Inspirational Speeches / Quotes (Non-Fiction and Fiction)

[TrueMacedonian]

YouTube - Rocky Balboa Speech

[Risto the Great]

All true isn't it.

I kept waiting for the son to fly off somewhere though.

[Pelister]

I'm going to get this movie out tonight.

I grew up on the "Rocky" theme and even though I have seen the last one, I need to watch it again. I think it was his best, and when it ended I felt as though an era had also ended.

[Risto the Great]

I haven't seen the last one. Perhaps I better.

[TrueMacedonian]

You know when it first came out I thought "Oh geez stallones losing it big time" but the movie was actually really good and it carries a message just like all his Rocky movies did. You should definitely see it RTG.

[Soldier of Macedon]

TM, I have changed the title of the thread so we can broaden it to include other inspirational speeches from movies.

YouTube - Gladiator ~ Best Quotes & Battle Scenes!

At my signal, unleash hell

[TrueMacedonian]

Braveheart inspirational speech to the Scottish army

YouTube - Brave heart speech

And the infamous Battle of Stirling. Probably the most brutal battle scene in a movie;

YouTube - Braveheart battle of sterling p1

YouTube - Braveheart battle of sterling p2

[TrueMacedonian]

TM, I have changed the title of the thread so we can broaden it to include other inspirational speeches from movies.

YouTube - Gladiator ~ Best Quotes & Battle Scenes!

At my signal, unleash hell

SoM Gladiator is probably one of the best movies ever made. By far one of my favorites.

[The LION will ROAR]

Even thou it's not from a movie but quote i love..

„IN ALL MY YEARS OF WAR, I HAVE NEVER IN MY LIFE, SEEN ANYTHING MORE TERRIFYING, THAN THOSE MACEDONIANS ADVANCING ON THE BATTLEFIELD“ - Aemilius Paullus

[Prolet]

TM, What about this one by Al Pacino??

YouTube - Al Pacino's Inspirational Speech

[TrueMacedonian]

Prolet Pacino has made some great films. Alot of flops as well. But this speech is awesome.

[Soldier of Macedon]

A speech by Ronald Reagan from back in 1966. Short section quoted below. Amazing how his words from over half a century ago echo the truth of today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkVCppsIyrA

Already there are a 135 separate federal agencies and offices doling out money at the college level. Some time ago a group of distinguished college presidents, alarmed at the extent to which academic freedom has been compromised by these vast money grants, went to Washington, and they had a proposal they’d worked out. A proposal for allowing the individual citizen to compute his income tax and then deduct a specified amount and contribute it to the college of his choice instead of paying it in income tax. And the government would be allowed to determine the proper amount that would solve the problem and yet not disrupt the government’s own economy or need for revenue. And thus, they would get around the question of church and state, the separation of same, if an individual citizen chose to contribute his money to a church-supported school. Over and over again, in Washington, they kept asking but why won’t this system work and finally a Freudian slip occurred. Francis Keppel, United States Director of Education, blurted out, "you don’t understand, under the plan you propose we couldn’t achieve our social objectives".

Social objectives – and now we uncover a memorandum, thanks to the Press actually, a memorandum in the community relations service at the poverty program, has nothing really to do with education, but the memorandum is very disturbing, in this sentence: “We should conduct a systematic effort to contact all publishers and school boards, to encourage their publication and adoption of text books, conforming to established standards”. Well, if the government is going to build the schools and buy the books, issue scholarships, make judgements and exert pressure, what if one day that pressure is of a political nature not to our liking? Education is the bulwark of freedom, but you remove it too far from the community and the parents’ control and education becomes the tool of tyranny.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Below is an excerpt from a much longer farewell address by George Washington. The foresight is quite remarkable and although the circumstances are somewhat different, it would have served as a useful example for Macedonia had its spineless politicians not driven the country into the ground by doing exactly what Washington warned against.

https://speakola.com/political/georg...l-address-1796

George Washington: 'A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils', farewell address - 1796

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?

In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils? Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.