Progressive castoffs don’t get to define the right



When woke mobs began chasing off guest speakers from college campuses and elite institutions started investigating scientists over minor infractions against gender orthodoxy, a certain class of moderate progressives realized its reign was ending. Figures like Sam Harris, Bari Weiss, and Michael Shermer weren’t conservatives by any stretch. In the George W. Bush or Barack Obama years, they would have qualified as mainstream progressives. But they couldn’t keep pace with the radical left.

These disaffected progressives needed a new label. But they couldn’t bring themselves to align with the “backward” conservatives they’d spent careers ridiculing. Venture capitalist Eric Weinstein coined the term “Intellectual Dark Web,” which Weiss attempted to popularize in the New York Times. But most settled on “classical liberal” to describe their stance. The problem? They had spent years rejecting classical liberalism.

Disillusioned progressives are not conservatives. They’re not classical liberals, either. They don’t get to define the future of the right.

“Classical liberal” serves as the ideal label for repackaging Obama-era liberalism in a way that reassures Republicans while keeping a safe distance from the woke left. It sounds moderate compared to identity politics. It evokes America’s founders — Washington, Jefferson, Adams. If you want to appear reasonable to conservatives while shielding yourself from attacks on your right flank, aligning with the founders is a smart move.

Whether the branding strategy was intentional remains debatable. What’s not in question is how badly this self-description distorted classical liberalism.

Some members of the Intellectual Dark Web drifted right. Most did not. They held tightly to progressive instincts. Many were atheists. Some had built careers in the New Atheist movement, penning books mocking Christianity and debating apologists for sport. Several were openly gay, and most championed same-sex marriage. These were not defenders of tradition — they spent decades undermining it.

They didn’t oppose the revolution. They led it — until the mob turned on the parts they still cherished, like feminism or science.

Toleration of all ... except atheists

When the Intellectual Dark Web embraced the “classical liberal” label, it did so to defend free speech. Most of these disillusioned progressives had been canceled — for “misgendering” someone, for not parroting the latest racial orthodoxies, or for refusing to bow to ideological litmus tests. They longed for an earlier version of progressivism, one where they still held the reins, and radical activists didn’t dictate the terms of debate.

This shared frustration became the rallying point between conservatives and anti-woke liberals. Free speech offered common ground, so both sides leaned into it. But classical liberalism involves far more than vague nods to open dialogue.

Some trace liberalism’s roots to Machiavelli or Hobbes. But in the American tradition, it begins with John Locke. Much of the Declaration of Independence reads like Thomas Jefferson channeling Locke — right down to the line about “life, liberty, and property,” slightly rewritten as “the pursuit of happiness.”

In “A Letter Concerning Toleration,” Locke argued for religious toleration among Christian sects. He even entertained the idea of tolerating Catholics — if they renounced allegiance to the pope. But Locke drew a hard line at one group: atheists.

“Lastly, those are not at all to be tolerated who deny the being of a God,” Locke wrote. “Promises, covenants, and oaths, which are the bonds of human society, can have no hold upon an atheist ... [they] undermine and destroy all religion can have no pretense of religion whereupon to challenge the privilege of a toleration.”

For Locke, atheism was social acid. It dissolved the moral glue holding a nation together. A silent unbeliever who kept to himself might avoid trouble — but even then, Locke saw no reason to trust such a man with power. Atheism, in Locke’s view, posed a civilizational threat.

Indispensable religion

Now, consider the irony. Many of today’s self-declared “classical liberals” rose to prominence attacking religion. They led the New Atheist crusade. They mocked believers, ridiculed Christianity, and wrote bestsellers deriding faith as delusion. These weren’t defenders of liberal order. They launched a secular jihad against the very moral foundation that made liberalism possible.

Their adoption of the “classical liberal” label isn’t just unserious. It’s either historically illiterate or deliberately deceptive.

It’s a mistake to treat America’s founders as a monolith. They disagreed — often sharply — and those disagreements animate much of the "Federalist Papers." But one point remains clear: Their understanding of free speech and religious liberty diverged sharply from modern secular assumptions.

RELATED: Labeling you ‘phobic’ is how the left dodges real arguments

sesame via iStock/Getty Images

Even after the Constitution and Bill of Rights were ratified, several states retained official churches. Courts regularly upheld blasphemy laws well into the 20th century. Some state supreme courts continued defending them into the 1970s. Blue laws, which restrict commerce on Sundays to preserve the Sabbath, remain on the books in several states.

John Adams put it plainly: The Constitution was “made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” The founders, and the citizens they represented, expected America to function as an explicitly Christian nation. Free speech and religious liberty existed within that framework — not apart from it.

