It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

to vote at all is the same as voting for hitler

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Here's a video of someone putting adolf hitler on the ballot.

www.youtube.com...

Why would someone do this? What if they never thought their vote counted in the first place.

What if this person wanted to show their distaste for how their first election had to be between two idiots who reminded him of the people he hated in highschool.

And finally what if this was someone who needed to vent his rage over the political stupidity reigning over america today?

Please watch and tell me what you think




posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
He could have voted for one of the other people on the ballot maybe? It seems that he made his vote more worthless than he already thought it was by not even lending support to one of the lesser parties. I don't see how writing in Hitler will do anything for him besides give him something silly to tell his friends later. At least when you vote for a lesser party, you can engage in discussion about your political views and not have to say 'I wrote in Adolf Hitler' at any point in the conversation. I get what he was doing, but it disappoints me that people want to make a point by writing in a name that won't mean anything when there is actually a chance to show the entire nation on television that a lesser party can get an actual percentage of the popular vote. Think about if all the people who wrote in Hitler or Hello Kitty or a name of a friend they have had voted for Johnson instead. We may have been engaging in some really groundbreaking discussions tonight. Just makes me sad really.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Careful with Hitler threads...most likely will be in the trash bin courtesy of a "Super Moderator" or Springer himself.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by prostheticmind
 


Didn't he say something about the mindless sheepness about the nazi party before world war 2?

The point of Hitler was obviously shock. A rough comparison of how the people tossed away all hope and put it into some freak who would bring them to ruin. And thats how i think it will go



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by X9ballX
reply to post by prostheticmind
 


Didn't he say something about the mindless sheepness about the nazi party before world war 2?

The point of Hitler was obviously shock. A rough comparison of how the people tossed away all hope and put it into some freak who would bring them to ruin. And thats how i think it will go


Still could have used his voice to help a lesser party up to get us out of this without a revolution. Symbolism is a neat trick, but it blows over the majority's heads.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by prostheticmind
 


personally I think the result would have been the same either way.

The game is rigged.

Ron paul is proof of that.

He was screwed over in ever debate. They treated him like trash. He was the very thing the nation needed and yet the screw him over.

Why? Simply put he was not one of the white shoe boys destroying us



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 11:39 PM
link   
But why does that seem to translate to most people that they shouldn't even participate. No, it isn't fair, but what do they think, if they wait long enough it will magically get better? That's just laziness. Pure, unadulterated, American laziness.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by prostheticmind
 


Laziness no.

More along the lines not wanting to be part of the system.

The current system needs thrown out. issue is nobody can agree on the how and when.

I'll say this. It doesn't need my gun to someones head to make the change

Nor does it need to go to socialism or communism.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   
I would never cast a vote, pledge to, or approve any EVIL MURDERER, SLAVER, DICTATOR. You can't do that, and I don't even support Karma, but to me that is something that is beyond my belief system that anyone is voting for them. The least you can do, is ensure you vote 3rd party, and only if you don't know if the person is tied into any form of abuse of humans anywhere in the world.

Your vote endorses them.



posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 12:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


The video was about how the two candidates were as bad as hitler and how the system is rigged. third party votes will do nothing



posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by X9ballX
reply to post by Unity_99
 


The video was about how the two candidates were as bad as hitler and how the system is rigged. third party votes will do nothing


As long as people continue to force that view on others, it will be true. People need to get their minds out of pessimism and start believing they can enact change in the world. In the US, far too many people function with the attitude: 'nothing will ever change so why should I do anything about it?' On the surface, it seems like they're saying that they don't think they can do anything themselves. I think though, that them not wanting to put forth the effort and risk damaging their fragile egos is closer to the truth.



posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by X9ballX
reply to post by prostheticmind
 


Laziness no.

More along the lines not wanting to be part of the system.

The current system needs thrown out. issue is nobody can agree on the how and when.

I'll say this. It doesn't need my gun to someones head to make the change

Nor does it need to go to socialism or communism.


Excellent point, I just think if they're going to go through the trouble of making a youtube video to show how frustrated they are, couldn't they just as easily have done something that would have made people think about positive change when they watched the video. I don't know how it could be considered positive is all, and we get enough negativity from the folks running the show.



posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 01:41 AM
link   
I would have voted for Hitler - and I'd do it today in a New York second.

I wish Hitler were alive and well in American politics - He could get us out of this financial mess the bankers and corrupt politicians left us in. I know this because he did it once before WWII. Hitler was brilliant and a True patriot. When the Jewish Zionists bankers in control of Germany's money caused a banking system crash leaving the country devastated and bankrupt, Hitler kicked the bankers out of the country and created a new economic system which brought Germany back to prosperity in just a few short years. He single-handedly was responsible for bringing Germany out of economic disaster.

Mind you this was before the war and before Hitler was responsible for killing anyone. Now these same Zionists bankers are ruining the everything for the people of the USA. We need a Hitler to save us - minus the later madness and the taking over the world bit.

Obama, i would not vote for if you tortured me.



posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by prostheticmind
He could have voted for one of the other people on the ballot maybe? It seems that he made his vote more worthless than he already thought it was by not even lending support to one of the lesser parties.


Here in Australia, if you vote for one of the lesser parties, they are just forced to give it to the bed guy or the blue guy anyway.

Don't know how it works there, but here is is just a clever scam...



posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
Mind you this was before the war and before Hitler was responsible for killing anyone.


