The left-right divide in America is, unfortunately, unbridgeable.
There are three reasons.
First, we are divided by our vision of what we want America to be.
The right believes the founders&#8217; vision was brilliant and moral, that bourgeois middle-class values are superior to alternative value systems; that rights come from God, not man; and that the state must be as small as possible. The left (not liberals) shares none of those values.
Second, we are divided by the means we use to achieve our vision. Given their different ends, left and right obviously differ on what means to use to achieve their ends.
Third, and perhaps most troubling, there is a reality-perception divide.
Left and right have different perceptions of reality.
I have been aware of this for many years, but it was dramatically brought home last week when I was a guest on &#8220;Real Time With Bill Maher.&#8221; Given that the other two guests on the panel and more or less the entire studio audience were on the left, their reactions to what I said proved my point.
For example, I said that though there are, of course, racists in the United States, America is the least racist multiethnic and multiracial country in the world.
I was booed.
I said the United States military has brought so much liberty to the world it deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.
I was booed.
Clearly, there is an unbridgeable divide in the way we perceive the reality of the American military&#8217;s role in the world.
I said that it turned out the Russia-Trump campaign collusion never happened.
I was booed.
There is an unbridgeable divide in the way left and right perceive this reality.
I said the Trump-Ukrainian president phone transcript did not show a quid pro quo.
I was booed, and one of the other panelists said it actually showed &#8220;extortion.&#8221;
This, too, constitutes an unbridgeable divide between the way left and right view reality.
I said John Brennan, the former CIA director, has voted communist. (He has admitted that he voted for the Communist Party USA presidential candidate Gus Hall in 1976.) I was dismissed as having made something up. Bill Maher sarcastically responded that he didn&#8217;t recall Mao having been on any ballot.
And I said that people on the left say men can menstruate.
For that, I was not merely booed; I was laughed at by the panel, Maher and the audience.
Anyone can Google this and learn that I was entirely right. Just type &#8220;can men menstruate.&#8221; One of the first results will be from the popular left-wing website The Daily Beast: &#8220;Yes, Men Can Have Periods and We Need to Talk About Them,&#8221; reads one of its headlines. &#8220;How is this possible?&#8221; you might ask. Well, if a woman declares herself to be a man, then &#8220;a man&#8221; can have a period. In fact, last month, Procter &amp; Gamble announced that it will remove the female Venus symbol from its Always line of menstrual products. After all, not only women menstruate.
The irony is that as soon as most progressives become aware that LGBTQ groups say that men menstruate, they will say that men menstruate. And that will be another differing perception of reality.
On each of these issues — all the issues for which I was booed — right and left have different perceptions of reality. That — even more so than differing values — makes the left-right divide unbridgeable. When you cannot agree on what is real, there is no possible bridging of the gulf.
The left believes the president colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. The reality is that there was no collusion. This is the conclusion of the Mueller report, but still, the left doesn&#8217;t accept it.
The left is certain President Trump said the neo-Nazis are &#8220;very fine people&#8221; when referring to the protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia. The right is certain the president didn&#8217;t say there are good neo-Nazis any more than he said there are good &#8220;antifa&#8221; members. When he said there were &#8220;very fine people on both sides,&#8221; he was referring to those demonstrating on behalf of keeping Confederate statues and those opposed. See &#8220;The Charlottesville Lie&#8221; by CNN analyst Steve Cortes.
The left believes socialism is economically superior to capitalism. But the reality is that only capitalism has lifted billions of people out of poverty. This is, therefore, not an opinion divide — &#8220;You prefer capitalism. I prefer socialism&#8221; — but a reality divide.
The reason this is so frightening is that it means one side has lost its grip on reality. If half of this country cannot distinguish truth from falsehood, that is not a good sign for the nation&#8217;s future. On that point, ironically, left and right can agree.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in May 2019, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Genesis. His film, &#8220;No Safe Spaces,&#8221; comes to theaters fall 2019. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Fork in road.

PRAGER: The Left-Right Divide Is About Reality Itself

Conservatism

Leftism

Transgender

Here are some of the messages the left has been giving America&#8217;s young people:
— Your past is terrible, and your future is terrible.
The American past is a story of genocide, slavery, racism, patriarchy and colonialism. You should be ashamed of it.
As regards your future, your very existence is in jeopardy. You may well die at a young age unless society completely shifts from fossil fuels to wind and solar power. In fact, your future is so bleak you should probably not consider getting married and having children.
— If you are a girl, you should know that American society has contempt for you. You will be paid less than a man for the exact same work and exact same number of hours of work. You will have between a 1 in 4 and 1 in 3 chance of being sexually assaulted if you attend college. There is a glass ceiling that will prevent you from professional success. And professional success, not marriage and family, is what you should concentrate on.
That none of the above is true is irrelevant to the left. What is relevant to the left is that these messages make young women leftists — because they make them angry (virtually all leftists are angry), sad (there are happy liberals and happy conservatives but very few happy leftists) and lonely (singles are overwhelmingly on the left).
— If you are a young black, the most important thing for you to know is that this country loathes you — that racism is &#8220;part of our DNA,&#8221; as President Barack Obama put it — and that just being black gets you suspended or expelled from school, shot by police, denied the vote whenever possible and disproportionately imprisoned.
Again, almost none of that is true. But a happy black — let alone a black grateful for being an American — is much less likely to support the left.
— If you are a young Latino, know the white majority is so xenophobic that if it could, it would expel you from the country.
— If you are a white male, you are the recipient of unearned privilege, and you are a racist.
— Boys and girls, you need to know from as young an age as possible that there is actually no such thing as &#8220;boys and girls.&#8221; That is why your teachers have been told not to refer to you as &#8220;boys and girls&#8221; but only as &#8220;students.&#8221;
— Young people, you should know that there is no God. So don&#8217;t look to God or religion for meaning. They are for the emotionally handicapped and for intellectual lightweights. For meaning, look to social action.
— Christianity, the religion of the great majority of Americans since America&#8217;s founding, the religion of nearly all your parents or grandparents, justified slavery, the slaughter of Native Americans and the persecution of gays. And in our time, most people who call themselves believing Christians are bigots and hypocrites. Whatever good was achieved was done so by believers with secular Enlightenment values, not Judeo-Christian values. Islam, on the other hand, has always been a religion of peace.
— Western civilization is nothing for you to be proud of. It is neither culturally nor morally superior to any other civilization or culture. And in many ways, it is worse: It is largely a record of persecution and genocide. That&#8217;s why you will no longer celebrate Columbus Day but rather Indigenous Peoples Day.
— Columbus Day will not be the only national holiday we will either erase or minimize in importance. Whereas Americans have always had meaningful holidays to celebrate and enrich their lives, you will have few or none (aside from Halloween). Previous generations found great meaning in Washington&#8217;s and Lincoln&#8217;s birthdays. You won&#8217;t. Their birthdays are no longer celebrated. Throughout American history, July Fourth meant a great deal to nearly all Americans. They celebrated it with patriotic marches, parades and speeches. No longer. Anyway, America wasn&#8217;t founded in 1776: According to The New York Times, it was founded in 1619, when the first slaves arrived. As for Memorial Day, this once solemn day in which Americans placed flowers at the graves of those who died to preserve our freedoms, is just another day off. And most of the deceased probably died in vain anyway.
— You have few American heroes.
Hey, kids, America&#8217;s founders, known as heroes to every generation until the present one, were not heroes at all. They were rich white men who believed in patriarchy, the suppression of women and slavery. They were all racists, and some were rapists. In short, as an American, you have few, if any, heroes.
Only when one understands that the left — the left, not liberalism — has always and everywhere been a destructive force can one begin to understand what is happening to America. And the left has damaged no group more than America&#8217;s youth. Leftists speak about &#8220;the children&#8221; — but they care about &#8220;the children&#8221; as much as the communists cared about &#8220;the workers.&#8221;
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. His film, &#8220;No Safe Spaces,&#8221; comes to theaters fall 2019. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Old American flag.

PRAGER: &#8216;Your Past Is Terrible, And Your Future Is Terrible&#8217;: What The Left Tells Young Americans

Progressivism

Air Canada announced last week that it will no longer use the phrase &#8220;ladies and gentlemen&#8221; on board its flights. The policy is part of a &#8220;commitment to respect sexual identity, diversity, and inclusion,&#8221; the company said in an internal memo.
Instead of the gender-specific &#8220;ladies and gentlemen&#8221; (and &#8220;mesdames et messieurs&#8221; — all announcements on Air Canada are in English and French), flight attendants are to address passengers as &#8220;everybody&#8221; and &#8220;tout le monde.&#8221;
LGBTQ groups are delighted.
Most other people are not.
Needless to say, Air Canada never polled its passengers or its employees. The left believes in democracy only when it wins a popular vote. When it loses a popular vote, it regards democracy as defective. A perfect example is the attempt by the left in Britain and the rest of Europe to overturn the British people&#8217;s vote in favor of leaving the European Union (also known as Brexit). Because the left lost, it regards that exercise in democracy as invalid.
Everyone knows that had there been a vote among Air Canada passengers — say, all those enrolled in the airline&#8217;s frequent flier program — even liberal Canadians would have voted to retain &#8220;ladies and gentlemen.&#8221; Even the infinitesimally small number of Canadians who are transgender would almost all vote to retain &#8220;ladies and gentlemen.&#8221; Remember, transgender individuals strongly identify as male or female — they simply reject their biological sexual identity. So, who, exactly, is Air Canada making more comfortable? Not the 99-plus percent of Canadians who identify with their biological sex, and not the fraction of a percent of Canadians who are transgender.
They are allegedly making the most rare of all human beings comfortable: those with no sexual identity. And not even every member of that group would vote to have Air Canada drop &#8220;ladies and gentlemen.&#8221; I recently interviewed one such individual on my radio show, Professor Camille Paglia, one of the major thinkers of our time. She told me she identifies as neither female nor male but she thinks society is going mad in its rush to obliterate male and female.
The truth is no one but LGBTQ activists (including their cisgender heterosexual supporters) approve of Air Canada&#8217;s change.
So why did Air Canada do this?
To feel good about itself and buy goodwill with some of the most powerful social forces in the English-speaking world: LGBTQ activist groups. Big-business leftism — like Citibank&#8217;s recent video featuring the hurt and angry reactions of young girls (around ages 10 to 13) when told women are &#8220;paid less than men&#8221; for the same work — can best be described as moral onanism.
There are no other reasons for Air Canada&#8217;s decision. Air Canada has offended nearly all its passengers — male, female, straight, gay and transgender — who want to be referred to as ladies or gentlemen. But this means nothing to Air Canada. And it is likely that U.S. airlines will follow suit. There is no left-wing position, no matter how radical or absurd, that hurts a business.
Only taking a conservative position can hurt a business. The owner of Chick-fil-A believes in the only sex-based definition of marriage that has ever existed — the union of male and female — and is boycotted, closed down or never allowed to open. That Chick-fil-A hires and serves gays, including married gays, makes no difference to left-wing haters.
Forbes reported last week that just eight days after a new Chick-fil-A was opened for business, &#8220;the Oracle shopping mall in Reading, outside London &#8230; yanked its lease. &#8230; The outlet in Reading, about 35 miles from London, was an effort to test the metropolitan area&#8217;s waters. But, campaigners from Reading Pride, an LGBT organization, called for a boycott of the American brand because of its foundation&#8217;s support of groups they say are hostile to gay rights.&#8221;
Earlier this year, the San Antonio Airport banned Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant there. And New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel tried to prevent Chick-fil-A from opening in their cities — because of the owner&#8217;s views, not Chick-fil-A&#8217;s policies.
Air Canada will pay no price for a decision that insults the vast majority of its clients and undermines one of the most beautiful and essential building blocks of civilization: the existence, and even celebration, of the two sexes. No company pays a price — from Air Canada to Citibank to Gillette (whose &#8220;toxic masculinity&#8221; video was a &#8220;screw you&#8221; to nearly all its male clients) to Nike (which has appointed as its national spokesman a football player who won&#8217;t stand for the national anthem and loathes America).
Such is the power and stranglehold of the left today — in big business as much as in journalism and our schools. This is not new. As the famous quote attributed to (but perhaps not actually said by) Lenin put it, &#8220;The capitalists&#8221; — in this case, Western businesses — &#8220;will sell us the rope with which to hang them.&#8221;
If the West sinks, you can thank big businesses like Air Canada as much as the universities and the media.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. His film, &#8220;No Safe Spaces,&#8221; comes to theaters fall 2019. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Air Canada jet.