Skin suit liberalism

So when non-woke liberals claim that “classical liberalism” demands a secular or religiously neutral government, they misrepresent history. That idea would have struck the founders as absurd. The Constitution was not written for New Atheists. Adams said so himself.

Faced with these historical facts, critics usually pivot. They argue that America has morally advanced beyond its founding values. Today, we tolerate non-Christian religions, recognize women’s rights, and legalize same-sex marriage. These changes, they claim, bring us closer to “true” American principles like freedom and equality.

Classical liberalism was a real political tradition — one that helped shape the American founding. It deserves serious treatment. Watching it get paraded around by people who reject its core values is exhausting. If Locke or Adams saw progressive atheists wearing classical liberalism like a skin suit, they’d spin in their graves.

The secular liberalism of the 1990s and early 2000s is not classical liberalism. It isn’t even an ally of conservatism. The non-woke left served as useful co-belligerents against the radical fringe, but they were never true allies — and they should never be allowed to lead the conservative movement.

Some have earned respect. Carl Benjamin, Jordan Peterson, and others have taken real steps to the right, even toward Christianity. That deserves credit. But let’s not kid ourselves. Many who still fly the “classical liberal” banner don’t believe in the values it represents. They reject its religious foundation. They rewrite its history. They co-opt its label while advancing a worldview its founders would have rejected outright.

Disillusioned progressives are not conservatives. They’re not classical liberals, either. They don’t get to define the future of the right. And they certainly don’t get to lead it.

Against Bari Weiss-ism

Anti-woke liberals are positioning themselves as gatekeepers on the right. We should reject their fake process neutralism, and ignore them.

Now It Can Be Told: History Will Not Be Kind To Bitter Joe Biden

Chuck Schumer's tell-all confession about Biden's unfitness to serve as president is telling -- and dangerously too late. He's an accomplice.

Speaker Mike Johnson Confirms Shocking Report Of President Biden’s Mental Decline

'I thought, 'We're in serious trouble — who's running the country?'

Cowboys, Billionaires, And Pastors Break Tough Ground To Build Great Books Colleges

Parents, teachers, philanthropists, and students aren’t waiting for American higher education to fix itself. They’re pioneering new colleges and universities now.

Mask off: Sam Harris’ Trump Derangement Syndrome revealed in fiery Ben Shapiro debate



Sam Harris was once a key thinker when it came to waking liberals up to the dangers of identity politics on the left. However, that has not stopped him from contracting a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, which he has tragically been unable to shake.

“My original claim, Sam, is that Donald Trump is very obvious in his excesses. Democrats and the Democratic Party and Kamala Harris are much more, I would say much more, subtle in their excesses,” Ben Shapiro said in a debate with Sam Harris on Bari Weiss’ “The Free Press” podcast. "But those excesses are no less dangerous for being more subtle, in fact, in some ways I think they are more dangerous."

“You can’t use a phrase like ‘no less dangerous.’ Hillary Clinton conceded in 24 hours. That is less dangerous than this continuous provocation that has gone on for years,” Harris responded, referencing Trump’s denial of the 2020 election results.



“I disagree with you,” Shapiro shot back. “I think that the attempt by members of the media, by Hillary Clinton who herself said that Donald Trump was illegitimately elected based on Russian interference in the 2016 election, was highly damaging.”

Harris then acted as though Clinton no longer says anything of the sort.

“She will still claim openly that there was manipulation that took place during the 2016 election,” Shapiro responded, while Harris repeated, “That’s not true.”

Harris then went on to make the case that “the sane thing to say is that there is continuous foreign interference in our elections.”

“Sam, now you’re proposing a double standard. When Hillary says it, it’s totally subtle and fine, and when Trump says it in the most obvious, foolish way, it’s totally different,” Shapiro said, stifling a laugh.

“You’re just missing the relevant details,” Harris concluded.

Dave Rubin of “The Rubin Report” is dismayed to see how bad Harris’ TDS has gotten, as Rubin once looked up to him.

“He’s not missing the relevant details. Hillary repeatedly, multiple times on Twitter and throughout the media, over the course of the four years of Donald Trump’s presidency, referred to him as illegitimate and said that the election was stolen,” Rubin says.

“They also had a sham impeachment, they had 51 intelligence officials who claimed that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation,” he continues, noting Big Tech banned the story.

“You had an entire machine that was designed to destroy Donald Trump,” he adds.

Want more from Dave Rubin?

To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The Obi-Wan factor: 5 celebs whose cancellation made them stronger



A classic “Star Wars” line speaks volumes about today’s culture. Two, actually.

