Russell Brand on Revolution

[FNG]

Ive yet to see any of team brand adress the point at how quick the non violent revolutionaries clamouring for change at maiden square were brushed aside by counter revolutionary forces of the banderists who were initially allowed to share a platform in the name of inclusivity.

 

[Jean-Luc]

Still, suggesting the Russian Revolution wasn't worthy of the name and reducing it to mere "hegemonic exchange" (and suggesting it simply lead to Stalinism), is one of the fucking dumbest things I've ever read.

I thought that might smoke out the Leninists here and it has. There was a revolution in Russia in March 1917 that ended the semi-feudal Tsarism regime continued to a conclusion in November when the Bolsheviks seized power. Bui it was a revolution that did amount to a change of rulers, from a land-owning nobility to a minority who eventually emerged as a new, state-capitalist ruling class. That Leninism led to Stalinism is a long-standing view in non-Leninist Marxist and anarchist circles. The dummies are those who thought it was a "socialist" revolution. So Brand was expressing a quite coherent view when he said that what happened in Russia was essentially a "hegemonic exchange", i.e a change of rulers, and to reject this as a model for revolution.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

I thought that might smoke out the Leninists here and it has. There was a revolution in Russia in March 1917 that ended the semi-feudal Tsarism regime continued to a conclusion in November when the Bolsheviks seized power. Bui it was a revolution that did amount to a change of rulers, from a land-owning nobility to a minority who eventually emerged as a new, state-capitalist ruling class. That Leninism led to Stalinism is a long-standing view in non-Leninist Marxist and anarchist circles. The dummies are those who thought it was a "socialist" revolution. So Brand was expressing a quite coherent view when he said that what happened in Russia was essentially a "hegemonic exchange", i.e a change of rulers, and to reject this as a model for revolution.

And how does Brand suggest we avoid repeating such a 'hegemonic exchange' come that glorious new dawn?

 

[caleb]

I thought that might smoke out the Leninists here and it has. There was a revolution in Russia in March 1917 that ended the semi-feudal Tsarism regime continued to a conclusion in November when the Bolsheviks seized power. Bui it was a revolution that did amount to a change of rulers, from a land-owning nobility to a minority who eventually emerged as a new, state-capitalist ruling class. That Leninism led to Stalinism is a long-standing view in non-Leninist Marxist and anarchist circles. The dummies are those who thought it was a "socialist" revolution. So Brand was expressing a quite coherent view when he said that what happened in Russia was essentially a "hegemonic exchange", i.e a change of rulers, and to reject this as a model for revolution.

I'm not a fucking Leninist you mug.

 

[Jean-Luc]

Also people who keep pointing out his involvement in campaigns as if a) that makes him good, and b) that makes him one aof 'us' - what about the Easeman character Brand is or was chummy with. Fash and involved in the same stuff - he one of us too?

This raises a relevant question for those who think that revolution will emerge from day-to-day grass-roots struggles under capitalism. These are struggles to survive within capitalism and can be, and are, supported by people with all sorts of views, including characters like Easeman. And wlth also sorts of axes to grind such as the various Trotskyist and anarchist would-be vanguards. I'd have thought that they were much more of a danger to these struggles than support from a well-meaning if confused and woolly "celebrity" like Brand. The irony is that his views on such struggles(that they should be conducted by the people directly involved) are probably the same as many of his critics here.

 

[Jean-Luc]

I'm not a fucking Leninist you mug.

Apologies. That's good news. What are you then? Why do you think that the Russian Revolution didn't lead to Stalinism when everybody can see that it did?

 

[butchersapron]

104 pages and the spgb/cpgb drone finally gets to the burning issue of the day - and probably the only reason for starting this thread.

Also noticed further confirmation of my poisoning theme this morning - but this time, rather than Brand being weaponised in order to attack other groups/people/networks etc campaigning or even just having criticisms, this time it's the people directly involved in the new era campaign that are used as the weapon to attack others. Brand is the just the door that opens up this possibility this time though.

 

[smokedout]

You want to go there with this? Seriously?

So let me ask you smokedout, are the new era campaigners still getting it wrong over brand's contribution to their campaign?