PRAGER: Air Canada To Its Passengers: &#8216;Screw You&#8217;

Gender

Gender Pronouns

LGBT

Dear Mr. Brin: Fifty years ago this week, when I was a 21-year-old college senior, I was in the Soviet Union, sent by the government of Israel to smuggle in Jewish religious items and smuggle out names of Jews who wanted to escape the Soviet Union and could then be issued a formal invitation to Israel.
I was chosen because I was a committed Jew and because I knew Hebrew and Russian. I was no hero, but the trip did entail risk. The Soviets did not appreciate people smuggling out names of Soviet citizens who sought to emigrate, information the Israeli government and activist groups in America used to advocate on their behalf.
My four weeks in the USSR were, of course, life-changing. This young American, lucky beyond belief to have spent his entire life in the freest country in the world, experienced what it was like to live in a totalitarian police state. People feared merely being seen speaking with a Westerner, lest the KGB arrest and interrogate them. People arranged to meet me at a certain tree in a certain park and only spoke to me while walking to avoid eavesdroppers. I met with Jewish engineers, doctors and professors who could find no work because they were known to the government to be &#8220;otkazniki,&#8221; or &#8220;refuseniks&#8221; — Jews who had applied for exit visas to leave the Soviet Union and been refused permission. I&#8217;m sure you know of them from your parents.
I left the Soviet Union angry and grateful — angry there are people who have the audacity to tell other people what they could and could not say, and grateful beyond measure to have been born in America, where no one could tell anyone what they could say. From that day to this, I have never taken freedom, especially freedom of speech, for granted.
Why I am writing to you about this?
Because, beyond my wildest dreams, two things are happening in America.
One is that for the first time in America&#8217;s history, free speech is seriously threatened.
In 1977, when Nazis sought to march in Skokie, Illinois — those terrible human beings chose Skokie because it was home to many Jewish Holocaust survivors — virtually every liberal and conservative organization, including Jewish organizations, defended the Nazis&#8217; right to march. Because in America — and only in America — it was understood that even if the most loathsome speech was not protected, all speech was at risk.
That has changed.
Today, decent people — people who abhor Nazism and every other form of evil, left or right; people like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro and Ayaan Hirsi Ali — are shouted down, threatened, disinvited or never invited to speak at America&#8217;s universities.
The other thing that is happening is even more frightening. The company that you co-founded, Google, the greatest conduit of speech in world history, is also suppressing speech. I have asked myself over and over: How could the company founded by a man whose parents fled the Soviet Union do this?
It so boggles the mind that I have to hope you are simply not fully aware of what your company is doing.
So, in a nutshell, let me tell you what Google has done to one organization, Prager University (better known as PragerU). Every week, PragerU releases a five-minute video on virtually every subject outside of STEM (science, technology, engineering and math). Some of the finest minds in the world have presented these videos — including professors from Harvard, Stanford and MIT; four Pulitzer Prize winners; three former prime ministers; liberals; conservatives; Democrats; Republicans (including never-Trumpers); gays; and, of course, many women and members of ethnic and racial minorities.
Yet YouTube, which Google owns, has placed hundreds of our videos on its restricted list. In addition to the inherent smear of being labeled &#8220;inappropriate for children,&#8221; this means no family that filters out pornography and graphic violence, no school and no library can see those videos. Among those restricted videos is one during former Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper defends Israel. Had someone told me 50 years ago that a company led by the son of Soviet Jewish refuseniks would suppress a video by a world leader defending the Jewish state, I would have told them they were out of their mind. That&#8217;s one reason I can only assume, or at least hope, that you are not fully aware of what your company is doing.
Or how about a video series I present on the Ten Commandments? YouTube is suppressing a number of those, too. When Sen. Ted Cruz asked a Google official why Google restricted one of my videos on the Ten Commandments, the official responded (it&#8217;s on YouTube) that it was because the video &#8220;contains references to murder.&#8221;
In fact, PragerU has repeatedly asked Google over the past several years why any of our videos are on the restricted list, and we have received either a runaround or silence. We have never received a substantive explanation. We have no desire to see government intervene in private business to protect free speech. But your company has availed itself of protections under law that shield it from liability for defamation, copyright infringement, etc. Your company&#8217;s arrogance is such that a vast number of Americans — liberals as well as conservatives — are worried that the major conduit of speech in the Free World doesn&#8217;t care about free speech.
Mr. Brin, along with millions of other Americans, I fought to bring your parents from a land with no freedom to the Land of the Free. None of us has ever asked for anything in return. It was our honor to work for liberty in general and for Soviet Jewry specifically.
What Americans most want from immigrants is that they help keep America free. I never had any doubt that those leaving the Soviet Union would fulfill that mission.
Until now.
Freedom of speech is the most fundamental of all freedoms. It&#8217;s what your parents yearned for and bequeathed to you. Please don&#8217;t help take it away from those who made it possible — the people of America.
Sincerely yours,
Dennis Prager
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. His film, &#8220;No Safe Spaces,&#8221; comes to theaters fall 2019. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Sergey Brin.

PRAGER: An Open Letter To Sergey Brin

Communism

Free Speech

Google

Russia

A rule of life is that everything the left touches it ruins: art, music, Christianity, Judaism, race relations, male-female relations, universities, high schools, elementary schools, late-night comedy, sports, liberty, journalism, the Boy Scouts, national economies, language and everything else it influences.
The left, not liberalism. (I have written a column and done a PragerU video on the differences between liberalism and leftism.)
To this list, we can now add childhood and children.
1. The left robs children of their innocence and has helped produce an unprecedented number of anxious and depressed young people.
Most of us are aware of how the left prematurely introduced sexuality into young children&#8217;s lives under the guise of &#8220;sex education.&#8221; That was just the beginning. Then the left changed same-sex college dorms, which had been the norm throughout American history, into coed dorms on virtually every American campus. Then came coed bathrooms. And just in case college students were not thinking about — or having enough — sex, the left introduced sex columns in college newspapers and &#8220;sex week&#8221; on virtually every college campus. One is more graphic than the other. After reading a college newspaper sex column or experiencing the college&#8217;s sex week, a student could easily conclude that without having experienced a menage a trois and mastering cunnilingus or fellatio techniques, life is neither exciting nor fulfilling.
There are many reasons a greater percentage of college students are more depressed than ever before. But the immersion in loveless and romance-less sex is undoubtedly one of them. That is what contributes to the especially high rate of female depression on campuses.
The left hypersexualized colleges and now laments that colleges are all filled with a &#8220;rape culture.&#8221;
2. The left has devalued marriage.
An unprecedentedly large percentage of young Americans are not married, and more of them than ever do not consider marriage important. The left has indoctrinated a generation (or two) of young Americans into believing that marriage is unimportant — career alone is the road to a meaningful life for both men and women. Throughout American history, until the left took over the culture and universities beginning in the 1960s, it was a given, as Frank Sinatra sang, that &#8220;love and marriage &#8230; go together like a horse and carriage.&#8221;
3. The left has devalued having children.
The left is ambivalent and often hostile to people having children. That&#8217;s why people on the left have the fewest children of all political and religious groups.
The latest reason not to have children is that much of humanity is doomed if global warming is not immediately reversed. But since the 1970s, the left has offered other reasons not to have children including that the world would not produce nearly enough food and other basic resources to sustain the growing world population. Thus began the zero population growth (ZPG) movement.
But the left&#8217;s ambivalence over having children isn&#8217;t just hysteria over too many people, lack of food or global warming. Many people on the left (again, unlike liberals or conservatives) just don&#8217;t particularly want kids. Children are a nuisance: They interfere with one&#8217;s career; they cost too much; and dogs and cats are perfectly acceptable substitutes.
In sum, the left doesn&#8217;t particularly like children.
4. The left is ruining the childhood of many children by depriving them of the joys and excitement of growing into men and women. The left has invented a new idea in history: that human beings are not born male or female but are &#8220;assigned&#8221; their sex at birth by sexist parents, physicians and a society that is not yet &#8220;woke&#8221; to this &#8220;fact.&#8221; In schools throughout America, teachers are told to no longer call their students &#8220;boys&#8221; and &#8220;girls,&#8221; just &#8220;students,&#8221; lest they impose a gender identity on them. Mattel has released a doll that has no gender. A New York Times columnist whose photo shows him with a beard has requested that his readers refer to him only as &#8220;they,&#8221; as he believes gender is useless. Teenage girls who declare themselves boys are allowed to have their breasts surgically removed without their parents&#8217; permission. Divorced parents who tell their 5-year-old male child who feels he is a girl that he is a boy risk losing custody or parental rights if the other parent affirms the child is a girl. Girls who compete in sports against boys who identify as females and complain that they lose unfairly are attacked as &#8220;transphobic.&#8221;
5. The left has convinced innumerable young Americans that their past is terrible and their future is terrible.
The left tells American children that their past — the American past — is shameful and their future is even worse: They will likely die prematurely as a result of global warming.
Whatever the left touches it ruins. The latest example is children.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Dem donkey.

