Who Wrote This?? (No Cheating!)

Flip the 'Open' sign on your head. Try to avoid the temptation, at least for a moment to look this up on the internet. Let me know if the words resonate with you prior to finding the author.

We are just good enough that international capital allows us to fill its money sacks with interest payments. That and only that is the result of a centuries-long history of heroism. Have we deserved it? No, and no again!

Therefore we demand that a struggle against this condition of shame and misery begin, and that the men in whose hands we put our fate must use every means to break the chains of slavery.
Three million people lack work and sustenance. The officials, it is true, work to conceal the misery. They speak of measures and silver linings. Things are getting steadily better for them, and steadily worse for us. The illusion of freedom, peace and prosperity that we were promised when we wanted to take our fate in our own hands is vanishing. Only complete collapse of our people can follow from these irresponsible policies.
Thus we demand the right of work and a decent living for every working *****.

While we dreamed and chased strange and unreachable fantasies, others stole our property. Today some say this was an act of God. Not so. Money was transferred from the pockets of the poor to the pockets of the rich. That is cheating, shameless, vile cheating!
A government presides over this misery that in the interests of peace and order one cannot really discuss.

Do you think these thoughts are universal or transcendent of time?

Let the words sink in, then feel free to look up the author. I found this to be quite interesting. When you have found the source, think about what 'change' these words brought.

Are we in the same boat?

(I in no way endorse the author of these words, or his actions to facilitate the change brought about. This was his opinion and not mine and is used for purposes of discussion only.)

Nelson Mandela? The last paragraph is what makes me guess this ,and it is just a guess

reply to post by KSPigpen


Unfortunately, it sounds like Adolph Hitler, and I do not support anything the man did.

It did not resonate with me, I remember hearing many of his speeches from the watching the atrocities he commited on the History Channel.

He was an oratory master in his own right, but he bespoke lies to induce the masses to follow his master plan.

The extinction of anyone who did not fit his image of the superior race.

What he did led his country our of a depression that was sanctioned upon the German's because of WWI.

I suspect you put this into the Global Meltdown thread for a reason.

Your thoughts on the speeches speaker as well as the words and timing led me to believe you posted this about Hitler, not because I believe anything the man said or did, he was a monster.

Since you shared this, whether I am correct or not, I will share a thread of mine, based around the moral dilema that makes you ponder what to do.

Would You Kill Adolph Hitler, Before He Was Born?

[edit on 20-8-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


He was an oratory master to the ignorant and poor. Those that recognized his b.s. rhetoric tried dismantling him from the inside..all to no avail...well maybe some...

How many assasination attempts?

17?

reply to post by open_eyeballs


Isn't that exactly what I said, with the second half of what I said about his oratory skills?

He was an oratory master in his own right, but he bespoke lies to induce the masses to follow his master plan.

I just said it more diplomatically.

The reason it did not resonate with me, is I see through and hear through the words to the hidden message within, always have and always will.

This speech as well as George W Bush's speech after 9/11 made the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end.

[edit on 20-8-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

He was an oratory master in his own right, but he bespoke lies to induce the masses to follow his master plan.

sound like any one else you know?Sorry couldn't resist didn't mean to derail the thread.

It's alright, guys. I know it'll get some cackles up. The words are words very similar to what I hear today, arranged a slightly different, but in a way even pertinent to what many people are feeling. Quite a few parallels in the description of the state of affairs.

And no. It wasn't Hitler.

reply to post by genius/idoit


not even close..

two completely different styles..

Obamas constant pauses indicates he is thinking of diplomatic ways of saying things..being plitically correct...thinking about the talking points his advisors recommend he adress and the ones he should stay away from

you think it is his message? come on man, get a clue...

as for the message in the OP..i dont believe they can be taken into todays context..that time...that era..those yeasr leading up to the war are far different than the world we see today.

Leonidas...

that same speech had the hairs on my neck standing up too...

Originally posted by genius/idoit
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

He was an oratory master in his own right, but he bespoke lies to induce the masses to follow his master plan.

sound like any one else you know?Sorry couldn't resist didn't mean to derail the thread.

Clinton? Bush? Obama? Kim Jong Ill? Saddam Hussein? Hugo Chavez?