“I’ve got a bad feeling about this,” Han Solo warned in “Star Wars,” a sentiment that applies to virtually every part of America in 2024.

Wallen’s fans recognized both his contrite nature and the two-tier approach to his 'crime.' A Biden family member? Move along, nothing to see here. A beloved country star? Get ‘em!

The other? “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine,” Alec Guinness’ Obi-Wan Kenobi told Darth Vader moments before the villain did just that.

And, spoiler alert, Vader regretted it.

The modern left has tried to cancel several prominent personalities in recent years. Yet, one by one, they not only survived but came back stronger than ever.

In no particular order.

Bari Weiss

The New York Times scribe famously fled the paper in 2020 via a scathing open letter. The left-leaning journalist had had enough of the Old Gray Lady’s extreme bias. The newspaper, in turn, refused to defend her against fellow employees. They called Weiss a Nazi, a racist, and more.

The paper likely figured Weiss would wish she had clammed up and took the abuse.

Hardly.

Weiss picked herself up and joined the Substack revolution. Her newsletter quickly became one of the platform’s most popular feeds. And she wasn’t done.

Weiss went on to create The Free Press, a news outlet dedicated to news, not narrative. The platform became so successful, the New York Times ran a snippy profile on Weiss and her new creation earlier this month.

The newspaper that couldn’t defend her against gross accusations now sees her as more than a rival. Her Free Press is a threat to its news monopoly.

Joe Rogan

The Spotify superstar already stood atop the podcasting world in 2021. And then the usual suspects — as well as a posse of aging rock rebels — allied to bring him down.

Rogan took an adversarial tone to the left’s pandemic response. "Wait," he said. "Why can’t we talk to vaccine critics like Dr. Robert Malone? Should young, healthy people take an experimental vaccine? And if Rogan’s doctors said to take ivermectin as part of a 'kitchen sink' approach to battling COVID-19, why not?"

Rogan didn’t get every pandemic-related item right. Neither did any corporate media outlet, and Rogan never claimed to be a news source.

But by questioning The Narrative(TM) he drew the ire of Neil Young and, by extension, the left. Young yanked his music from Spotify, demanding the company release Rogan. Fellow AARP icons Joni Mitchell, Graham Nash, and David Crosby followed suit.

The left, smelling blood in the water, unearthed old footage during which Rogan used the N-word. He said it without malice and never taunting a person of color, but the lowlight reel forced a rare apology from the comic podcaster.

Things looked grim, and the liberal press piled on.

Except Spotify CEO Daniel Ek stood by Rogan. And, when the smoke cleared, the podcaster renewed his contract and returned to outside platforms like iTunes and YouTube, drastically expanding his cultural reach.

Rogan later spearheaded a comedy revolution in Austin, Texas. His Comedy Mothership is the city’s unofficial stand-up hub, and major talents like Roseanne Barr, Tyler Fischer, Tom Segura, and Tony Hinchcliffe relocated to Austin to partake in Rogan’s free expression revolution.

The 2024 Rogan is bolder than ever, exposing media bias and pushing free speech from his Spotify perch.

Shane Gillis

The husky stand-up forged his fame via his self-deprecating delivery and apolitical musings. He even caught the eye of Lorne Michaels, the guru behind “Saturday Night Live.”

Gillis signed on to join the show’s 45th season, giving the show a voice that wasn’t part of the doctrinaire left.

He had arrived, but social justice warriors begged to differ. They found some of his old podcast routines featuring crude Asian imitations. Gillis was gone, having never set foot on “SNL’s” hallowed stage.

Some SNL regulars fade into the Hollywood woodwork following their show exit. Surely Gillis would fare the same, if not worse.

Except he refused to slink away.

Gillis leaned on YouTube, his loyal fan base, and social media to rebuild his brand. And it worked. He became part of the comedy rebellion, stand-ups who refused to play by the left’s rules. He was neither conservative nor liberal. He was ... funny.

And his star just kept rising.

Need proof? SNL swallowed its corporate pride and invited Gillis on to host an episode earlier this year. That, plus a starring role in the Netflix comedy series “Tires,” proved Gillis out-hustled his critics.

Megyn Kelly

The Fox News superstar left the channel in 2017 for a cushy daytime gig at NBC. Her self-titled talk show struggled in the ratings, leaving her vulnerable on two fronts.

Her Fox News fame had left a permanent target on her back. Weak ratings meant the Peacock network’s investment wasn’t panning out.

So when during a discussion about "offensive" Halloween costumes Kelly wondered aloud why blackface was out of bounds, the left pounced. Kelly’s apology wasn’t enough.