PRAGER: The Left To America&#8217;s Children: Your Past Is Terrible, And Your Future Is Terrible

Climate Change

Ask any young person — even a young child — &#8220;What do you want to be?&#8221; and just about everyone will answer, &#8220;a doctor,&#8221; &#8220;an engineer,&#8221; &#8220;a teacher,&#8221; &#8220;a firefighter,&#8221; &#8220;an airplane pilot&#8221; or a member of some other profession.
This is completely understandable.
But I have a suggestion that would change your child&#8217;s life — and the world — for the better. Tell your child to answer, &#8220;I want to be a good person.&#8221; This would completely change the way your child sees himself or herself.
As a rule, people become what they want to become. If you devote the entire first half of your life including your most formative years to being a good student in order to be a good professional, you probably will become &#8230; a good student and a good professional.
Think of how long it takes and how hard one has to work to accomplish those two goals. Why wouldn&#8217;t it take as much time and effort to become a good person? How would anyone become proficient at anything that wasn&#8217;t his or her goal to achieve?
Every generation in recorded history has witnessed a terrible amount of evil. One would think that making good people would therefore be the first goal of every decent society, indeed of every society that wishes to long survive. But with a few exceptions, this has not been the case — and is not the case today.
What preoccupies parents today is not that their child be a good person but that their child be a good student, get into a &#8220;good&#8221; school and become good at some profession. You can test this. Ask your child, whether he or she is 5 years old or 50 years old, &#8220;What do you think I, your mother (or I, your father) most want (or most wanted) you to be: smart, successful, good or happy?&#8221;
For 30 years, I have suggested listeners of my radio show do this, and for 30 years, parents have called to tell me how disappointed they were that their children did not answer, &#8220;good.&#8221;
But given how few parents make goodness their children&#8217;s primary goal, why should they be surprised?
To be fair, one obvious reason few children respond, &#8220;a good person&#8221; to the question &#8220;What do you want to be?&#8221; is that the question (often ending with &#8220;when you grow up&#8221;) implies a profession.
But the very fact that the question is only understood to mean &#8220;What type of work do you intend to do?&#8221; is precisely the problem. Therefore, parents need to change the meaning of the question, and they can easily do so by having their children answer, &#8220;a good person.&#8221;
Just imagine how adults asking the question would react to a child who gives that answer.
And that answer would force you, the parent, to work on your child&#8217;s goodness. The moment you tell your child to answer, &#8220;a good person,&#8221; you will have to start communicating that you value their character more than their grades.
There is another reason virtually no parent tells his or her child to answer, &#8220;a good person.&#8221; Most secular parents think that human nature is basically good and, therefore, that all most children need to be good is love, not moral instruction.
Unfortunately, even the answer &#8220;a good person&#8221; does not ensure character development. Among too many parents, &#8220;a good person&#8221; has come to mean holding the proper political positions. Many parents, especially among the best educated, believe that if their child believes that America is racist; that all whites have &#8220;white privilege&#8221;; that patriarchy is a serious problem and needs to be eradicated; that carbon emissions threaten life on Earth, that economic inequality is a great evil; that there are scores of genders; that Republicans are deplorable people; and other left-wing positions, then their child is good person.
But, while political/social positions do indeed have a moral component, they are not necessarily related to a person&#8217;s character. With regard to young people, we should be much more concerned with how they treat their parents and teachers, how they treat their peers, whether or not they cheat on tests and how honest they are in general than their position on carbon emissions.
Finally, if &#8220;a good person&#8221; strikes you as too corny or objectionable for some other reason, how about telling your child to answer the question &#8220;What do you want to be?&#8221; with one or more of these responses:
— &#8220;A good man.&#8221;
— &#8220;A good Christian (or Jew).&#8221;
— &#8220;A good American.&#8221;
— &#8220;A good father and husband.&#8221;
— &#8220;A good mother and wife.&#8221;
They&#8217;re all better answers than any profession.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Kids playing.

PRAGER: What Do You Want Your Child To Be?

Christianity

Judaism

Religion

The entire American left — the mainstream media, the environmentalist movement and Democratic politicians in particular — are celebrating the involvement of teenagers and even younger children in protesting the world&#8217;s &#8220;inaction&#8221; with regard to global warming.
And not just the American left, of course. The left throughout the world is celebrating. A 16-year-old Swedish girl whose contempt for adults is breathtaking is an international hero. Congressional Democrats invited her to testify in Congress, and the United Nations has likewise invited her.
The mayor and city council of New York City further politicized their city&#8217;s public schools by allowing students to skip school to actively participate in a global warming protest.
The message of young climate change activists is: &#8220;You adults aren&#8217;t doing your job. As a result, we have no future.&#8221; As a sympathetic reporter — are there any non-sympathetic reporters? — for the Los Angeles Times put it, &#8220;(T)eens are still waiting for a sign that their elders get it.&#8221;
The Times&#8217; coverage is typical. It reported: &#8220;Underneath the activism lies a simple truth: Young people are incredibly scared about climate change. They see it as a profound injustice and an existential threat to their generation and those that will follow. &#8230;
&#8220;&#8216;They do worry, and they worry kind of a lot,&#8217; said Maria Ojala, an environmental psychologist at Orebro University in Sweden. &#8230;
&#8220;Arielle Martinez Cohen&#8221; — an 18-year-old Los Angeles activist with the youth climate group Zero Hour — &#8220;remembers reading a report from an Australian think tank that warned the human species could face extinction by 2050 if society doesn&#8217;t get its act together.
&#8220;&#8216;I almost imagine, like, an apocalypse-type thing happening,&#8217; Arielle said.
&#8220;Many young people say they can&#8217;t fathom bringing kids of their own into the world. &#8230;
&#8220;&#8216;It&#8217;s not ethical. It&#8217;s literally a burning house,&#8217; Lana said.
&#8220;&#8216;That&#8217;s something that&#8217;s not realistic,&#8217; agreed her twin sister, Yena.
&#8220;And how can they even think about college or contemplate their careers when faced with so much uncertainty?
&#8220;&#8216;It&#8217;s something I feel every single day,&#8217; Yena said. &#8216;I work really hard at school and I do all these things, and I&#8217;m like, &#8220;What am I working for? Do I have a future?&#8221;&#8216;&#8221;
It is critical to remember that hysterias — such as Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, &#8220;endemic and systemic racism in America,&#8221; the heterosexual AIDS &#8220;crisis&#8221; in America and the &#8220;rape culture&#8221; on American college campuses — are to the left what oxygen is to biological life. No oxygen, no life; no hysteria, no left.
Apparently, however, the left-wing hysteria about global warming leading to the virtual extinction of life on Earth has not moved enough adults. Many adults who do not deny that the Earth is getting warmer — such as Danish writer and environmentalist thinker Bjorn Lomborg — do deny that the threat is &#8220;existential&#8221; and do believe that the left&#8217;s solutions, such as the Green New Deal, will damage the world far more than will carbon emissions. Proof that the left is hysterical is its unwillingness to promote nuclear power — a completely clean, non-fossil fuel-based source of power. It provides France with 70 percent of its energy. Anyone who really believes life on Earth is endangered would grasp at the nuclear power lifeboat. That they do not proves what many of us have believed from the beginning: The &#8220;existential threat&#8221; scenario is another left-wing falsehood used to whip up hysteria that will lead to the left&#8217;s control of the economy and society.
And that takes us back to the children: If you can&#8217;t sell your hysteria to adults, try kids. And that is what the left has done. After all, no one is as malleable or as easily indoctrinated as children.
Consider this: If the left didn&#8217;t tell them the world is going to end, they wouldn&#8217;t worry about it. They&#8217;d be enjoying their young lives, maybe even learning to appreciate that they live in the freest country at the most prosperous time in human history. Instead, thanks to leftists (who are children in adult bodies), they live in their grip of &#8220;existential eco-anxiety.&#8221;
This is but one more way in which the left abuses children (along with telling them they are neither boys nor girls but whatever they later choose to be; teaching them contempt for their country; and depriving them of the greatest source of morality, meaning, community and happiness — any of the Judeo-Christian religions).
It&#8217;s depressing, and it&#8217;s frightening.
The scariest movies are those featuring brainwashed children. This horror show is happening in real life.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Great Thunberg.

PRAGER: If You Can&#8217;t Sell Your Hysteria To Adults, Try Kids

Environmentalism

Global Warming

Greta Thunberg

The last debate among 10 Democrats seeking their party&#8217;s nomination for president set a new low for demagoguery, contempt for America and just plain foolishness.
Here are some examples:
Andrew Yang: &#8220;In America today, everything revolves around the almighty dollar — our schools, our hospitals, our media, even our government.&#8221;
It is difficult to imagine a more contemptuous, not to mention erroneous, view of America.
I would like to ask Mr. Yang: Does everything in your life revolve around &#8220;the almighty dollar&#8221;? In your friends&#8217; lives?
If his answer is yes, he is projecting the shallowness of his life onto that of all Americans — a common trait on the Left (&#8220;All whites are racists,&#8221; white leftists tell us, admitting to how contemptible they are).
If his answer is no, he thinks he is morally superior to all other Americans.
In either case, what is clear is his disdain for his country, a disdain that underlies all leftism.
Andrew Yang: &#8220;We have to get our country working for us again, instead of the other way around.&#8221;
Yang&#8217;s statement is literally the opposite of one of the most famous lines spoken by an American politician since World War II: &#8220;Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country,&#8221; from John F. Kennedy&#8217;s inaugural address in 1961.
Upending JFK&#8217;s message is a perfect example of what the left has done to the moral fabric of America.
Kamala Harris: &#8220;President Trump, you&#8217;ve spent the last two-and-a-half years full-time trying to sow hate and division among us &#8230; &#8221;
In reality, it is the Left that has spent full-time &#8220;trying to sow hate and division among us&#8221; — and not for the last two-and-a-half years but for the last 50. It is the Left that has mocked the notion of America as a &#8220;melting pot.&#8221; It is the Left that has defined Americans by their race and ethnicity.
Kamala Harris: &#8220;We know that the vast majority of us have so much more in common than what separates us, regardless of our race, where we live or the party with which we&#8217;re registered to vote.&#8221;
This is false on two grounds.
First, the Left constantly tells us that every American who voted for Donald Trump or supports him is a racist at best and a white supremacist at worst. Does Harris have more in common with people whom she considers white supremacists — or does more separate her from them?
As I constantly note, truth is a liberal and a conservative value but has never been a left-wing value. The Left&#8217;s only criterion in determining whether or not to say something is not whether it is true or false but whether it is effective or ineffective.
Second, the notion that we all have more in common than what separates us is not true no matter who says it. The only thing that the Left and the non-Left have in common is biological — we are all homo sapiens. Valueswise, we are utterly different.
Elizabeth Warren: &#8220;Let&#8217;s be clear: I&#8217;ve actually never met anybody who likes their health insurance company.&#8221;
One can only marvel at the ease with which leftists lie. In Warren&#8217;s case, she had decades of practice, having promoted herself as one of Harvard&#8217;s Native American professors of law. The fact is, tens of millions of Americans like their health insurance company just fine (I was one of them until I was forced onto Medicare) — far more than veterans who like their single-payer government health care.
Bernie Sanders: &#8220;&#8216;Medicare-for-All&#8217; &#8230; allows you to go to any doctor you want.&#8221;
Why did none of the moderators ask him the most obvious question: How is that possible?
Let&#8217;s say an oncologist in Dallas had a stellar reputation and, therefore, tens of thousands of Americans wanted to see him either because they or a loved one had cancer. How would Medicare for All make that happen? Again, leftists will say anything to further their agenda.
Pete Buttigieg: This debate &#8220;reminds everybody of what they cannot stand about Washington: scoring points against each other, poking at each other and telling each other that — my plan, your plan. &#8230;&#8221;
Mayor Buttigieg seems incapable of uttering anything that isn&#8217;t pablum. Even his fellow Democrat Julian Castro immediately responded: &#8220;Yeah, that&#8217;s called the Democratic primary election, Pete. That&#8217;s called an election.&#8221;
ABC News correspondent Linsey Davis: &#8220;I&#8217;d like to start with young black voters. Several recent polls indicate their No. 1 concern is racism.&#8221;
Nothing more clearly divides left from right than this statement. The Left says the No. 1 problem facing black Americans is racism. No one else does. Anyone who says racism is a greater problem than, for example, the absence of black fathers (more than three-quarters of black children are born to unwed mothers) either is woefully ignorant or purposefully wants to spread racial division.
Furthermore, if such polls exist and they are right, there is no hope for black America in this generation. It means that the Left has successfully indoctrinated young Americans, white and black, into believing that a truly decent country is so indecent it hates its black population.
Beto O&#8217;Rourke (in response to Davis): &#8220;Racism in America is endemic. &#8230; It is found in our education system, where in Texas, a 5-year-old child in kindergarten is five times as likely to be disciplined or suspended or expelled based on the color of their skin.&#8221;
This is one of the Left&#8217;s &#8220;proofs&#8221; of &#8220;endemic&#8221; American racism: America is so racist even kindergarten teachers and school principals — all notorious Trump supporters — expel black students solely because they are black, not because black students are disruptive at rates higher than their percentage in the classroom. Yet, despite the contempt in which Democrats hold teachers, teachers will overwhelmingly vote Democrat.
Joe Biden: &#8220;Nobody should be in jail for a nonviolent crime.&#8221;
After such a statement, that this man is taken seriously is a comment on those who take him seriously.
Unfortunately, the left and right do, in fact, have far less in common than what unites them. Reading these statements, you can see why.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Democratic debate

PRAGER: Do You Know What The Democrats Said At Their Debate?