It could be any one of them.


reply to post by KSPigpen


That's okay, I gave it a shot.

It still does not resonate with me however.

I hear and see through the lies like looking through a open window into their soul.

[edit on 20-8-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

Hmm, lots of people locked onto it being Hitler and that's pretty close.

Joseph Goebbels

He was Chancellor immediately after Hitler in 1945 and was in office for a day.

[edit on 20-8-2009 by HaTaX]

reply to post by KSPigpen


Without reading the other posts first, just yours..i'm saying Adolf Hitler, Germany, 1930's.

Just sounds like something he would say, before the mania started properly.

Now i'll go find out the answer...

You know folks. I LOVE this place, I really do. No where have I ever found the fondue pot of consciousness that exists here. I love cheese.

The point to this exercise, whether wasted or not, is to look at the words that DO relate to current events. If you can claim they do not mean anything to you now, you were being biased. Nothing in these words speaks of atrocity. You don't have to defend yourself. It's not about whether you believe the words or not, or agree with any action taken by the writer.

This man, was a revolutionary. He told people what they wanted to hear, he wrote an essay addressing the government of his time to express his disapproval. He was considered a patriot at the time he wrote this.

The similarities are either uncanny, or universal in nature.

I'll paraphrase:

The rich are getting richer at the cost of the poor.
The international bank is getting rich off of our interest.
We were sold a dream that is nowhere near what reality is.
Unemployment is too high and we want jobs.
For whatever reason, we can't really openly discuss these things.
The thing that surely follows this mess is the total collapse of our society.

Now...have you heard these words anywhere else?

I'm not asking you to buy into someone else's propaganda. The question I'm asking, in all seriousness is: Given the similarities of the situation back then and the verbiage used to express the problems, why would we be able to expect any different outcome?

If we are so quick to jump on the revolution bandwagon, I fear our fate is probably the same.

I want to say Karl Marx, but I am not too sure. So I'll just throw it out there as my initial guess.

Good post, by the way! I love thought-provoking threads and this sure does provoke some thought. I knew it wasn't Hitler, didn't sound like his work to me, but I can see why people could misconstrue his plans with this piece.

Only complete collapse of our people can follow from these irresponsible policies.
Thus we demand the right of work and a decent living for every working

This is why I think it is Marx. Sounds pretty Communist to me, but I could easily be mistaken.

EDIT:

I kinda cheated after I guessed... I am wrong, it isn't Marx. It is Joseph Goebbels.

We Demand

[edit on 20-8-2009 by Bushido Kanji]

That's from the essay "We Demand" by Joseph Goebbels.

I think it was published in one of the early issues of "Der Angriff", a newspaper/propaganda rag which was coincidentally set up by, you guessed it, Joseph Goebbels.

I guess that's one way to get published.

I would think it was from Franklin Delano Roosevelt garnering support for his "new deal."

reply to post by open_eyeballs


Those pauses are because he's listening to someone tell him what to say.Check out his press conference with the Mexican pres.and Canadian prime minister.when his earpiece falls out after a long winded explanation to a question nobody asked ,he was stuttering and stammering until he realized he better shut up.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


Hitler is villified because he lost the war, simple as that.. the winners won the right to re-write history as they please..

The only downside to his plan was the extermination of Jews.. but even in that we cannot deny that the only people to ever see first hand was the liberating armies.. what ever they say was deemed fact. If it were to happen in an age of transparency, how different would the story be?

Just something to think about.

reply to post by open_eyeballs


I think you are mistaken to downplay this interesting lesson of history.
He didn't rise in power only because of his oratory talent and certainly not by appealing only to the ignorant (of what ?) and the poor. We are easily disdainful when looking at people of the past as if we have so much more judgement and are so bright nowadays, we, modern humans. We only have the knowledge of what happened AFTER and thus easily understand the situation. It's not that long ago, this people are our grandfathers.

Nationalism was a common trend not limited to Germany. The strong focus and impulse of the Nazis on the economy was hailed and viewed as progressist and modern, including in the US. Hitler was seen as a very respectable and civilised leader. All of this may be a reason why some didn't forecast the war.
NSDAP was funded early by big businesses, Siemens, Krups, Thyssen, etc... The Weimar Republic politically fought the KPD (communist) by fear of a revolution and gave way to the NSDAP. For the big boys, anything is better than communism.

