If The West Won’t Defend Itself, Third World Hordes Will Destroy Us

We can defeat the people who want to kill our civilization. Or we can weep when the hordes have robbed us of children, spouses, and homes.

Warning: This college course may be bad for your brain



Every August, families spend tens of thousands of dollars on college tuition, housing, meal plans, and textbooks. They compare degree requirements, graduation rates, and campus amenities. Yet many never ask the most basic consumer question: What is actually inside the classes they are buying?

Colleges already label the price. It’s time to label the product.

Americans would not buy food without reading the ingredients or take medicine without knowing something about the possible side effects. College courses, however, are often sold by title and catalog description alone. Students register for “Introduction to History,” “Ethics,” or even a science requirement with little idea of the intellectual assumptions the professor will bring into the lecture hall.

That information can be consequential. A course may pursue knowledge through evidence and argument. It may also subordinate the subject to diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, critical theory, gender ideology, Marxist assumptions, or some other political project.

Ideological activism is not confined to philosophy, literature, or religious studies. It increasingly appears across the curriculum, including in professional programs and “hard” scientific fields.

Parents and students have every right to know whether a professor intends to teach the advertised subject, examine competing arguments, and permit disagreement — or use the classroom to promote a political worldview.

The concern is especially urgent at public universities. Faculty members at state institutions are government employees paid by taxpayers. In Arizona, for example, they undertake obligations to uphold the United States and state constitutions. Taxpayers are therefore entitled to ask whether professors are educating students for citizenship in a constitutional republic or teaching theories fundamentally hostile to it.

That’s why I developed what I call the “Intellectual Nutrition Label.”

The idea is simple. A nutrition label does not order shoppers to buy or reject a product. It tells them what the product contains so they can decide for themselves. The Intellectual Nutrition Label would do the same for college professors and courses.

Using public information — university biographies, curricula vitae, books, articles, interviews, lectures, and course materials — each label would summarize the intellectual content students are likely to encounter. Families should not need graduate training or weeks of research to understand what a professor openly teaches.

RELATED: Trump’s Justice Department is shining a light on woke universities — finally

Angela Lewis/Bloomberg/Getty Images

A useful label might ask:

  • Does the professor encourage the pursuit of knowledge or deny that objective truth exists?
  • Does the course cultivate virtue and self-command or treat desire as its own justification?
  • Does it direct students toward goodness, beauty, and wisdom or toward resentment, envy, and contempt?
  • Does the professor teach students how to examine arguments or tell them which political conclusions a decent person must reach?

A label could also rate qualities such as intellectual honesty, knowledge, virtue, beauty, meaningfulness, and piety. A professor might rank highly for candor and scholarship while receiving a low rating for piety because he publicly rejects belief in God. The point would not be to uncover private opinions or publish anonymous accusations. The ratings would summarize what professors already say about themselves and their work.

Owen Anderson

That distinction is essential. An Intellectual Nutrition Label should not become a blacklist, an invitation to harassment, or a substitute for reading a professor’s work. It must rely on verifiable public evidence, represent a professor’s position fairly, and provide enough sourcing for readers to check the judgment for themselves.

The concept has predecessors. David Horowitz’s 2006 book, “The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America,” documented ideological activism in higher education. The David Horowitz Freedom Center continues to track left-wing activists and organizations. Turning Point USA’s Professor Watchlist sought to alert students to professors who brought political activism into the classroom and briefly maintained a list of recommended faculty.

The Intellectual Nutrition Label would have a narrower purpose: consumer disclosure. It would tell students and parents what intellectual ingredients a professor publicly advertises, in a format ordinary people can understand before registration day.

If a professor teaches that the United States is inherently oppressive, advocates Marxist critical theory, rejects biological sex as fixed, or treats Christianity principally as an instrument of domination, those positions should be documented in the professor’s own publications, biography, lectures, or course materials. An accurate summary of publicly stated beliefs is not censorship.

RELATED: Universities won’t give back the land — but they will bury history

ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images

The more serious objection may be that parents and taxpayers were never expected to notice. Academic language often conceals radical assumptions behind specialized vocabulary. Professors can signal their commitments to colleagues while students discover the course’s real content only after enrollment.

That arrangement is losing its protection. Parents increasingly ask what their children are learning. Taxpayers increasingly ask whether public universities are educating students or recruiting them into political movements. Those are legitimate questions, especially when a single semester can cost more than many families earn in months.

Throughout the coming semester, I will publish Intellectual Nutrition Labels evaluating professors from publicly available evidence. The labels will not decide which courses students may take. They will help families make that decision with their eyes open.

Readers can follow the project on my Substack and at intellectualnutritionlabel.com (coming soon).

When families spend tens of thousands of dollars on a college education, they deserve to know who is teaching, what that professor believes, and which intellectual ingredients will be placed before their children. Colleges already label the price. It’s time to label the product.