I don't know but I've never said Brand contribution to their campaign specifically was detrimental, I think they'd have won without him, and I don't think the coverage that is now emerging in the press about how Brand won it is hugely helpful. My criticism is of what Brand represents overall, his flaky politics, chumminess with fascists and anti-semites, and the idea that we need celebrity leaders to speak for us - because I dont want Brand to speak for me. And of course I'd say that to the New Era campaigners if they asked me what I thought.

 

[Flavour]

Let's not eh, Jean luc?

 

[classicdish]

go away Diana- you are an unwanted and irrelevant irritant - go and sip a fucking latte or summat...inane Californians have zero to add to this debate...and your output has been particularly feeble.

I disagree. People from anywhere and everywhere in the world are welcome to contribute to these forums. Anyone here is free to discuss events, politics and people in the UK, the US or Timbuktu if they want to, and we should be grown up enough to listen to everyone's point of view and make some kind of decent response, not just tell people to go away based on their nationality, or whether they live in Hoxton, Cambridge or California.

Russell Brand is calling for a global revolution and does not confine himself to only talking about UK politics. He talks about American topics and people all the time - why shouldn't Americans or anyone else respond to this?

Brand does a lot of work in the US where he is a well known public figure. Westbrook is a US company.

I really don't understand your logic about American people not being welcome on u75 or whatever you are trying to say. Care to explain?

 

[xenon]

Are we there yet?

 

[Pickman's model]

Do you really, really have a reading and comprehension problem?

Where do you see credit being given to Boris? He had to be shamed into doing something by the Mayor of New York City.

That's called playing hard ball. Russell Brand knows the game, you obviously don't.

you've admitted your ignorance so now's the time to leave the thread

 

[Jean-Luc]

you've admitted your ignorance so now's the time to leave the thread

I don't understand the logic of this. I'd have thought that if some is "ignorant" they should be invited to stay on the thread so that they could learn something.

 

[Pickman's model]

the old people divided by a common language thing in full swing. tbh I'm grateful to Diane for bringing her yank sensibilities to this thread. For all our exposure to them we remain Europeans, Brits and, hereabouts, reasonably communist minded ones at that. So we're not often served an attempt at the Great Man theory of politics and history.

And very seldom indeed does anyone suggest that all that's needed to sort out parochial struggles is an American politician to bark out a few orders for British politicians, media, capital and people to follow.

It's good to be reminded, now and again.

you do talk some awful bollocks. weren't you taught kings and queens history at school?

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't understand the logic of this. I'd have thought that if some is "ignorant" they should be invited to stay on the thread so that they could learn something.

it hasn't done you any good, so you're in no position to prate on the subject

 

[ViolentPanda]

Why are you pretending not to see the difference between a "racist" and a "nationalist" ? The racist BNP, EDL, NF etc stand for "British jobs for white British workers". The anti-EU left stand for "British jobs for British white and black workers", i.e are not racists but simple nationalists. I'm against both nationalism and racism as they both divide the wage and salary working class against each other. You don't seem to mind nationalism which (not being funny, but genuinely) surprises me as I thought from your other posts on urban 75 that your views were more advanced than this, with some sort of commitment to the world-wide working class.

You seem to be unable to appreciate that Tomlinson's message has any meaning except the one that you attribute to it. Now, far be it for me to contradict your rather dogmatic interpretation, but to me "If there’s jobs available it should be available for everyone" can as easily be read as "jobs for workers in Britain" as the spin you're giving it, and that's not racist or anti-internationalist, it's merely a rational statement that British employers be held to some sort of account with regard to their economic exploitation of workers - i.e. have to actually pay employer N.I. contributions etc.

 

[SpineyNorman]

He's giving the proceeds of his book to worthy causes, like drug rehabilitation.

I could care less about his bank account. Nor should you.

There are more important things to care about.

He's a dangerous zealot when it comes to drug rehab (with his anti-methadone/substitute cruisade and his one size fits all abstinence is the only way to go obsession) so that doesn't exactly fill me with optimism either.

Also, if you could care less doesn't that mean you care quite a bit?

 

[ViolentPanda]

A bit like you, then, telling me I've been calling people racist.

You didn't call people racist.
You insinuated it.

 

[rekil]

So let me ask you smokedout, are the new era campaigners still getting it wrong over brand's contribution to their campaign?

How long are you prepared to hide in them bushes waiting for somebody to blunder into your half-arsed trap?