Hitler's rhetorics didn't work so well with the working class. It's the middle-class who supported him not the poor and ignorant. Quoting Dr Kurt Gossweiler in Arbeiterklasse Und Faschismus, workers were the only category under represented in the NSDAP. Workers counted for 28.1% of NASPD members and 45.8% of the total population, -38.8% proportionnally. Compare to employees (25.6% of NASDP members, 12% of total population, +113.5%), independants (20.7%, 9%, +130%), public servants (8.3%, 5.1%, +62.7%), small farmers (14%, 10.6%, +32%). The poor voted KPD.

The middle-class and the petite bourgeoisie, the regular people pushed Hitler to power. He didn't came out of nowhere, he has been a political leader for a decade before becaming Chancelor. It's not only his speeches but also the vast propaganda, you don't escape propaganda easily, look around.

It could have happened anywhere else than in Germany. It could happen today. The next Hitler if there is one will be "democratically" elected.

Originally posted by Bushido Kanji

Only complete collapse of our people can follow from these irresponsible policies.
Thus we demand the right of work and a decent living for every working

This is why I think it is Marx. Sounds pretty Communist to me, but I could easily be mistaken.

You should read more Marx.

Karl Marx, like all of the classical sociologists (Weber, Durkheim, etc), was interested in the human condition within a Capitalist society. He wrote his Communist Manifesto for financial reasons ("Communists of the world unite!" and so forth...).

Marx actually looked at the history of socio-economic-technological evolution and asked: "What comes after Capitalism, and how will it come about?"

His answer was something resembling "communism" and that it would come about in a bloody revolution (which would come a couple of hundred years in the future, mind you).

One hundred and fifty years later, it's starting to look like he may have been disturbingly accurate; what with "Moore's Law" and increasing civil unrest, and everything else, and so forth...

[edit on 22-8-2009 by theWCH]

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

The only downside to his plan was the extermination of Jews..

Just something to think about.

The only downside?

Okay, Rockpuck, after picking my jaw up off the floor, I have to say that was troubling to read from you.

So, before I misquote or mistake what you referenced there, I'm going to have to ask, what exactly was the upside to the bastard Adoplh Hitler and the Third Reich?

Yes, I realize and firmly see that history is only written by the victors, that is a lesson learned well by anyone who knows history and anyone who understand the aspects of propaganda writing by Governments on both sides of a war, as well as those who are paid to write the history books by the winners.

Please, do not take my post as harsh or attacking you, because it is not, and it is not off topic since I guessed that the speech was Adolph Hitler it stays on topic, but I have to ask for clarification of your post.

As for Adolph Hitler, he was a megalomanicial bastard, plain and simple, and anything connected to the Third Reich was just a bastardization of him.

So many people in America do not realize the implications of extermination of any race, no matter the nationality, religion, or beliefs, extermination is not the answer.

This is why I rail against F.E.M.A. "detainee" camps, because a prisoner has rights whereas a "detainee" has none whatsoever, and the fine line and slippery slope of our Government defining anyone it deems a terrorist, is something to be concerned about very much so because of the implications of the change from a "detainee" camp into a permanent solution, transformed through the necessity of what to do with those "terrorists" once the over-population of said camps is to its gills, will be to turn them into Concentration Camps, which I say is a scary thought, because the words "concentration camp" is not a realistic choice of words, places like Dachau and Auschwitz and the rest of them have been labled Extermination Camps.

The fact that they were not labeled as such only belittles the plight of the Jews who were exterminated to me.

I will never forget the atrocities of Hitler and his henchmen, nor will I ever stand for a Government that will repeat them and under Bush we came damn close to just that and that is exactly why I am watching every single thing Obama does as well.

We are closer to a Fourth Reich than anyone will ever realize and that is something that concerns me very much because it is not something I ever want to see or live through, and if it should happen it is not something I would want to have to strive to live through and tell my children of in the future.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e9747d4f6f34.gif[/atsimg]

[edit on 23-8-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]