That gave NBC an excuse to cut ties with Kelly even though the network was on the hook for part of her remaining salary.

It seemed unlikely Kelly would slink back to Fox News, and the blackface “scandal” meant no mainstream outlet would take a chance on her. She turned to podcasting, marshalling her velvety voice and hard-news chops to lap the competition.

It worked. The show caught fire, attracting major news players and celebrities alike. The podcast grew and grew, catching the eye of SiriusXM suits.

The satellite service snatched “The Megyn Kelly Show” up, acknowledging its power in an increasingly cluttered media landscape.

Why? Kelly’s brand of reportage is smart, sophisticated, and backed by facts. She slices through corporate media lies and offers transparency at a time when it’s sorely needed.

She even snagged a voice gig on “Mr. Birchum,” the Daily Wire’s irreverent cartoon series to cap her improbably comeback.

Morgan Wallen

The country music star angered the left by defying COVID-19 protocols early in the pandemic. And, as a straight, white country crooner, he checked more unwelcome boxes on the identity politics ledger.

In February 2021, TMZ leaked footage of a drunken Wallen uttering the “N-word.” He didn’t target a person of color, it was just dumb talk amongst friends. Very dumb talk.

Wallen’s career evaporated overnight.

Radio stations boycotted his music. His representatives cut ties with him. Country music awards shows blocked him from attending their galas.

Wallen apologized, went to rehab, and appeared genuinely forlorn about the matter.

Few stars have fallen that far, that fast, for a word uttered away from the stage and without malice. Months later, we’d learn that first son Hunter Biden repeatedly used the N-word in text messages.

Zero repercussions.

Wallen’s fans recognized both his contrite nature and the two-tier approach to his “crime.” A Biden family member? Move along, nothing to see here. A beloved country star? Get ‘em!

Wallen gingerly crept back into the spotlight, and his fans were waiting for him. And how.

“Morgan Wallen Dominated The American Music Industry In 2023 Like No One Else Could,” screamed the Forbes.com headline.

It’s Past Time For American Jews To Abandon The Democrat Party

The choice is easy and clear-cut: One side in this argument is just, right, and moral; the other is dissimulating, immoral, and evil.

Does Bari Weiss Really Oppose Cultural Marxism?

Bari Weiss’s journey of discovering the truths to guide her actions surely mirrors that of many other Americans. Yet, like all of us, she has a lot further to go.

Jerry Seinfeld says he misses 'dominant masculinity' in culture



Jerry Seinfeld said he misses "dominant masculinity" in culture.

During a recent interview with independent journalist Bari Weiss, the iconic comedian discussed the early 1960s during which his movie "Unfrosted" is set — and during which he grew up — and Seinfeld said he's noticed that "an agreed upon hierarchy" has "absolutely vaporized" in the present day.

'I miss a dominant masculinity. Yeah, I get the 'toxic' — thank you, thank you — but still, I like a real man.'

"I think that is why people lean on the horn and drive in the crazy way that they drive because we have no sense of hierarchy," Seinfeld noted, adding that "as humans, we don't really feel comfortable like that, so that is part of what I think is — if you want to talk about nostalgia — that's part of what makes that moment attractive looking back."

He added that "as a man — can I say that? — I've always wanted to be a real man; I never made it. But I really thought when I was in that era — again it was JFK, it was Muhammad Ali, it was Sean Connery, Howard Cosell, you can go all the way down there, 'that's a real man. I wanna be like that someday.'"

Seinfeld also said, "I miss a dominant masculinity. Yeah, I get the 'toxic' — thank you, thank you — but still, I like a real man."

Anything else?

Elsewhere during the interview, Seinfeld addressed anti-Israel sentiment that's fueled college campus protests this spring — and how protesters have even targeted him. Earlier this month, some Duke University graduates walked out of Seinfeld's commencement address.

“It’s so dumb. It's so dumb," he said. "In fact, when we get protesters occasionally, I love to say to the audience, ‘You know, I love that these young people, they’re trying to get engaged with politics ... we have to just correct their aim a little bit."

When Weiss brought up seeing video of protesters calling Seinfeld "Nazi scum" and being shocked when he smiled back and waved, Seinfeld told her, "It's so silly. They want to express this sincere, intense rage, but again, a little off target ... so that’s, to me, comedic."

Also, at one point, when Weiss asked Seinfeld about his trip to Israel after the deadly Oct. 7 Hamas attack, the comedian in a rare moment had to fight really hard to hold back tears after he called his visit the "most powerful experience of my life."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!