 

[SpineyNorman]

A better question would be how much is the Queen worth. £44 billion the last I read. What did she do for New Era? Did she speak out on behalf of the mothers trying to keep a roof over their children's heads?

You're never going to make friends here with that kind of attitude towards our beloved head of state. She opens kids homes and charity hospitals and stuff - you're just jealous cos she does more good than you and her wealth is just an excuse to attack her. I know you yanks are jealous of our glorious incorruptible monarchy but you don't need to show it quite that much.

 

[Jean-Luc]

You didn't call people racist.
You insinuated it.

No I didn't. You inferred it because you have a different, wider definition of "racist" than me. Or unless you think Poles and East Europeans generally are a "race". Which would be worse.

 

[SpineyNorman]

No I didn't. You inferred it because you have a different, wider definition of "racist" than me. Or unless you think Poles and East Europeans generally are a "race". Which would be worse.

I for one am grateful to you for shining the light of your advanced consciousness on the issue. Until now I had always assumed 'jobs for all regardless of nationality' was an internationalist demand and that those supporting the right of bosses to only offer jobs to workers of a specific nationality (in this case Polish) were definitely not communists and more likely to be nationalists. You intellectual giant of internationalism.

 

[Jean-Luc]

to me "If there’s jobs available it should be available for everyone" can as easily be read as "jobs for workers in Britain" as the spin you're giving it,

But that was the "spin" I was prepared to give it. It is saying "no jobs to people from outside Britain". Which is what I was objecting to (as anti-internationalist). Migrants from Eastern Europe are basically fellow workers seeking a better life just as migrants from Britain to the US, Australia and Canada or wherever are.

 

[SpineyNorman]

But that was the "spin" I was prepared to give it. It is saying "no jobs to people from outside Britain". Which is what I was objecting to (as anti-internationalist). Migrants from Eastern Europe are basically fellow workers seeking a better life just as migrants from Britain to the US, Australia and Canada or wherever are.

It isn't saying that at all you massive plum. It's saying jobs in Britain shouldn't only be advertised to Polish workers. And he's right.

But you carry on in your defence of the right of bosses to divide the working class in order to drive down wages.

 

[ViolentPanda]

actually to be fair, I'm not sure Brand is trying to take that away, its just whats happening, and I dont think even Boris is either. But you are.

Well, you know how it is. People feel threatened by even the idea that the lumpen-proletariat might have the capacity to organise for themselves. Far better to attribute shit to members of the bourgeoisie.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Urban is trying to take it away by posting 102 pages of garbage about Brand, thereby deflecting from New Era which after all the blahblahing on this thread has hardly been addressed until *I* brought it up.

New Era, Focus E15 and literally hundreds of thousands of other causes are a symptom of an over-arching problem. While Brand's engagement may or may not address a few symptoms, his wishy-washy take on politics, his incoherent call for revolution, don't address the over-arching problem, they distract from it.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Former Westbrook partners Benyon are still managing the estate on behalf of Dolphin, meet the new boss.

Not quite. Dolphin has the final say, and Benyon are now retained agents.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The title of this thread is "Russell Brand on Revolution."

102 pages on what a louse Brand is, and other stupidities, and NADA about the "Revolution."

You obviously haven't read the thread, then.
That or you're being a disingenuous halfwit.
Or both.

 

[FNG]

Not quite. Dolphin has the final say, and Benyon are now retained agents.

I need a bit more convincing about Dolphin TBH, they were set up as a charitable trust after selling their previous holdings to Westbrook, but as their usp is providing affordable housing their application criteria of a joint income of 30,000k seems steep to me it would price most single parents out of the market and a sizeable number of couples too unless both were holding down full time jobs, obviously this doesn't apply to existing new era tennants, but my inner sceptic says its all a bit too cosy.

 

[SpineyNorman]

I need a bit more convincing about Dolphin TBH, they were set up as a charitable trust after selling their previous holdings to Westbrook, but as their usp is providing affordable housing their application criteria of a joint income of 30,000k seems steep to me it would price most single parents out of the market and a sizeable number of couples too unless both were holding down full time jobs, obviously this doesn't apply to existing new era tennants, but my inner sceptic says its all a bit too cosy.

It would price me and my partner out and we both do have fulltime jobs. what kind of affordable housing provider demands a minimum income?