eschew religious faith and seek instead to fill the spiritual void in their souls with a devotion to leftwing political crusades. Such individuals are especially vulnerable to what Finch identifies as the very enticing “false virtue” of charlatans professing “to be like God, indeed to be God” – and thereby proclaiming their own right “to rule … by force of might.” It is a drama, he explains, that has been reenacted many times throughout human history, where “the cleansing blood of the innocents” rages like a river across the landscape of “a world decimated and barren” – and where “the guilty are never held to account” for their “unspeakable crimes.”

With specificity, Finch identifies particular monstrous evils that the Left has inflicted on our nation in modern times. He observes, for instance, that in the “grievance culture” of the Left, “race has become an industry” premised upon a venomous “hatred of white people.” He further notes that a denial of reality – even biological reality – has infected the leftist mind: “We can’t even discuss certain things anymore,” Finch writes. “What is a man, what is a woman?” The very fact that such questions need to be addressed at all, leaves the author feeling as though he is living in an unrecognizable, alien land:

“I don’t even begin to understand what this sexual identity crisis is all about. Just to say this, incurs wrath. Something isn’t right, or maybe I am just getting too old. Our hearts cry out, not in judgment, but for the lost souls, the confused and depressed, the anxiety and pain that so many feel.”

These are not the words of a scold shouting condemnations from a rooftop, but rather, of a gentleman extending grace and compassion to people who are obviously – and needlessly – afflicted by a psychological burden born of social contagion.

Finch further observes that the Left has expended inconceivably enormous energies on the task of tearing down and delegitimizing America’s founders, its founding doctrines, its history, and its institutions. As a result of those efforts, “all that was once held true and right has been torn and ripped and attacked as ghosts of an evil past.” “What had built this nation into a city on the hill and beacon,” he elaborates, “is now ridiculed as nothing, nothing but a graveyard wavering on the guilty carcass of a cancerous beginning and the Founders’ dreams that we are now taught are nothing but nightmares.”

Many profoundly destructive ramifications have grown out of the timorous self-doubt and self-flagellation that the Left’s contempt for our country has spawned in the hearts of so many Americans. People who do not believe in their own nation’s goodness, righteousness, and moral legitimacy, will certainly be disinclined to defend it in any meaningful way. We saw this deplorable mindset in action during the Biden years, when the President and his entire administration steadfastly refused to protect the sanctity of America’s borders – intentionally permitting what Finch calls an “invasion” by countless thousands of illegal aliens who entered the country unobstructed, month after month after month. “The complete negligence by the Biden administration” was “beyond criminal,” Finch declares in one of his essays, decrying the “full scale anarchy” of “a border land in chaos,” dominated by “lawless and armed gangs” conducting a veritable reign of terror.

\And for what purpose did Biden and his cohorts permit those millions of illegals to make a mockery of America’s immigration laws? Clearly, the objective was to import millions of newcomers who, they hoped, would eventually coalesce into a massive, reliable Democrat voting bloc. Such diabolical schemes prompt Finch to remind us: “There is a reason our Founding Fathers agonized about what would happen with freedom in a society without virtue.”

But Finch’s work goes far beyond merely identifying, analyzing, and decrying the various crises that afflict America and its people. He is prepared also to engage in, and help lead, a passionate battle of ideas against the enemies of our nation. “We will not be sold, enslaved and controlled by utopian dreams of radical minds and from tyrant’s grasp of these poisoned serpents,” he writes, exhorting his fellow countrymen to join him in the “fight for our honor, our family, our homes, our flag, our heritage and God-given rights.”

During his more than 20 years as a leader at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, Finch has been a staunch, indefatigable general in the battle to save America by proudly articulating the principles of conservatism and laying bare, in blunt and unapologetic tones, the toxic agendas of the Left. Finch’s comrade-in-arms, the late David Horowitz, gave voice to this mission when he said: “Over the years people would refer to my Freedom Center as a ‘think tank’ and I would correct them, ‘No, it’s a battle tank,’ because that is what I felt was missing most in the conservative cause – troops ready and willing to fight fire with fire.”

In 2015, Finch himself was quick to recognize the greatness that lay within one extraordinary, rising political figure who openly relished the opportunity to “fight fire with fire” by speaking plainly and boldly about the weightiest of issues: Donald Trump. Finch understood that Trump represented a welcome change from the many Republicans who seemed to believe that they only stood a chance of winning their party’s presidential nomination if they presented themselves to the public as mealy-mouthed milquetoasts whose every utterance was delivered in measured, inoffensive tones.

When Trump’s detractors in 2016 argued that he was too crude, undisciplined, and politically incorrect to win the White House, Finch used his pen to mount an impassioned defense of Trump and make the case for his election. “I will come right out and say it,” he wrote in an October 2016 essay that is reprinted in “A Time to Stand.” “I could give a damn what Donald Trump says in private. … [T]he false piety on display by so many Republicans and conservatives is nothing more than a symptom of the wussification of America and the American male and the selling out of our liberty. … George Patton, Ulysses S. Grant, Sam Houston, Andrew Jackson and so many others were hardly saints. … Patton wouldn’t last five minutes in today’s army of political correctness. … But how many American lives and the lives in the German camps did he save by steamrolling into Germany months ahead of schedule? We are not electing a Pope – we need a leader. Conservatives fall into the trap of thinking that with a pious perfect Christian who is a moral saint, we are guaranteed the traits necessary to lead our country in a time of crises. I am sorry – they are not one in the same.”

At its heart, “A Time to Stand” is both a battle cry and a love song to one’s country. A blend of patriot and poet, Finch possesses the rare ability to articulate the urgency of the fight to save America from the Left’s depredations, while giving voice, just as eloquently, to the warm and tender emotions that have made his life here so very joyful. “Gaze at a Thomas Cole painting,” he writes, “listen to a Samuel Barber composition, walk along the wide Missouri River, get lost in the poems of Walt Whitman, study the life of George Washington, stand in the fields at Antietam, recite Abraham Lincoln’s second Inaugural, and don’t dare apologize for any of it. Not a thing. Not a darn minute of our history needs to be sullied like the haters of our great nation are doing today.”

“A Time to Stand” is a book that will warm the hearts of all who love America, and rouse the patriotic spirits of those who wish to help defend it.

Editor’s note: Here’s what other prominent conservatives are saying about Michael Finch’s “A Time to Stand”:

“Without any exaggeration, this book is simply a masterpiece. It’s destined to become a go-to resource for realizing and recalling the beauty and goodness that America represents – and what the American people must do now to save our nation.” – Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas, current U.S. ambassador to Israel

“Michael Finch’s ‘A Time to Stand is an aesthetic and political tour de force. It is a beautifully and brilliantly written appreciation of the constitutive core features of America’s identity: beauty, freedom, Godliness, and moral heroism.” – Jason D. Hill, professor of philosophy at DePaul University

“Michael Finch’s ‘A Time to Stand’ is an inspiring collection of his profound essays that celebrate all manifestations of the American experience – the beauty of the American continent, the resilience of its hallowed culture, and America’s preeminent role in the wider, global struggle to preserve Western civilization. A defiant optimism pervades Finch’s writing, suggesting his belief that, at last, slowly and almost imperceptibly, we now unapologetic Americans are finally taking a stand to protect and enhance America’s memories, traditions, history, and values amid challenges at home and abroad.” – Victor Davis Hanson, senior fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution

Order Michael Finch’s new book, “A Time to Stand,” HERE.