I suggest you stop dwelling in ignorance and do some research on the actions of the Nazi party between 1933 and 1939

Maybe then you wouldn't make such foolish statements or hero worship a racist psychopath.



posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 02:47 AM
link   
The majority of third party candidates the real conspiracy here.. And why? Because they are nothing but republicans and democrats who lack the funding and support to run on ther own ticket!



posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
Mind you this was before the war and before Hitler was responsible for killing anyone.


I suggest you stop dwelling in ignorance and do some research on the actions of the Nazi party between 1933 and 1939

Maybe then you wouldn't make such foolish statements or hero worship a racist psychopath.


Answer me one question smart guy. Did Hitler do as I suggest and bring the country back from the brink of banking failure with a new system?

I believe history bears this out, and if true, that was the point of my post. That's the kind of leader we need today. The rest of what Hitler did and when is irrelevant . I admire the man for those good things he did for Germany.

Going off on the Hitler is Evil card and ignoring the good he did for his people ( a feat no world leader can seem to do today, get one over on the evil bankers - so Hell Yeah I admire that.. only a fool would not) is just as bad as being a racist hating someone for the color of his skin. .
edit on 7-11-2012 by JohnPhoenix because: sp


I submit:


To deal with the massive unemployment and economic paralysis of the Great Depression, both the US and German governments launched innovative and ambitious programs. Although President Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal” measures helped only marginally, the Third Reich’s much more focused and comprehensive policies proved remarkably effective. Within three years unemployment was banished and Germany’s economy was flourishing. And while Roosevelt’s record in dealing with the Depression is pretty well known, the remarkable story of how Hitler tackled the crisis is not widely understood or appreciated.

Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. A few weeks later, on March 4, Franklin Roosevelt took office as President of the United States. Each man remained his country’s chief executive for the next twelve years -- until April 1945, shortly before the end of World War II in Europe. In early 1933 industrial production in each country had fallen to about half of what it had been in 1929. Each leader quickly launched bold new initiatives to tackle the terrible economic crisis, above all the scourge of mass unemployment. And although there are some striking similarities between the efforts of the two governments, the results were very different.

One of the most influential and widely read American economists of the twentieth century was John Kenneth Galbraith. He was an advisor to several presidents, and for a time served as US ambassador to India. He was the author of several dozen books, and for years taught economics at Harvard University. With regard to Germany’s record, Galbraith wrote: “… The elimination of unemployment in Germany during the Great Depression without inflation -- and with initial reliance on essential civilian activities -- was a signal accomplishment. It has rarely been praised and not much remarked. The notion that Hitler could do no good extends to his economics as it does, more plausibly, to all else.”

The Hitler regime’s economic policy, Galbraith goes on, involved “large scale borrowing for public expenditures, and at first this was principally for civilian work -- railroads, canals and the Autobahnen [highway network]. The result was a far more effective attack on unemployment than in any other industrial country.” / 1 “By late 1935,” he also wrote, “unemployment was at an end in Germany. By 1936 high income was pulling up prices or making it possible to raise them … Germany, by the late thirties, had full employment at stable prices. It was, in the industrial world, an absolutely unique achievement.” / 2 “Hitler also anticipated modern economic policy,” the economist noted, “by recognizing that a rapid approach to full employment was only possible if it was combined with wage and price controls. That a nation oppressed by economic fears would respond to Hitler as Americans did to F.D.R. is not surprising.” / 3

Other countries, Galbraith wrote, failed to understand or to learn from the German experience: “The German example was instructive but not persuasive. British and American conservatives looked at the Nazi financial heresies -- the borrowing and spending -- and uniformly predicted a breakdown … And American liberals and British socialists looked at the repression, the destruction of the unions, the Brownshirts, the Blackshirts, the concentration camps, and screaming oratory, and ignored the economics. Nothing good [they believed], not even full employment, could come from Hitler.” / 4

Two days after taking office as Chancellor, Hitler addressed the nation by radio. Although he and other leaders of his movement had made clear their intention to reorganize the nation’s social, political, cultural and educational life in accord with National Socialist principles, everyone knew that, with some six million jobless and the national economy in paralysis, the great priority of the moment was to restore the nation’s economic life, above all by tackling unemployment and providing productive work.

“The misery of our people is horrible to behold!,” said Hitler in this inaugural address. / 5 “Along with the hungry unemployed millions of industrial workers there is the impoverishment of the whole middle class and the artisans. If this collapse finally also finishes off the German farmers we will face a catastrophe of incalculable dimension. For that would be not just the collapse of a nation, but of a two-thousand-year-old inheritance of some of the greatest achievements of human culture and civilization …”
www.ihr.org...

There are tons more references to the good work Hitler did for Germany through his new economics. This is historically agreed on despite the "monster" Hitler turned out to be.
edit on 7-11-2012 by JohnPhoenix because: sp



posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
Answer me one question smart guy. Did Hitler do as I suggest and bring the country back from the brink of banking failure with a new system?

I believe history bears this out, and if true, that was the point of my post. That's the kind of leader we need today. The rest of what Hitler did and when is irrelevant . I admire the man for those good things he did for Germany.


Of course, the bombed out ruins of Germany circa 1945 are, of course, a poster child for the economic miracle, and an indication of how good he was for his country and obviously everyone needs to follow that example....



Behold the utopia...




posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Are you just missing the point or being purposefully misleading?

Hitler may have after the fact, squandered the money and gotten his nation into a terrible war but that's besides the point. The point is Hitler as Chancellor in 1933 brought his nation back from economic disaster - in a few short years. That's an amazing accomplishment, no world leader has been able to do today.



posted on Nov, 7 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


And that is why it is more an insult for the guy who made the vid to compare mittens and obama to hitler.

unlike hitler neither of them would bring the us back at all



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join