Bernie Sanders

Democratic Party

Elizabeth Warren

Joe Biden

Kamala Harris

Pete Buttigieg

Our age loves scientific equations. Here&#8217;s one you weren&#8217;t taught at college but which affects you as much as the law of gravity:
GI &#8211; W = E
Good Intentions (GI) minus Wisdom (W) leads to Evil (E).
You weren&#8217;t taught this rule at college because the modern university believes only science has rules. &#8220;Rules of life&#8221; is another term for wisdom, and there is no wisdom — or even pursuit of wisdom — at our universities.
Life has rules just like the natural sciences do. Examples include:
Ingratitude makes happiness impossible.
Corrupt people think everyone else is as corrupt as they are.
Human nature is not basically good.
Feelings are far less important than actions.
Most men need a woman to mature. Most women need a man to mature.
The list is long. And the more life rules people know and live by the better people they&#8217;ll be — the better the world will be.
There is a reason Jordan Peterson&#8217;s book &#8220;12 Rules for Life&#8221; has sold millions of copies, mostly to young people. It is the same reason PragerU has a billion views a year, mostly among people under 35. Many young people are sensing they have been cheated by the adults that have taught them, for example, to pursue self-esteem rather than self-control — a &#8220;rule&#8221; guaranteed to lead to moral and professional failure.
But one rule almost no one was taught, that explains most organized evil and the left in particular, from the Bolsheviks to Mao to Castro to Chavez to your everyday leftist in New York or Iowa: Good intentions without wisdom leads to evil.
Communism, the greatest mass murder ideology in history, was for almost all its rank-and-file supporters rooted in their desire to do good. (This was rarely true for its leaders, whose greatest desire was power.)
The many millions of people all over the world who supported communism did not think they were supporting unprecedented levels of mass murder and torture or an equally unprecedented deprivation of the most fundamental human rights of a substantial percentage of humanity. They thought they were moral, building a beautiful future for humanity — eliminating inequality, enabling people to work as hard or as little as they wanted, providing their fellow citizens &#8220;free&#8221; education and &#8220;free&#8221; health care. They were convinced that the moral arc of history was bending in their direction and that they were good because their motives were good.
That&#8217;s why leftists have such moral contempt for those who differ with them. Because those on the Left are so good, only bad human beings could possibly oppose them. That is the position of virtually every editor and columnist at The New York Times.
The problem with communists and with leftists who don&#8217;t consider themselves communists is not that none of them mean well. It&#8217;s that they lack wisdom. There are wise and foolish liberals, wise and foolish conservatives; but all leftists are fools. Every one of the Democrats running for president is a fool. This is not, however, a description of their totality as a human being. Fools may be personally kind and generous, may be loyal friends and devoted spouses, and of course, they may be well-intentioned. But in terms of making the world worse, there is little difference between a well-meaning fool and an evil human being. Tens of millions of well-intentioned Westerners supported Stalin. The Westerners who supplied Stalin the secrets to the atom bomb were not motivated by evil. They were simply fools. But few evil people did as much to hurt the world as they did.
They are fools partly because they believe good intentions are all that matter. Therefore, they never ask perhaps the most important moral question one can ask: What will happen if my policy is enacted? Leftist supporters of communism never asked.
Democrats who push the country-bankrupting Green New Deal provide a contemporary example. They not only deny the economy- and society-crushing consequences of the Green New Deal, they deny any price will be paid. Every home, office, hospital, school and business will be forced to stop using fossil fuels, yet only good will come from that. Giving that amount of coercive power to the state is of no consequence to leftists. In their make-believe world, no one will suffer. On the contrary, America will become richer, and millions of jobs will be created while we destroy our economy. Poor Africans trying to electrify their countries will be told not to — yet they, too, will somehow become rich using only wind and sun.
If the Green New Deal is enacted, the American economy will tank — and with it, much of the rest of the world. Tyrannies like China and Iran will be emboldened, as will dictatorships like Russia.
On every issue in which the Left differs from conservatives (and often from liberals), they are fools. They push for a Palestinian state although even Israelis on the left know this would mean a Hamas-Hezbollah state on the Israeli border. But they know they mean well.
They routinely label the beacon of freedom on Earth racist, misogynistic, homophobic, imperialistic, genocidal; cheapen the label &#8220;Nazi&#8221;; promote all-black dorms and graduations; promote preteen boys&#8217; performing drag shows; tell young women career is more important to happiness than marriage; believe a country can remain a distinct nation with open borders; condemn parents who try to reassure their 3-year-old son that he is a boy; and ruin the university, the arts, late-night comedy, pro football and religion.
But they mean well.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Equations.jpeg

PRAGER: The Equation That Explains Evil

Socialism

On Aug. 8, CNN headlined: &#8220;Owner of SoulCycle and the Miami Dolphins faces outrage and calls for boycott over Trump fundraiser.&#8221;
The report began: &#8220;The billionaire owner of Equinox is planning a high-dollar Hamptons fundraiser for President Donald Trump, leading to calls for a boycott of the luxury gym and its associated businesses SoulCycle and Blink Fitness.&#8221;
Examples CNN gave of this outrage included a tweet from comedian Billy Eichner — &#8220;Hey @Equinox &#8211; what&#8217;s your policy for canceling memberships once a member finds out your owner is enabling racism and mass murder?&#8221; — and from actor Conrad Ricamora — &#8220;Sorry @soulcycle &#8230; you can&#8217;t peddle &#8216;inspiration&#8217; in your classes and have an owner funding hate and racism in the back room. Byyyeeeeeeeeeee.&#8221;
Additionally, CNN reported, &#8220;Equinox was added to a list of companies to boycott by Shannon Coulter, a self-described consumer advocate who manages Grab Your Wallet, a protest group that targets companies that support the Trump administration. &#8230; LGBTQ publications seemed to be especially offended.&#8221;
This, of course, is the way the left works. If you support what the left opposes, the left will do everything possible to destroy your name and your business. It doesn&#8217;t matter if you&#8217;re a billionaire like Stephen Ross or a middle-class family like the owners of Ristretto Roasters in Portland, Oregon. The wife of the coffee store owner said in her podcast, &#8220;#MeNeither,&#8221; &#8220;the idea that any charge any woman — or man — brings must be believed without question &#8230; where&#8217;s the logic in that? I believe we are better off judging any claim of harassment, like any other claim, on its own merits.&#8221;
For saying that, her husband&#8217;s business was targeted for destruction by leftists who harassed customers and called for a boycott. You can watch her story here.
A few days later, as a member of Equinox, I received an email from Harvey Spevak, executive chairman and managing partner of Equinox. This is part of what he wrote to &#8220;Our Equinox Community&#8221;:
&#8220;The last week has been difficult for all. I am sorry for the impact it has had on our community &#8230; I have been in our clubs listening to our teams and members. I really appreciate the open and honest feedback I received. It&#8217;s been heartfelt and, in many instances, emotional. I&#8217;m proud that even during this difficult time our community is one that listens and respects each other.
&#8220;Many of you have asked for clarification on Stephen Ross&#8217;s investment in Equinox. Mr. Ross is not the majority investor in Equinox. He is one of the investors including myself. He does not run the company. I do. &#8230;
&#8220;When I joined Equinox over 20 years ago, I worked with our then small team to create values that would guide us forward. They are the foundation of our culture, a culture based on equality, diversity, inclusivity, integrity, empathy and mutual respect. A community where everyone is welcome. &#8230; We have been a proud partner of House Lives Matter, supporting the House Ballroom Community comprised of sexual and gender minority people of color (LGBTQ and gender non-conforming). &#8230;
&#8220;I want to thank our amazing team and all they do in service of you, our members. It pains me to see how this has been impacting them and I am truly grateful for their commitment, passion and dedication. We will continue to listen to your thoughts and ideas, and while we have a lot of work to do, I am confident that together we will come out a stronger community.&#8221;
So, here is my response:
Dear Mr. Spevak:
As a member of Equinox who has spent tens of thousands of dollars in membership fees and personal training, I want you to know how highly I regard Equinox. It is a class act. You, however, are not. It is not a class act to throw your partner under the bus in order to curry favor with America&#8217;s bullies — left-wing organizations who seek to crush all dissent, from the university to big and small businesses — and the morons in Hollywood who accuse America of engaging in mass murder.
Moreover, I do not believe much of what you wrote.
I don&#8217;t believe you &#8220;have been in our clubs listening to our teams and members.&#8221; What I believe is you listened only to those who hate the president of the United States.
I don&#8217;t believe you received &#8220;open and honest feedback.&#8221; You received feedback only from people who hate the president and who would work to destroy your beloved Equinox if you didn&#8217;t do exactly what they want.
You could have shown courage and a commitment to the American way of life by honoring the right of fellow Americans to hold different political opinions without fearing they would lose their business.
You could have explained that as you really do believe Equinox is a community committed to &#8220;diversity, inclusivity &#8230; and mutual respect,&#8221; this also applies to conservatives.
Had the left forced you out of your Equinox position, I suspect that would not have rendered you a poor man. But you would have kept your soul. As it is, you will be remembered as just one more frightened executive who fed the totalitarian beast at a time when courage was most needed to keep America the land of the free.
Sincerely yours,
Dennis Prager, clearly an unwanted member of the &#8220;Equinox Community&#8221;
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Equinox

