Explore American exceptionalism, free speech, and conservatism ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Perhaps there are those of you who remember the 1968 film starring Richard Burton and Clint Eastwood about a secret World War II mission to rescue an Allied General deep inside Germany at the fictitious Schloss Adler. The movie itself was fiction, but it was indeed an action thriller. I’m surprised Hollywood has not attempted to remake something of that genre. Then again, they should leave this classic alone. They already screwed up Ben-Hur. The motto of the British SAS is “Who Dares Wins,” and as we begin our trek to the 2026 midterm elections, that maxim is more applicable than ever.

This evening, I will be on the campus of the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) to discuss topics of American exceptionalism, illegal immigration, and foreign policy. It is imperative that we do not stop bringing a constitutional conservative message to our American college and university campuses, as we cannot cede any ground to the Marxist left. Am I concerned about “protesters?” Nah, I am a combat veteran. As well, it would be quite interesting to have leftists seeking to shut down the free speech of a Black man who was born in a segregated hospital in Georgia 65 years ago.

Conservatives must indeed go where eagles dare, and challenge the most formidable bastions of Marxism. That was the essence of what Charlie Kirk did so very effectively. I recall meeting the young 19-year-old Kirk back in 2013 and being asked to be part of his Turning Point USA Board of Advisors as he was launching. His personal efforts will be missed, but we cannot focus on just a singular person. As in the movie Spartacus, we must all say, “I’m Charlie Kirk.” The message that our young people are receiving on college and university campuses is completely antithetical to the American ideal, that of individual sovereignty, rights, freedoms, and liberties. That is what America 250 is all about. However, when one ponders what we have devolved into since America 200, when I was fifteen years of age, it is quite telling.

Who in 1976 thought that we would have discussions about defining what a woman is? Or that we would be confused about two scientifically based sexes. Once upon a time, it would have been considered child abuse to recommend that minors undergo body-transforming surgeries and disturb their natural hormonal growth and adolescence. Let’s be real, little kids are not confused about whether they are a boy or a girl. Adults are injecting them with this poison. As a matter of fact, anyone under the age of eighteen is not allowed to have a tattoo, but we are supposed to believe that the removal of healthy body parts is normal?

I remember as a young fella the day when my Dad made his last house payment. It was a source of pride for the ol’ World War II Corporal, as well as for me. He gave me something to achieve: being a homeowner. We all know that our Declaration of Independence was built upon the Natural Rights theory of the English political philosopher, John Locke, called the father of classical liberalism. The three unalienable rights endowed, naturally, to all mankind are life, liberty, and property. Yes, we do need to ensure that the American dream of home ownership is attainable for current and future generations.

However, government-run housing and policies of rent control are not the answer. I got a unique opportunity to see what that looked like — not once but twice — when visiting East Berlin, and government-controlled transportation was ugly. The purpose of government is to protect our life, liberty, and property. French economist Frederic Bastiat wrote of such in his phenomenal essay of 1850 called The Law. It was an apparent direct response to a differing philosophy that was introduced in 1848, the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. In Marx’s work, he advocated for heavy progressive taxation and the elimination of private property rights, two things that the Marxist/Islamist mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani, has made central to his policy.

I have no issue with those who say that they hate President Trump. I would suggest stopping shooting at him. Americans are free to have differing opinions. It was New York liberal Democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan who once asserted, “You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.” The same can be said about the absurdity of claiming one’s own truth, which is rooted in situational morality and ethics.

It is therefore imperative that we go where eagles dare, and not confine ourselves to our respective echo chambers of adoration. I will never forget the young lady on the campus of Northwestern University some eight to 10 years ago who asked me, “Do you identify as Black?” It was a truly shocking inquiry, but reflective of the low standards of academic rigor and critical thinking that exist on many college and university campuses. Northwestern University is one of the top academic institutions in our country, yet someone had filled this young lady’s mind with the folly that one’s skin color should dictate how they think, totally bypassing the brain that God gave to each of us. As my Mom and Dad would say, “some folks got a lot of book learning but ain’t got the common sense to come in outta the rain.”

One of the world’s great minds, Albert Einstein, advocated on behalf of socialism in his 1949 essay Why Socialism? He believed that socialism would quell the “predatory phase” of human development caused by capitalism. As opposed to economic minds like Mises, Hayek, Friedman, and Sowell, Einstein believed that capitalism brought about “economic anarchy” and that the pursuit of profit was less admirable for individuals than a government-planned economic system that ensured social welfare. That sounds a lot like Marx’s “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need,” wealth redistribution schemes.

America has a clear choice in this election cycle, and future ones as well: shall we choose the philosophy of economic servitude and enslavement and collectivism, or do we still believe in the indomitable individual spirit that yearns for freedom, economic empowerment, and yes, rugged individualism? I dare to choose the latter over the former. As history has proven, the former never works out well. As Sir Winston Churchill said, “Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.” He also affirmed that “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of misery.” And we know that socialism is the economic model of Marxism.

Go where eagles dare, spread the message of individual entrepreneurial economic achievement.

Steadfast and Loyal.

Allen West | May 18, 2026

Source: Where Eagles Dare