Why 'Israel derangement syndrome' is a direct attack on the roots of your faith



As anti-Jewish rhetoric gains traction in some corners of the political right, BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey says the church can no longer afford to stay silent about what she calls “Israel derangement syndrome.”

“The Israel derangement syndrome, the Jewish derangement syndrome that has infected the minds of so many people, that they see Jewish people behind every closed door, that they’re behind every conspiracy, that they’re pulling the strings of power in every single direction, and that everything, somehow every tragedy, every injustice comes back to Israel, that is just beyond the pale,” Stuckey says.

“That is beyond logic. That is beyond reason. I think that there is something spiritual there because we see that same pattern over and over again in so many cultures throughout history and that is anti-Christian,” she continues.

This “Jewish derangement syndrome,” Stuckey says, has “blinded them to reality.”


“Scripture gives us no reason whatsoever to sever Christianity from its Jewish roots. Jesus came as Israel’s Messiah, the fulfillment of the law and the prophets. And the gospel came, according to Romans 1:16, to the Jew first and also to the Greek,” she explains.

“Christianity, it is absolutely true and inarguable, is rooted in God’s covenant with Israel, which Christ fulfilled,” she continues.

“Jesus was born under the Jewish law given to Moses in the Old Testament and came to those who were under the law, to Jews. That was His primary mission field. That’s what He reiterated over and over again,” she adds.

What those with “Israel derangement syndrome” are attempting to do is separate Christianity from Judaism when the Bible makes clear that it’s impossible.

“You cannot when you serve a Jewish savior and a God who does not go back on His promises,” Stuckey says.

“One plan of salvation through Jesus Christ for Jews and Gentiles and every single person. That does not negate the very real Jewish context, Jewish history, Jewish principles that are shared because of the biblical canon, because of the history of who God actually is,” she explains.

Stuckey also points out that many detractors claim that we don’t have Judeo-Christian roots because our founding fathers were not Jewish.

“A lot of the people I see saying that are what you call ‘trad Cath.’ A lot of the people I see pushing back against this Judeo-Christian terminology moniker are Catholic themselves. So if we are going to say we can’t call it Judeo-Christian because the founders weren’t Jewish ... we’re also not going to call it Catholic Christian because the founders weren’t Catholic,” she says.

“When people are saying Judeo-Christian, they’re not saying that some of the founders were Jewish. They were saying, ‘We have these shared principles of people being made by a God whose power and knowledge transcends ours,’” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Some Christians call Trump the Antichrist — but does Scripture agree?



The idea that Donald Trump is the Antichrist warned about in the Bible continues to circulate in some fringe Christian circles. Last month, William Upham — a former Marine and Florida Republican write-in congressional candidate — was arrested and charged for threatening the president after he posted videos calling Trump the Antichrist and saying he “must be killed.”

While Upham is the only one to take his Antichrist claim to criminal levels, he’s certainly not the only professing Christian to accuse Trump of being the Antichrist.

On a recent episode of “Strange Encounters,” Rick Burgess tested this theory by holding it up to Scripture.

“Let me go ahead and just tell you right now: Donald Trump does not meet the criteria, OK?” Rick says bluntly.

The first indicator that Trump doesn’t match the description of Revelation’s beast, he says, is that his communication skills do not hold up to the Antichrist standard.

“I don't think [Trump] is all that great a communicator, and Antichrist will be the most polished politician the world has ever seen. He will be an incredible orator. You will be drawn to the way he speaks, the way he looks. … That right there, it's already over,” says Rick.

But the list of reasons goes far deeper than just rhetorical gifts.

Rick explains that there are three primary theories for the Antichrist’s origin: Gentile/European from a revived Roman Empire, Jewish, or Middle Eastern.

“I don't think that our friend and President Donald Trump is going to meet that very well,” he says.

Further, according 2 Thessalonians 2:4, the Antichrist “will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.”

In 1 John 2:22, an antichrist is anyone who “denies the Father and the Son.”

“I'm not the judge of Donald Trump, and under no circumstance am I given authority by God to judge anyone's eternity, OK?” Rick caveats. “However … the way that I've seen Trump approach his faith ... I don’t believe he is of the church, but I have seen that he's proven he's not an enemy of the church. Antichrist would be an enemy of the church.”

“Antichrist would be someone who tries to get in theology. See, Trump just doesn't know good theology. He isn't trying to change anyone's mind on what Jesus claimed. He's just not doing what Antichrist would be doing,” he adds.

To hear more, watch the episode above.

Want more from Rick Burgess?

To enjoy more bold talk and big laughs, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Gorsuch Abandons Originalism (Again) With Claims America Isn’t A Christian Nation

Justice Gorsuch keeps insisting America was founded as a religiously neutral nation, but the founding-era record tells a very different story.

How Critical Theory Redefines Good As Evil

Bradley Green's latest book, 'What is Critical Theory,' offers valuable insight into how Marxism threatens to undermine the family and subvert Christian morality.