PRAGER: My Response To Harvey Spevak, Executive Chairman Of Equinox

Donald Trump

Imagine a group of people who work to destroy Italy because, they claim, Italy&#8217;s origins are illegitimate. Imagine further that these people maintain that of all the countries in the world, only Italy is illegitimate. And then imagine that these people vigorously deny they are in any way anti-Italian. Would you believe them? Or would you dismiss their argument as not only dishonest but absurd?
Substitute &#8220;Israel&#8221; for &#8220;Italy&#8221; and &#8220;Jew&#8221; for &#8220;Italian&#8221; and you&#8217;ll understand the dishonesty and absurdity of the argument that one can be anti-Zionist but not anti-Semitic.
But that is precisely what anti-Zionists say. They argue that the very existence of a Jewish state in the geographic area known as Palestine — there was never an independent country known as Palestine — is illegitimate. They do not believe any other country in the world is illegitimate, no matter how bloody its origins. And then they get offended when they&#8217;re accused of being anti-Semitic.
How can they make this argument?
First, they change the topic. They say it is unfair to charge those who merely &#8220;criticize&#8221; Israel with being anti-Semitic. But I don&#8217;t know anyone who does that. It&#8217;s a phony argument. Criticism of Israel is fine. Denying Israel&#8217;s right to exist is not. Anti-Zionism is not criticism of Israel. Anti-Zionism is opposition to Israel&#8217;s existence.
Zionism is the movement for the return of Jews to their ancient homeland, Israel. Over the past 3,000 years, there were two independent Jewish states located in what is called Israel. Both were destroyed by invaders, and no Arab or Muslim or any other independent country ever existed in that land, which was only named Palestine by the Romans in an attempt to remove all memory of the Jewish state they destroyed in the year A.D. 70.
Second, anti-Zionists claim they can&#8217;t be anti-Jewish because Zionism has nothing to do with Judaism. That, too, is equally false. It is the same as saying that Italy has nothing to do with being Italian. Judaism has always consisted of three components: God, Torah and Israel. If Israel isn&#8217;t part of Judaism, neither is the Bible or God.
Third, anti-Zionists claim that Judaism is only a religion; therefore, Jews are only members of a religion, not a nation. But the Jews are called the &#8220;nation of Israel&#8221; repeatedly in the Bible. That is why there are irreligious, secular and even atheist Jews — because Jews are not only a religion. There are no atheist Christians because Christianity is only a religion.
Fourth, the anti-Zionists claim that Israel is illegitimate because it is racist. This is the charge Israel- and America-haters make against two of the least racist societies in the world. In the case of Israel, it is fraudulent because:
a) Half of Israel&#8217;s Jews are not white.
b) Anyone, of any race or ethnicity, can become a Jew.
c) One out of every 5 Israelis is not a Jew. And these Israeli citizens — mostly Arab Muslims — have the same rights as Jewish Israelis.
d) Israel&#8217;s control of the West Bank has nothing to do with &#8220;race.&#8221; Israel does not control the West Bank because Palestinians are of another race but because Palestinians tried to destroy Israel in 1967, and they lost the war. The only reason Palestinians do not have their own state has nothing to do with race: They rejected offers to found their own state on five separate occasions since 1948. They have always rejected building a Palestinian state because they have always been more interested in destroying Israel.
Fifth, the anti-Zionists claim that Israel&#8217;s origins are illegitimate.
The fact that, of all the world&#8217;s 200-plus countries, the only country anti-Zionists declare illegitimate is also the only Jewish country is pretty much all you need to know about their motives. Why, for example, don&#8217;t they make this claim about Pakistan? In 1947, nine months before the establishment of Israel, India was partitioned into a Muslim state — Pakistan — and a Hindu state — India.
Unlike Israel, Pakistan had never existed before.
Unlike Israel&#8217;s founding, which created about 700,000 Jewish refugees from Arab lands and 700,000 Arab refugees from what became Israel, the founding of Pakistan created about 7 million Muslim refugees from India and about 7 million Hindu refugees from Pakistan. And while the highest estimate of Arab deaths in the fighting that took place when Israel announced its establishment is 10,000, the number of deaths as a result of Pakistan&#8217;s creation is around 1 million.
Given these facts, why is Israel&#8217;s legitimacy challenged while the legitimacy of Pakistan isn&#8217;t? There&#8217;s only one answer: Israel is the one Jewish state in the world. So, while there are 49 Muslim-majority countries and 22 Arab states, anti-Zionists reject the right of the one Jewish state — the size of New Jersey — to exist.
Of course, not all anti-Zionists hate all Jews. But as I wrote at the beginning, if you seek to destroy Italy, you don&#8217;t have to hate every Italian to be anti-Italian. If you seek to destroy the only Jewish state on Earth, you don&#8217;t have to hate every Jew to be an anti-Semite.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Israeli Flag

PRAGER: Criticism Of Israel Is Not Anti-Semitism; Anti-Zionism Is

Israel

Zionism

Virtually every week, there seems to be another issue that preoccupies the country. But while our attention is focused on President Donald Trump, Google, Charlottesville, Russia, impeachment, Jeffrey Epstein, the next elections, racism, a trade war with China, the #MeToo movement or something else, LGBTQ organizations are quietly going about their work dismantling ethical norms, making a mockery of education, ruining innocent people&#8217;s lives and destroying children&#8217;s innocence. If you think this is overstated, here are some examples:
The LGBTQ Dismantling of Women&#8217;s Sports
Last month, a transgender weightlifter won multiple gold medals at the 2019 Pacific Games in Samoa. Laurel Hubbard of New Zealand won two gold medals and a silver in the three heavyweight categories for women weighing more than 87 kilograms, or 192 pounds. Hubbard is physically male.
Last year, two biologically male sophomores at different Connecticut high schools competed in female division of the state open track and field competition. They came in first and second place in the 100- and 200-meter dashes.
Because the Western world cowers before LGBTQ demands, no matter how unfair they are to women athletes, men who deem themselves female must be allowed to compete against women. They almost always win.
The Dismantling of Male and Female — Even at Birth
As reported by the Associated Press: &#8220;Parents also can choose (gender) &#8216;X&#8217; for newborns. New York City is joining California, Oregon, Washington state in allowing an undesignated gender option on birth certificates. A similar provision takes effect in New Jersey in February.&#8221;
What percentage of Americans believe children are lucky if born to parents who will not identify them at birth as male or female? On the other hand, how many of us think such parents are engaged in a form of child abuse?
The Dismantling of Children&#8217;s Innocence and Parental Authority
The Associated Press also recently reported that &#8220;California has overhauled its sex education guidance for public school teachers, encouraging them to talk about gender identity with kindergartners.&#8221;
Tatyana Dzyubak, an elementary school teacher in the Sacramento area, objected: &#8220;I shouldn&#8217;t be teaching that stuff. That&#8217;s for parents to do.&#8221;
But parents and parental authority have always been a thorn in the side of totalitarian movements. Therefore, dismantling parental authority is one of the primary goals of the left, of which LGBTQ organizations are a major component.
Libraries in major urban centers now feature Drag Queen Story Hour — drag queens reading stories to preschool-age children. (Read, for example, the laudatory New York Times article &#8220;Drag Queen Story Hour Puts the Rainbow in Reading&#8221; from May 19, 2017.)
A few weeks ago, the popular actor and TV host Mario Lopez told Candace Owens (Full disclosure: Her podcast is produced by PragerU):
&#8220;If you&#8217;re 3 years old and you&#8217;re saying you&#8217;re feeling a certain way or you think you&#8217;re a boy or a girl, whatever the case may be, I just think it&#8217;s dangerous as a parent to make that determination then: &#8216;OK, well, then you&#8217;re going to be a boy or a girl,&#8217; whatever the case may be. &#8230; I think parents need to allow their kids to be kids, but at the same time, you gotta be the adult in the situation.&#8221;
For sensibly and respectfully saying what any loving parent of a 3-year-old should say, he was so forcefully condemned by GLAAD and PFLAG, two of the biggest LGBTQ organizations, that, knowing his livelihood was on the line, he immediately recanted. In the style of the Chinese Cultural Revolution, he &#8220;recanted&#8221; everything he said and acknowledged how much he still has to learn about parents allowing 3-year-olds to determine their gender.
The Dismantling of Educational Norms
CNN reported last week: &#8220;Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed into law a bill that ensures the contributions of LGBTQ people are taught in public schools. &#8230;
&#8220;(The bill states) &#8216;In public schools only, the teaching of history shall include a study of the roles and contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people in the history of this country and this State.&#8217;
&#8220;Equality Illinois, the state&#8217;s largest LGBTQ civil rights advocacy organization, supported the bill and said the curriculum can have a &#8216;positive effect on students&#8217; self-image and make their peers more accepting.'&#8221;
Once the purpose of teaching history is changed from teaching what happened to &#8220;having a positive effect on students&#8217; self-image,&#8221; history is no longer about what happened; it is propaganda. But rewriting history is not a problem for the left. As a famous Soviet dissident joke put it: &#8220;In the Soviet Union, the future is known; it&#8217;s the past that is always changing.&#8221; I note almost every day that truth is a liberal value and a conservative value, but it has never been a left-wing value. This is just one more example.
The Dismantling of Reality
David Zirin, sports editor of The Nation: &#8220;There is another argument against allowing trans athletes to compete with cis-gender athletes that suggests that their presence hurts cis-women and cis-girls. But this line of thought doesn&#8217;t acknowledge that trans women are in fact women&#8221; (italics added).
Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., in a letter to USA Powerlifting: &#8220;The myth that trans women have a &#8216;direct competitive advantage&#8217; is not supported by medical science.&#8221;
Sunu Chandy of the National Women&#8217;s Law Center: &#8220;There&#8217;s no research to support the claim that allowing trans athletes to play on teams that fit their gender identity will create a competitive imbalance.&#8221;
How can these people say such lies? Because lying is not an issue when truth is not a value. LGBTQ organizations care about lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders as much as communists cared about workers. They use them as a cover for their real agenda: dismantling civilization as we know it.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

