This thread has cheered me up about STW. I think shib and others have summarised Brand exactly. It is all about the ego..

As with Cameron,Clegg,Milliband….

I will never vote for a mainstream party ever again. They only represent the have’s as Brand rightly points out. And regarding conservation, dont forget it was the Torys who wanted to sell off OUR Forests not so long ago.The system sucks. Cant stand any of them… Take the planet back people. Revolution.

I’ve warmed to Brand recently. Previously I dismissed him as a one trick pony, mad shagger but recent appearances have shown him to be quite a smart guy. The US tv show thing was excellent.

However, while the sentiment in the Paxman video is admirable, it’s verging on Bono-esque levels of hyprocrisy. He was a real man of the people when we spotted him staying at Tiger Lily in Edinburgh during the festival.

A bit like Tommy Sheridan, Bob 🙂

He used to stand down Argyle St with his Mauritius suntan and Versace suits, telling voters that he was a regular working class guy, one of them, before hurrying off to meet some Z listers for his 6pm reservation at Amaryllis

He was a real man of the people when we spotted him staying at Tiger Lily in Edinburgh

not sure what you’re getting at there. I’ve stayed there, for two nights, nice boutique hotel, not terribly expensive. where should he stay? behind a bin on the street?

However, while the sentiment in the Paxman video is admirable, it’s verging on Bono-esque levels of hyprocrisy.

This seems to be the main sticking point for his detractors here, his use of flowery language, his sometimes long way round to get to a point nature, and hypocrisy.

I find the hypocrisy bit really funny, because it’s more or less saying that if you are part of the established system you cannot criticise or change it. I’m sure all those Eastern Europeans must be feeling really guilty now about being part of the Communist system, yet bringing it down.

He used to stand down Argyle St with his Mauritius suntan and Versace suits, claiming to the people that he was a regular working class guy, one of them, before hurrying off to meet some Z listers for his 6pm reservation at Amaryllis

Oh well, we had better dismiss what he says then. We can then listen to the politicians and their dead pan deliveries on all thing political, economic and social…and still not believe what they say.

However, while the sentiment in the Paxman video is admirable, it’s verging on Bono-esque levels of hyprocrisy.

The hypocrisy thing is a smokescreen. He’s quite open about it in the New Statesman piece. Everyone who lives in the West and claims to be concerned about inequality, social issues etc can be dismissed as a hypocrite, but it doesn’t devalue the point. If all those who espoused equality and egalitarianism were first required to impoverish themselves then that simply plays into the hands of their opponents as they could more easily be ignored and dismissed.

Oh well, we had better dismiss what he says then. We can then listen to the politicians and their dead pan deliveries on all thing political, economic and social…and still not believe what they say.

What are you talking about? I’m referring to Tommy Sheridan which, if you’d quoted my post in context, would have been been apparent.

Tommy Sheridan is a liar, that’s sufficient enough to dismiss what he says.

What are you talking about? I’m referring to Tommy Sheridan which, if you’d quoted my post in context, would have been been apparent.

Ah, I see. I thought you were going on about brand..still you were trying to draw comparisons between the two of them it seems.

He’s trying to be a Marxist Byron (if that’s possible). Except he’s not mad bad and dangerous to know, he needs to actually help topple a country instead of talking about it.

If he had any sense he’d know that the young need a charismatic leader like him and that he could change things within government by doing a UKIP and steal votes away from Labour to force them further left – as I don’t think the British have it in them for a fully blown armed revolution even if we did have access to the weaponry needed.

Everyone who lives in the West and claims to be concerned about inequality, social issues etc can be dismissed as a hypocrite, but it doesn’t devalue the point. If all those who espoused equality and egalitarianism were first required to impoverish themselves then that simply plays into the hands of their opponents as they could more easily be ignored and dismissed.

Indeed this

Its like you cannot speak out about social injustice unless you are ravished by poverty…then it would be the politics of envy label thrown at you no doubt and you would be told you were lazy for not achieving.

Like most insults its just a smokescreen to avoid debate and make you debate the person rather than the issue

[pedant hat on]

Shibboleth – Member

The problem is that the hoi polloi that are blinded by his flowery language are also the sort of people that would follow Hitler if they heard him utter the words “Bankers’ Bonuses”.

That should simply be ‘hoi polloi’. ‘Hoi’ means ‘the’.

[/pedant hat on]

He does have some valid points, even Paxman said “I wouldn’t disagree with many of those things.”

Out of interest, where did all this come from?

Last I knew Brand was still that insufferable comedian making his jokes funny by shouting as loud as he could, talking about how many shags he’s had and was making shit films whilst appearing in OK! Magazine & Cosmo.

I’m so out of touch. Going to watch this tonight.

I agree that the current system is broken, but Brand was talking a load of bollox. I’m afraid he lost me at “I don’t get my authority from this pre-existing paradigm”.

That should simply be ‘hoi polloi’

Arguable, that. Hoi Polloi is used as a phrase in English, we’re not speaking Greek. So we don’t necessarily need to treat it as such. Same reason you don’t need to (or shouldn’t) use Latin plurals for words imported from Latin.

The Paradigm be is referring to is that you can either vote Conservative or Labour, who differ remarkedly little in their policies and by not voting one has no ‘right’ to criticise on the party in power.

NB A few other minority parties do exist…

molgrips – Member

That should simply be ‘hoi polloi’

Arguable, that. Hoi Polloi is used as a phrase in English, we’re not speaking Greek. So we don’t necessarily need to treat it as such. Same reason you don’t need to (or shouldn’t) use Latin plurals for words imported from Latin.

Fair enough. But now you’ve just knocked me off my high and mighty throne and ruined my Friday.

Boom! 🙂

Out of interest, where did all this come from?

I first became aware of his transformation from idiot celebrity shagger to anti-establishment commentator with this missive after Thatcher’s death:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/09/russell-brand-margaret-thatcher

Closely followed by a superb piece on the murder of Lee Rigby:

http://www.russellbrand.tv/2013/05/woolwich/

Everyone who lives in the West and claims to be concerned about inequality, social issues etc can be dismissed as a hypocrite, but it doesn’t devalue the point. If all those who espoused equality and egalitarianism were first required to impoverish themselves then that simply plays into the hands of their opponents as they could more easily be ignored and dismissed.

Hear hear. This expresses exactly what I was thinking, only more betterer

Brand is spot on. Yes, he was confusing. He may even be confused himself. The point stands though: things need to change. The more people who start talking/thinking this way, the better.

Well, it’s lovely to have a spokesperson who can dance verbal rings around the great white shark of political journalism, while still keeping more than enough in reserve to concisely boot home the point once or twice..
And he seems to have ruffled feathers amongst the devout minions of the braying classes here too..

Which suggests to me that there may possibly be light at the end of the tunnel.. Which is a relief

He needs to put the thesaurus down and stop writing in ‘Jeremy Clarkson on magic mushrooms’ mode before I can take him seriously.

Brand is spot on. Yes, he was confusing. He may even be confused himself. The point stands though: things need to change. The more people who start talking/thinking this way, the better.

I think this is key.

Brand wasn’t great in the interview, BUT, it’s gone viral and people are listening to him. The message behind his arguments still came through, even though the substance was a bit naff. So this is a good thing, he’s potentially hitting a demographic who would normally let this sort of thing pass them by.

So long as his messages stay clear enough behind all that pointless verbal wizardry, then the more people who listen to him the better.

I can’t help but like the guy. Again, that’s a good thing when you’re trying to convey a message that is heavy and often too difficult to want to comprehend.

I first became aware of his transformation from idiot celebrity shagger to anti-establishment commentator with this missive after Thatcher’s death:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/09/russell-brand-margaret-thatcher

Closely followed by a superb piece on the murder of Lee Rigby:

http://www.russellbrand.tv/2013/05/woolwich/

I’ll give that a read, thanks.