Berkeley, CA

PRAGER: Meanwhile, This Is What LGBTQ Organizations Are Doing To Society

The president of the United States, Donald Trump, never said there were &#8220;fine&#8221; Nazis or Ku Klux Klansmen.
This is one of the two great lies of our time — the other being that all Trump supporters are racists — and perhaps in all of American history. I cannot think of a lie of such significance that was held as truth by so many Americans, by every leading politician of one of the two major political parties and disseminated by virtually the entire media.
The major news media need to understand these are important reasons that half of America considers them frauds. And we get no pleasure from this fact. The reason we don&#8217;t recoil when the president labels the mainstream media &#8220;fake news&#8221; is that we know the charge is true. Has one major media news outlet yet apologized to the American people for preoccupying them for nearly two years with the lie of &#8220;Trump collusion&#8221; with Russia? Has one Democrat? Of course not. Because with regard to the Trump-Russia collusion issue, the news media were never driven by a pursuit of truth; they were driven by a pursuit of Trump.
In my last column, I offered a way of proving Trump supporters are not racists. The timing was, unfortunately, perfect. I could not anticipate how two horrific mass shootings would enable the left — the press, the Democrats, academics and Hollywood — to scream even louder than before that Trump and his supporters are racists and that their racism is why such shootings are taking place.
This is all predicated on what may be the most glaring lie of all: that, after the Charlottesville demonstrations, President Trump said Nazis are &#8220;fine people.&#8221;
The president never said there were fine Nazis. The left-wing assertion that the president of the United States said there were fine Nazis will long endure as an example of something that has been true since Lenin: Truth is not a left-wing value. Truth is a liberal value, and it is a conservative value. But it is not left-wing value. A leftist says whatever is necessary to gain power.
By remarkable coincidence, this week&#8217;s PragerU video is titled &#8220;The Charlottesville Lie.&#8221; It proves the president never said Nazis were fine people. When Trump said there were &#8220;very fine people on both sides,&#8221; he was referring to people demonstrating in Charlottesville for and against tearing down a statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee, not to Nazis and Antifa.
The video is presented by CNN political commentator Steve Cortes, a voice of courage in the herd known as the mainstream American media. At this moment, of PragerU&#8217;s 325 videos, Cortes&#8217;s &#8220;The Charlottesville Lie&#8221; is the one I most want Americans to watch. The harm that the media and others on the left have done and continue to do to this country by charging the president with praising Nazis and other white supremacists is incalculable. It has only served to inflame and divide Americans: the tens of millions who believe the lie and the tens of millions who know the truth.
Typical of the former is author Wajahat Ali, whose attack on supporters of the president recently appeared in The Atlantic, which identifies Ali as &#8220;the lead author of &#8230; Fear Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America.&#8221; Ali has the audacity to write: &#8220;I feel compelled to ask Trump supporters: Is it worth it? How many have to suffer for you to feel great again?&#8221; The Atlantic is proud to publish such hate-inducing mendacity.
And the Left accuses conservatives of hate.
Aside from the clear evidence that the president never called Nazis &#8220;very fine people,&#8221; isn&#8217;t the very idea preposterous? Trump has a Jewish daughter, a Jewish son-in-law and Jewish grandchildren. Nazis want Jews dead. How do all the New York Times columnists, CNN anchors and correspondents and Democratic officeholders who say the president called Nazis fine people and who believe the president is a white supremacist reconcile those two facts?
They don&#8217;t — because they can&#8217;t, and because they can get away with saying anything they want. When a nation&#8217;s media and one of the two dominant parties are in lockstep, they can lie all they want.
New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand said, referring to El Paso: &#8220;(Trump) has created a national emergency of rampant white nationalism across the country. &#8230; I think we need to blame President Trump and the rhetoric he&#8217;s used since he got elected.&#8221;
Beto O&#8217;Rourke, in an obscenity-laced statement against the president the day after El Paso:
&#8220;He&#8217;s not tolerating racism, he&#8217;s promoting racism. He&#8217;s not tolerating violence, he&#8217;s inciting racism and violence in this country. We shouldn&#8217;t be asking if &#8230; he&#8217;s responsible for this when we know the answer.&#8221;
Meanwhile, half a day later, there was another mass shooting at a popular nightspot in Dayton, Ohio, resulting in nine deaths, including the shooter&#8217;s sister. Not much political hay against the president is being made of that one because, according to early reports, the shooter was a leftist, antifa-supporting Democrat who said he&#8217;d be happy to vote for Elizabeth Warren.
It is worth recalling that after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the American media blamed the assassination on right-wing bigotry that, they said, permeated Dallas. That Kennedy was murdered by a communist quickly disappeared from media descriptions of the assassination. Today, it is all but unknown to the American people.
Lee Harvey Oswald was a communist. And President Trump is not a white supremacist. No matter what the press says.
P.S. I just learned that within hours of PragerU posting &#8220;The Charlottesville Lie,&#8221; Google placed it on YouTube&#8217;s restricted list — just two weeks after a Senate hearing at which a Google representative swore under oath that Google doesn&#8217;t censor on the basis of political views. The ease with which the Left lies is breathtaking.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

PRAGER: America Is Drowning In The Left’s Lies About Trump

Media

Media Bias

Every non-liberal leftist — that is, nearly every Democrat running for president, New York Times and Washington Post columnist, CNN and MSNBC host, and your left-wing brother-in-law — labels every Trump supporter and, of course, President Donald Trump, a &#8220;racist.&#8221;
And they don&#8217;t stop there. Leftists don&#8217;t only label the half of the country that supports the president &#8220;racist,&#8221; they label all whites and America itself &#8220;racist.&#8221; If your son or daughter attends or recently attended an American university, it is close to certain he or she was repeatedly told that America and all whites are racist. According to the left, whites are divided between those who admit they are racist and those who don&#8217;t admit it.
Every conservative and many liberals know this is a big lie. The great question is: Do leftists believe it? It is impossible to know. But this we do know: If you repeat something often enough, and if your Weltanschauung (worldview) and that which gives your life meaning are dependent upon believing something, you will eventually believe it.
So here is a way to show it is a lie.
Ask any white conservative, including one who supports Trump, the following three questions:
1) Do you have more in common with, and are you personally more comfortable in the company of, a white leftist or a black conservative?
2) Would you rather have nine white leftists or nine black conservatives on the U.S. Supreme Court?
3) Would you rather your child marry a black Christian conservative or a white non-Christian liberal?
A white racist would prefer the whites in each case.
I have asked these questions of thousands of Trump supporters at lectures and on my radio show. Not once has a white Trump-supporting conservative said he or she would be more comfortable in the presence of a white leftist than a black conservative, or would prefer an all-white liberal Supreme Court to an all-black conservative Supreme Court. Not once has a white Christian conservative said he or she would prefer their child marry a white non-Christian liberal to a black Christian conservative.
If you&#8217;re an honest leftist, this should present a powerful challenge to your belief that all white conservatives are racist.
But it won&#8217;t. Leftists have too much at stake to confront the truth about conservatives. Everything the left has ever believed has depended upon lying about opponents. From the day Stalin labeled Trotsky — who served as the head of the Red Army and who, along with Lenin, founded the Bolshevik Party — a &#8220;fascist,&#8221; leftists have lied about their opponents.
Some liberals lie and some conservatives lie, but the truth is both a liberal and conservative value. It has never been a left-wing value. Any leftist who would commit himself to the truth would cease being a leftist. He would either become an anti-left liberal or an anti-left conservative.
&#8220;America is racist.&#8221; &#8220;Whites are racist.&#8221; &#8220;Trump supporters are racist.&#8221; These are all big lies.
So, then, given how important it is to leftists to maintain the lie of conservative racism — along with xenophobia, misogyny, transphobia and Islamophobia — how would they rebut conservatives&#8217; answers to these questions?
Presumably, they would argue that every conservative who responds to these questions as I described is lying.
But these questions are important — no matter how much leftists ignore or dismiss them — because they perform an important service for conservatives.
I know this from Jewish history. There was so much Jew-hatred in the medieval Christian world that Jews sometimes wondered if there was any truth to the attacks on them. When a whole society denigrates a group, members of the denigrated group start wondering whether any of the attacks on them have any truth. But when the charge of blood libel — that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood to bake matzos for Passover — arose, it liberated Jews from taking any of the anti-Semites&#8217; attacks seriously. Every Jew knew the blood libel was a lie — Jews never consumed animal blood, let alone human blood.
Every conservative knows his responses to these three questions are heartfelt and true, so these questions can help conservatives come to see the left&#8217;s charge of conservative racism as medieval Jews came to see the anti-Semites&#8217; blood libel charge: as a lie.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

PRAGER: How To Tell If A Trump Supporter Is Racist

Racism

Last week, at the invitation of Sen. Ted Cruz, I spoke to the Senate Judiciary Committee about Google&#8217;s having placed more than 60 Prager University videos on its restricted list. Any family that filters out pornography and violence cannot see those particular videos on YouTube (which is owned by Google); nor can any school or library.
This statement is as much about what I and PragerU stand for as it is about Google. Those interested in viewing the presentation can do so <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llt6kiwKwVI">here</a>:
It is an honor to be invited to speak in the United States Senate. But I wish I were not so honored. Because the subject of this hearing — Google and YouTube&#8217;s (and for that matter, Twitter and Facebook&#8217;s) suppression of internet content on ideological grounds — threatens the future of America more than any external enemy.
In fact, never in American history has there been as strong a threat to freedom of speech as there is today.
Before addressing this, however, I think it important that you know a bit about me and the organization I co-founded, Prager University — PragerU, as it often referred to.
I was born in Brooklyn, New York. My late father, Max Prager, was a CPA and an Orthodox Jew who volunteered to serve in the U.S. Navy at the start of World War II. My father&#8217;s senior class thesis at the City College of New York was on anti-Semitism in America. Yet, despite his keen awareness of the subject, he believed that Jews living in America were the luckiest Jews to have ever lived.
He was right. Having taught Jewish history at Brooklyn College, written a book on antisemitism and fought Jew-hatred my whole life, I thank God for living in America.
It breaks my heart that a vast number of young Americans have not only not been taught how lucky they are to be Americans but have been taught either how unlucky they are or how ashamed they should be.
It breaks my heart for them because contempt for one&#8217;s country leaves a terrible hole in one&#8217;s soul and because ungrateful people always become unhappy and angry people.
And it breaks my heart for America because no good country can survive when its people have contempt for it.
I have been communicating this appreciation of America for 35 years as a radio talk show host, the last 20 in national syndication with the Salem Radio Network — an organization that is a blessing in American life. One reason I started PragerU was to communicate America&#8217;s moral purpose and moral achievements, both to young Americans and to young people around the world. With a billion views a year, and with more than half of the viewers under age 35, PragerU has achieved some success.
My philosophy of life is easily summarized: God wants us to be good. Period. God without goodness is fanaticism and goodness without God will not long endure. Everything I and PragerU do emanates from belief in the importance of being a good person. That some label us extreme or &#8220;haters&#8221; only reflects on the character and the broken moral compass of those making such accusations. They are the haters and extremists.
PragerU releases a five-minute video every week. Our presenters include three former prime ministers, four Pulitzer Prize winners, liberals, conservatives, gays, blacks, Latinos, atheists, believers, Jews, Christians, Muslims and professors and scientists from MIT, Harvard, Stanford and a dozen other universities.
Do you think the secretary-general of NATO; or the former prime ministers of Norway, Canada or Spain; or the late Charles Krauthammer; or Philip Hamburger, distinguished professor of law at Columbia Law School, would make a video for an extreme or hate-filled site? The idea is not only preposterous; it is a smear.
Yet, Google, which owns YouTube, has restricted access to 56 of our 320 five-minute videos and to other videos we produce. &#8220;Restricted&#8221; means families that have a filter to avoid pornography and violence cannot see that video. It also means that no school or library can show that video.
Google has even restricted access to a video on the Ten Commandments &#8230; Yes, the Ten Commandments!
We have repeatedly asked Google why our videos are restricted. No explanation is ever given.
But of course, we know why: because they come from a conservative perspective.
Liberals and conservatives differ on many issues. But they have always agreed that free speech must be preserved. While the left has never supported free speech, liberals always have. I therefore appeal to liberals to join us in fighting on behalf of America&#8217;s crowning glory — free speech. Otherwise, I promise you, one day you will say, &#8220;First they came after conservatives, and I said nothing. And then they came after me. And there was no one left to speak up for me.&#8221;
Thank you.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

PRAGER: America, Google And Me: My Senate Speech

Censorship

Dennis Prager

Prager University

Technology

YouTube

For the first time in my life, I did not root for an American team. Whatever the sport, I have always rooted American. But if those who called into my radio show were representative of my audience, many millions of Americans made the same sad choice.
It takes a lot for people like me not to root for an American team. But Megan Rapinoe, the foul-mouthed star of the team, and her fellow players made it possible.
The U.S. women&#8217;s team disgraced itself. Either its members were cowed into submission by Rapinoe or they agreed (or, at least, never disagreed) with her attacks on the president, her reference to the White House as the &#8220;f—-ing White House,&#8221; her refusal since 2016 to participate in the national anthem and her repeatedly shouting during the team&#8217;s parade in New York City, &#8220;New York, you&#8217;re the motherf—-ing best!&#8221;
For example, Rapinoe said, &#8220;Every member of the team that I have talked to would not go&#8221; to the White House.
Rapinoe is a great soccer player. Other than that, she is unimpressive. She comes across as arrogant, a fool and a lowlife.
Why a fool? Because she thinks she has something important to say to the American people and that we need to hear it because she is a great soccer player. She is not alone in this conceit. Tom Steyer and other billionaires think the same thing about themselves: that because they are better at making money than almost everybody, they must be wiser than almost everybody.
People who excel in one thing are tempted to think they are smart about everything, but that is almost never the case. There is no reason at all to assume that people who excel in anything (other than wisdom) are wiser than anybody else. And here&#8217;s the kicker (no pun intended): People who think they are wise because they excel at something unrelated to wisdom are fools.
And why is Rapinoe a lowlife? What would you label any adult who constantly used the F-word in public (especially during events when children are expected to be present or watching)? Or does being a star — like the foul-mouthed Robert De Niro — make you less of a lowlife?
The American women&#8217;s soccer team is unified in protesting on behalf of &#8220;equal pay for equal work.&#8221; They regard their team as a perfect example because its members receive less money than members of the U.S. men&#8217;s soccer team — despite the fact that the women have a much better record.
But there is a reason the male players earn more. Among other things — such as the women&#8217;s team&#8217;s vote for financial security in the form of guaranteed salaries rather than revenue share — men&#8217;s soccer generates far more money than women&#8217;s soccer.
According to the Los Angeles Times: FIFA&#8217;s &#8220;2018 financial report said it earned revenue of $5.357 billion from the men&#8217;s tournament in Russia. &#8230; Forbes estimated the Women&#8217;s World Cup will generate about $131 million for the four-year cycle ending in 2022.&#8221;
So, unless people should be paid according to gender (which they now are in Norway) rather than according to revenue and profits, male soccer players will earn more money than female soccer players.
There are only two ways to equitably ensure male and female players earn the same amount of money. One is to pool all the money earned by both teams and then distribute an equal amount to all the players, men and women. The other is to end sex-based teams: Men and women compete to play on one team (composed of both men and women), and any woman who makes the team is guaranteed the same income as any man on the team.
Until then, the women&#8217;s soccer team and the left want to have their cake and eat it, too. (Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, for example, tweeted this non sequitur: &#8220;Here&#8217;s an idea: If you win 13-0 — the most goals for a single game in World Cup history — you should be paid at least equally to the men&#8217;s team.&#8221;) They want women to have their own soccer teams — because biology has made it impossible for almost any woman to successfully compete with men in sports — yet earn the same amount as men do. But the reality is more people will watch men play soccer, just as more people watch major league baseball than minor league baseball — which is why major league baseball players earn more money than minor league players. But if we applied the equal-pay-for-equal-work principle to baseball, minor league and major league players would be paid the same amount.
With their politicization of their victory, their expletive-filled speech and their publicly expressed contempt for half their fellow citizens, the women of the U.S. women&#8217;s soccer team succeeded in endearing themselves to America&#8217;s left. But they earned the rest of the country&#8217;s disdain, which is sad. We really wanted to love the team.
What we have here is yet another example of perhaps the most important fact in the contemporary world: Everything the left touches, it ruins.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

PRAGER: We All Wanted To Love The Women&#8217;s Soccer Team

Feminism

Megan Rapinoe

Soccer

Trump Administration

If you watched either or both of the two Democratic Party presidential candidate debates, and if you are a liberal, a conservative or a centrist, you had to have been depressed. The intellectual shallowness, the demagoguery and the alienation from reality were probably unprecedented in American political history. Only a leftist, a socialist or a communist could have gone to bed a happy person on either night.
If you think this is a baseless generalization, here are a few of myriad examples from the first night:
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.: &#8220;(The economy is not doing great) for the African Americans and Latinx whose families are torn apart, whose lives are destroyed and whose communities are ruined.&#8221;
Two things stand out: First is Warren&#8217;s morally reprehensible and false description of the economy. She never explains how the American economy is tearing families apart, destroying lives or ruining communities. Aside from being baseless, it is another left-wing libel against America.
She went on to explain economic inequality in America: &#8220;Corruption, pure and simple. We need to call it out.&#8221; It is difficult to overstate the contempt she and the rest of the left have for America.
Even more troubling was Warren&#8217;s use of the term &#8220;Latinx.&#8221; When leftist Orwellian newspeak makes its way into the United States Senate and into the vocabulary of a presidential candidate, the country is in trouble.
Here is how HuffPost explains the term (of which it approves):
&#8220;Latinx is the gender-neutral alternative to Latino, Latina and even Latin@. &#8230; Latinx is quickly gaining popularity among the general public. It&#8217;s part of a &#8216;linguistic revolution&#8217; that aims to move beyond gender binaries and is inclusive of the intersecting identities of Latin American descendants. In addition to men and women from all racial backgrounds, Latinx also makes room for people who are trans, queer, agender, non-binary, gender non-conforming or gender fluid.&#8221;
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn.: &#8220;If billionaires can pay off their yachts, students should be able to pay off their student loans.&#8221;
My only response to this statement is to ask, Do most Democrats find that a compelling argument? Do they not realize what a non sequitur it is — and therefore how demagogic?
Billionaires, like non-billionaires, pay off their debts because they do not incur debts they cannot repay, not because they are billionaires. Senator Klobuchar apparently believes that non-billionaires need not pay off their debts. Every Democrat who addressed this issue said American society should repay student debts — which amount to $1.6 trillion. The party of &#8220;fairness&#8221; thinks it&#8217;s fair that every student who repaid his or college debts — and every young American who never went to college — must pay off that debt.
Former Rep. Beto O&#8217;Rourke, D-Texas, Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro spoke in Spanish. Perhaps they — like all on the left — are unaware of the importance of all Americans speaking English in uniting the most ethnically disparate nation in human history. You cannot say &#8220;diversity is our strength&#8221; if you do not work to unite all the diverse cultures into Americans. And you cannot unite Americans without one language.
Their speaking Spanish was so transparently pandering to Latin, Latino, Latina, Latin@ and Latinx Americans that, for that reason alone, that group should decline to vote Democrat.
O&#8217;Rourke: &#8220;This economy has got to work for everyone. And right now, we know that it isn&#8217;t.&#8221;
This is just not true. Given some of the lowest unemployment rates in modern American history, this economy seems to be working quite well — certainly for all those willing to work.
Booker: &#8220;This is actually an economy that&#8217;s hurting small businesses and not allowing them to compete.&#8221;
The question I always want answered when someone on the left tells an outright lie is, Does he or she believe it? Someone should ask this of Booker. As the National Federation of Independent Businesses announced last month:
&#8220;Optimism among small business owners has surged back to historically high levels, thanks to strong hiring, investment, and sales,&#8221; said NFIB President and CEO Juanita D. Duggan. &#8220;The small business half of the economy is leading the way, taking advantage of lower taxes and fewer regulations, and reinvesting in their businesses, their employees, and the economy as a whole.&#8221;
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio: &#8220;There&#8217;s plenty of money in this country. It&#8217;s just in the wrong hands. Democrats have to fix that.&#8221;
The notion that America&#8217;s money is &#8220;in the wrong hands, (and) Democrats have to fix that&#8221; should frighten every American who believes in private property and who opposes dictatorships and theft.
Castro: &#8220;I don&#8217;t believe only in reproductive freedom; I believe in reproductive justice.&#8221;
Here&#8217;s an important rule: Whenever anyone adds an adjective to the word &#8220;justice,&#8221; know that the person is not speaking about justice but about something else entirely. &#8220;Social&#8221; justice is another such example.
Castro boldly proclaimed his view that unauthorized border crossing should be decriminalized and announced, &#8220;In my first 100 days with immigration reform (I) would put undocumented (i.e., illegal) immigrants, as long as they haven&#8217;t committed a serious crime, on a pathway to citizenship.&#8221;
Though not one Democrat candidate used the term, every single one believes in open borders.
NBC reporter Lester Holt: &#8220;So, a show of hands: Who as president would sign on to the 2015 nuclear deal as it was originally negotiated?&#8221;
Every Democrat was for returning to the original Iran nuclear agreement. For those Americans who believe Iran is the greatest threat to peace in the world, and the greatest sponsor of international terrorism, this alone should determine their vote.
I have chosen only a few examples — and only from the first debate — to illustrate how low the Democratic Party has sunk morally and intellectually. Americans who love America — or just love reason or truth or real people, as opposed to abstract ideas — cannot justify voting Democrat in 2020.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