Writes like a don, talks like a drunk.

Will be interesting to see how he gets on at new statesman. Hopefully he will grow up as editor and will use his writing skils to the fore.

Paxman looked both amused and bemused but handled it all pretty well. All very well ranting but at some stage you have to propose concrete alternatives rather than hiding behind vague rebellion nonsense. For an ardent revolutionary he has spent enough time cosying up to parts of the Establishment.

Will be interesting to see how he gets on at new statesman. Hopefully he will grow up as editor and will use his writing skils to the fore.

Pretty sure he is just guest editor for one issue.

Banks make lots of money?!?!?

The whole crisis falsifies this. Banks are fundamentally low profitABILITY organisations that mask, or at least masked, low basic returns (much, much lower than industrial companies) with massive and, as history shows, unsustainable levels of leverage, And so, when things go wrong, the whole facade came tumbling down around them. In the meantime, employees raped the shareholders rotten hence the adage, “work for a bank, but never own one.”

He’s very articulate in his criticism of our terrible government and the forces behind it.

But the **** doesn’t vote.

🙄

X-post. Is that the the case mike? Shame if so as I was looking forward to his adjustment.

Brand wasn’t great in the interview, BUT, it’s gone viral and people are listening to him. The message behind his arguments still came through, even though the substance was a bit naff. So this is a good thing, he’s potentially hitting a demographic who would normally let this sort of thing pass them by.

That’s exactly how the EDF started: a smart Alec mouthpiece for the disaffected masses becoming the figurehead of an antiestablishment movement badly disguised as politics. Che Guevara he ain’t.

Brand wasn’t great in the interview, BUT, it’s gone viral and people are listening to him. The message behind his arguments still came through, even though the substance was a bit naff. So this is a good thing, he’s potentially hitting a demographic who would normally let this sort of thing pass them by.

That’s exactly how the EDF started: a smart Alec mouthpiece for the disaffected masses becoming the figurehead of an antiestablishment movement badly disguised as politics. Che Guevara he ain’t.

I don’t know why anyone’s demanding that he should propose any ‘concrete alternatives’, when by his own admission, he hasn’t set out to do so, merely that the current system is crap and that his rant is simply to get people to consider what alternatives there might actually be. And he’s done this very successfully indeed, as it’s provoked mass debate as exemplified on here.

No-one’s demanding that Paxman come up with any answers, for example, and considering his long career as a political journalist, you’d think he might have an idea or two, instead of being an egotistical bully.

And I don’t see any of Brand’s detractors coming up with anything themselves. Maybe they’re content with the current mess.

The most obvious starting point is RON. Easy to do…

That’s exactly how the EDF started: a smart Alec mouthpiece for the disaffected masses becoming the figurehead of an antiestablishment movement badly disguised as politics.

I thought that EDF started with the acquisition and mergers of SEEBOARD Plc, London Electricity Plc, SWEB Energy Plc and two coal-fired power stations and a combined cycle gas turbine power station?

The most obvious starting point is RON. Easy to do…

Yep, plus PR.

Awww, Shib you seem flustered..
I’m sure that any change that comes about as a result of Brand’s eloquence will start in ways too subtle for the reptilian mind to comprehend.. So don’t worry your pretty little head about it dear.

I find his rakish shtick tub-thumping routine a little irritating.

No import or real substance – just ideological soufflé .

ideological soufflé

Ah, the forgotten Zappa album!

Hitler and EDL*, your coming up with some great comparisons shibby, why do you compare him to racist right wing muppets?

*i presume you did mean the racist blokes not the French energy blokes.

That’s exactly how the EDF started: a smart Alec mouthpiece for the disaffected masses becoming the figurehead of an antiestablishment movement badly disguised as politics. Che Guevara he ain’t.

Deep and insightful you aint
That is hyperbole masquerading as analysis
I dont know what is worse comparing him to the EDL [ I assume that is who you mean] or thinking the head of the EDL is a smart alec – perhaps he is compared to you?

the forgotten Zappa album!

😀