PRAGER: D Is For Damaged, Dangerous And Delusional

Beto O'Rourke

Bill de Blasio

Cory Booker

In order to make arguments for nationalism, we have to define it.
The first definition in Merriam-Webster is &#8220;loyalty and devotion to a nation.&#8221; But in a second paragraph, it adds, &#8220;especially: a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups.&#8221;
Let&#8217;s be clear: If the second paragraph is the only definition of nationalism, nationalism is always a bad thing. Furthermore, I acknowledge that this definition is what some people have in mind when they call themselves nationalists.
At the same time, even anti-nationalists would have to acknowledge that if the first paragraph is the definition of &#8220;nationalism,&#8221; nationalism can often be a beautiful thing.
So, if we are to be honest, the answer to the question of whether nationalism is good or bad is &#8220;How do you define it?&#8221;
Dictionary.com offers seven definitions.
The first is &#8220;spirit or aspirations common to the whole nation.&#8221;
The second is &#8220;devotion and loyalty to one&#8217;s own country; patriotism.&#8221;
Only when we get to the third definition is the definition pejorative: &#8220;excessive patriotism; chauvinism.&#8221;
Therefore, a) based on the competing definitions of the term, b) assuming both definitions can be true and c) if intellectual honesty is to govern our discussion, we can reach only one conclusion: There is good nationalism and bad nationalism.
That — not &#8220;nationalism is always good&#8221; or &#8220;nationalism is always bad&#8221; — is the only accurate assessment.
Therefore, morally speaking, nationalism is no different from anything else in life.
There is moral violence (in self-defense, in defense of innocents, in defense of a society under unjust attack, etc.) and immoral violence (murder of innocents, wars of aggression, etc.).
There is moral sex (consensual sex between adults and, in the Judeo-Christian value system, within marriage) and immoral sex (such as rape, incest and with a child).
There is moral use of a gun (in self-defense, etc.) and immoral use of a gun (against an innocent, etc.).
Knives are used morally by chefs and surgeons and immorally by murderers, muggers and torturers.
Even love must be morally assessed according to context. Love is not always beautiful and moral. Germans&#8217; love of Hitler, Chinese people&#8217;s love of Mao and Russians&#8217; love of Stalin were evil.
Nationalism is beautiful when it involves commitment to an essentially decent nation and when it welcomes other people&#8217;s commitment to their nations. Nationalism is evil when it is used to celebrate an evil regime, when it celebrates a nation as inherently superior to all others and when it denigrates all other national commitments.
One should add that nationalism is evil when it celebrates race, but that is not nationalism; it is racism. Nationalism and racism may be conjoined, as German Nazism did. But they are not definitionally related. While some Americans have conjoined American nationalism with race (such as the Confederacy, the Ku Klux Klan and currently various fringe &#8220;white identity&#8221; movements), American nationalism, based as it is on the motto &#8220;e pluribus unum&#8221; (&#8220;out of many, one&#8221;), by definition includes Americans of all races and ethnicities. That is how conservatives define American nationalism. I have never met a conservative who defined American national identity as definitionally &#8220;white.&#8221;
Otherwise, nationalism — the celebration of one&#8217;s nation and one&#8217;s national identity — is almost always a beautiful thing.
The creation of nations was a major moral achievement. It got people to identify with something beyond their families and tribes, which always involved violent feuds and warfare. The creation of the nation is one of the main reasons the West developed morally and in many other ways ahead of other cultures.
And the lack of a unifying national identity is one of the two main reasons (the other being corruption) that much of Africa lags behind other regions. If Hutus and Tutsis would have identified first as Rwandans, one of the worst genocides in the contemporary world — the Hutu slaughter of nearly 1 million Tutsis in a little over three months in 1994 — would likely never have happened. It was murder at a greater pace than the Nazi genocide of the Jews in the Holocaust — and without any modern machines of death. It was done one-on-one almost entirely using machetes.
Today, nationalism in Europe is increasing primarily because of the belief among many Europeans that the European Union is overbearing and because many Europeans do not believe that a &#8220;European&#8221; identity can offer anywhere near the comfort, emotional sustenance and communal ties a national identity offers.
Human beings need a descending order of commitments: first to oneself, then to one&#8217;s family, then to one&#8217;s community, then to one&#8217;s nation and then to humanity. It is neither possible nor praiseworthy to cry over a family killed in a car crash on the other side of the world as one would cry over the death of one&#8217;s own family or a family in one&#8217;s neighborhood or in one&#8217;s own country.
The great teaching of the Bible is &#8220;Love your neighbor as yourself.&#8221; It does not say &#8220;Love all of humanity as yourself.&#8221; Love must begin with our neighbor. It should never end with our neighbor, but it must begin with him.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

PRAGER: Clarity About Nationalism

Patriotism

When assessing America&#8217;s or any of the Western world&#8217;s universities &#8212; wondering whether you should send your child to one; whether you should pay for a child to attend one; whether you should go into great debt to attend one; whether you should donate money to one; and related questions &#8212; it would seem that the single most important question to be answered is: What type of person does the university produce?
It is hard to imagine any parent &#8212; left, right, liberal, conservative or apolitical &#8212; who would disagree with asking this question. They would disagree about what constituted a desirable outcome &#8212; obviously left-wing parents would want their child&#8217;s college to send home a child with left-wing views, and a parent on the right would not be happy if their child returned home with left-wing views &#8212; but every parent would agree that the question, &#8220;What type of person did college produce?&#8221; is an important one.
My belief is that most of the time, colleges today produce a worse human being or, at the very least, a person who is no better, wiser or more mature than when he or she graduated high school.
Let&#8217;s begin with behavioral issues.
There is a good chance your son or daughter will have spent much of his or her free time at college partying, which often means getting drunk, smoking marijuana and hooking up with someone for casual sex. While none of those activities necessarily means your son or daughter became a worse human being, all of us can agree that none of them made your child a better one.
Regarding college drinking, Alcohol Rehab Guide, an online alcohol addiction site, reports:
&#8220;A large percentage of college students consume alcohol by binge drinking. &#8230; For men, binge drinking involves drinking five or more alcoholic beverages in two hours. On the other hand, binge drinking for women is considered four or more drinks within a two-hour time period.&#8221;
The website also states that &#8220;Roughly 80 percent of college students &#8212; four out of every five &#8212; consume alcohol to some degree. It&#8217;s estimated that 50 percent of those students engage in binge drinking &#8230; &#8220;
BMC Public Health reported in 2013:
&#8220;One young adult in two has entered university education in Western countries. &#8230; (This) is often associated with risky behaviour such as excessive alcohol consumption. &#8230; We found that the more a student was exposed to college environmental factors, the greater the risk of heavy, frequent, and abusive drinking. Alcohol consumption increased for students living on campus, living in a dormitory with a higher number of room-mates, and having been in the University for a long spell.&#8221;
And we are all aware of the sexual activity that emanates from college drinking and can be regretted the next day (usually by the woman).
Then there is depression and mental illness at college. In the words of clinical psychologist Gregg Henriques through Psychology Today, &#8220;It is neither an exaggeration nor is it alarmist to claim that there is a mental health crisis today facing America&#8217;s college students. Evidence suggests that this group has greater levels of stress and psychopathology than any time in the nation&#8217;s history.&#8221;
Now, let&#8217;s move on to values and character.
Did your son or daughter (or niece or nephew, grandson or granddaughter) return home from college:
More, less or equally kind a person?
More, less or equally respectful of you, his or her parent(s)?
More, less or equally grateful to you for the monetary sacrifice you made to enable him or her to attend college?
More, less or equally proud to be an American?
More, less or equally respectful of religion?
More, less or equally wise?
More, less or equally committed to free speech?
More, less or equally open to hearing views he or she disagrees with?
I think I know the answers to those questions, in most instances. But far more important than what I assume is what you will find out. Please ask not only the college students and recent college graduates but their parents and other relatives these questions.
Then decide whether you want to risk sending your child to a place that will greatly increase their chances of being depressed, engaging in binge drinking and learning nothing important &#8212; while being taught how awful America is, why speech he or she doesn&#8217;t agree with should be suppressed, how pathetic religious Christians and Jews are, how wonderful religious Muslims are and how important skin color is.
I acknowledge that students who are entering STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) fields must attend college. But for most of the rest, sending your child to college is playing Russian roulette with their values, character and even joy of life.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

PRAGER: Did Your Child Return From College A Better Person?

Education

The sadistic treatment of Paul Manafort illustrates something I have believed since I attended graduate school in the 1970s and saw the behavior of left-wing students: Leftism makes people meaner.
There are kind and mean conservatives and kind and mean liberals. Neither liberalism nor conservatism makes people kinder or meaner. But this is not the case with leftism. With the handful of exceptions that accompany every generalization, leftism makes people meaner, even crueler.
Take the transfer of Manafort, the one-time Trump campaign manager, from a federal prison to New York&#8217;s Rikers Island prison. Rikers Island is universally regarded as a wretched place. As Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz wrote:
&#8220;The decision to move Paul Manafort &#8230; from the decent federal prison to which he was sentenced to solitary confinement to the dangerous hell hole that is New York City&#8217;s Rikers Island seems abusive and possibly illegal.
&#8220;I know Rikers well having spent time there visiting numerous defendants accused of murder and other violent crimes. It is a terrible place that no one should ever be sent to.&#8221;
Mass murderers and torturers are among those incarcerated at Rikers Island.
Moreover, Manafort, found guilty solely for white-collar crimes, will be placed in solitary confinement &#8212; &#8220;for his own safety.&#8221;
Virtually everyone who has written about solitary confinement, both on the right and the left, deems it torture. Manafort will therefore be tortured after being sentenced to seven years&#8217; imprisonment for fraud and, in the words of the Daily Wire, &#8220;a little-known law that requires lobbyists to report that they are working on behalf of a foreign government (in Manafort&#8217;s case, Ukraine).&#8221;
Angry over the possibility that Manafort may be pardoned by President Trump, the Manhattan District Attorney, Cyrus Vance, charged Manafort with additional crimes based on state law. That way, if found guilty of state offenses, he cannot be pardoned by Trump, as the president&#8217;s power to pardon applies only to federal &#8212; not state &#8212; crimes.
Everyone knows this prosecution is politically motivated. Vance hates the president and wants to use solitary confinement in a hellhole with violent criminals to squeeze Manafort into testifying against the president.
As Dershowitz said to me on my radio show, what Vance is doing reminds him of Stalin and Beria &#8212; the infamous state prosecutor, a man Stalin referred to as &#8220;my Himmler.&#8221; Dershowitz, a lifelong liberal Democrat and supporter of Hillary Clinton, does not use Stalin analogies loosely.
To her credit, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tweeted: &#8220;A prison sentence is not a license for gov torture and human rights violations. That&#8217;s what solitary confinement is. Manafort should be released, along with all people being held in solitary.&#8221;
I might add that my opposition to Manafort&#8217;s treatment is not partisan or new. On a number of occasions over the years, I have cited favorably New York Review of Books articles describing the horror of solitary confinement.
Despite its history of opposition to solitary confinement, The New York Times article reporting the plan to relocate Manafort said nothing against the unnecessary transfer but did comment on the expensive suits Manafort used to wear.
Solitary confinement is &#8220;basically a deathtrap,&#8221; former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik wrote when Manafort was placed in solitary at his federal prison. Manafort should never have been sentenced to solitary confinement. But Robert Mueller (and Judge Amy Berman Jackson) sought it for the same political reason Vance has: to break the man.
As former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell wrote: &#8220;When a witness or defendant from whom prosecutors want &#8216;cooperation&#8217; does not do as they demand, they put him in solitary confinement. And it works. It literally breaks people.
&#8220;Solitary does have a place in our prison system, but only for those people who are simply too dangerous to be placed around others at all. However, the torture of solitary confinement should never be used as it is now to break people to prosecutors&#8217; will &#8212; to torture them until they will say or do anything to get out.
&#8220;Solitary is also called the &#8216;hole.&#8217; It&#8217;s a small space, barely large enough to stand, with a slit for light, to which prisoners are confined/caged for 23 hours a day. &#8230;
&#8220;Paul Manafort, seventy years old, has endured this torture for eight months. He&#8217;s now in a wheelchair, while Judge Amy Berman Jackson mocks his rapidly deteriorating health. Where is the outcry from the ACLU?&#8221;
So, then, what enables Vance, Mueller and Jackson to engage in such evil?
The only answer is their politics &#8212; the politics of the Trump-hating left. Cyrus Vance, Robert Mueller and Amy Berman Jackson may well be good parents, loving spouses, loyal friends and charitable individuals. But leftism has given them permission to act vilely and mercilessly while thinking of themselves as fine people &#8212; just as evil doctrines have done throughout history.
As noted at the beginning of this column, when I was at Columbia, I witnessed this leftist mean-spiritedness firsthand in the personal cruelty of left-wing agitators against professors and others with whom they differed.
Here&#8217;s a question perhaps millions of parents will be able to answer: If your child returned home from college a leftist, was he or she a kinder or meaner person than before he or she left for college?
The question is rhetorical.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in April 2018, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Exodus. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

PRAGER: Leftism Makes People Meaner: Reflections On The Torture Of Paul Manafort

Crime

Paul Manafort

Prison

Menu