Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Russell Brand on Revolution

thornberry_3113624c.jpg

image of #Bristol
:facepalm:
 
Just read a Facebook debate between sp members during which someone said they wouldn't be comfortable campaigning if TUSC got an endorsement from Russell Brand or having his name on the leaflet. The replies were things like 'criticising brand for his wealth is helping the class enemy' :D and comparing Russell Brands support to using an iPhone.

I know that I am not supposed to care about what the sp do as im no longer a member of it but it made me go :( and then :facepalm:
 
Just read a Facebook debate between sp members during which someone said they wouldn't be comfortable campaigning if TUSC got an endorsement from Russell Brand or having his name on the leaflet. The replies were things like 'criticising brand for his wealth is helping the class enemy' :D and comparing Russell Brands support to using an iPhone.

I know that I am not supposed to care about what the sp do as im no longer a member of it but it made me go :( and then :facepalm:
They seem to be getting desperate for a quick fix to becoming a credible electoral alternative. Charismatic person with media interest seems to offer the chance of a bit more exposure. They're probably willing to overlook the (considerable) downsides.
 
They seem to be getting desperate for a quick fix to becoming a credible electoral alternative. Charismatic person with media interest seems to offer the chance of a bit more exposure. They're probably willing to overlook the (considerable) downsides.

I couldn't believe what I was reading.
 
A disgruntled former comrade I was chatting to last night reckons their trying to recruit him :facepalm:

Would probably be a good thing.

Not for the SP. Not in the way that they think it would. It might well fuck 'em over in a myriad of ways.

But generally.

Channels Brand down some blind alleys, stops him being such a loose cannon, the SP could function as a way of quarantine from more vulnerable groups and campaigns. Might put a lid on some of his more dodgy musings too.

Doesn't solve the problem of course but might neuter it a little to the benefit of the rest of us.
 
Let's get this clear though - this is only someone that brand relied on and was a central part of his vision during his rebirth - not brand himself. This is really really important - brand is very easily led and - judging by all the extreme-pro-brand people, they are gullible too. So there is a scene doing this -and they are targeting it. Brand was a target. ARE YOU A TARGET?!!!

Mungy apart, he's wrote good no nonsense direct stuff
 
A disgruntled former comrade I was chatting to last night reckons their trying to recruit him :facepalm:
I can't see that and certainly can't see Brand accepting. If you read his book he is more into the sort of direct action, anti-election anarchism of people like David Graeber than any brand of trostkyism or vanguardism. In fact he specifically repudiates leadership:
The answer to the quandry of how to reorganise society isn't new leaders within the system, the answer isn't leaders at all. The answer is, of course, simple: we can run our own lives and our own communities.
And he writes (or his ghost-writer does) admiringly of the Spanish Revolution as described by George Orwell in Homage to Catalonia. I would have thought he'd be more likely to join the Anarchist Federation than SPEW. But I imagine he won't endorse any particular group but, like Chomsky, all those committed to direct action and future society as a federation of self-administering communities.
 
I can't see that and certainly can't see Brand accepting. If you read his book he is more into the sort of direct action, anti-election anarchism of people like David Graeber than any brand of trostkyism or vanguardism. In fact he specifically repudiates leadership:

And he writes (or his ghost-writer does) admiringly of the Spanish Revolution as described by George Orwell in Homage to Catalonia. I would have thought he'd be more likely to join the Anarchist Federation than SPEW. But I imagine he won't endorse any particular group but, like Chomsky, all those committed to direct action and future society as a federation of self-administering communities.
The AF wouldn't let him in my diggy hostility clause mate.
 
I can't see that and certainly can't see Brand accepting. If you read his book he is more into the sort of direct action, anti-election anarchism of people like David Graeber than any brand of trostkyism or vanguardism. In fact he specifically repudiates leadership:

And he writes (or his ghost-writer does) admiringly of the Spanish Revolution as described by George Orwell in Homage to Catalonia. I would have thought he'd be more likely to join the Anarchist Federation than SPEW. But I imagine he won't endorse any particular group but, like Chomsky, all those committed to direct action and future society as a federation of self-administering communities.


Franco could be beat via 'liquid democracy'. That is if you like a tory candidates position on one thing vote for them via the internet.
 
Franco could be beat via 'liquid democracy'. That is if you like a tory candidates position on one thing vote for them via the internet.
Are you sure that's what "liquid democracy" implies? According to this entry on wikipedia it doesn't sound a bad idea. It seems a bit like the system of "mandated delegates" that Marx praised the Paris Commune for and that Lenin claimed the Russian soviets were based on.

Anyway, that's not the point. Is it being advocated by Brand and others for making political decisions now under capitalism or to be implemented after capitalism has been abolished? Not the same.
 
Are you sure that's what "liquid democracy" implies? According to this entry on wikipedia it doesn't sound a bad idea. It seems a bit like the system of "mandated delegates" that Marx praised the Paris Commune for and that Lenin claimed the Russian soviets were based on.

Anyway, that's not the point. Is it being advocated by Brand and others for making political decisions now under capitalism or to be implemented after capitalism has been abolished? Not the same.
I'm 100% sure that it is how brand used it. To compare it to 1871, grow up.
 
I'm 100% sure that it is how brand used it. To compare it to 1871, grow up.
You could be right about Brand. Maybe he did have in mind what the Pirate Party propose. I don't know. But it wasn't me who made the comparison to 1871 in Paris but whoever wrote the wikipedia article I gave a link to. This is what it says:

The internal policies of the Paris Commune are seen as the real-world precursor to the more formalized notions of modern delegative democracy.[citation needed]

Early Soviets,[2] before a Bolshevik majority was reached. Delegative democracy was gradually eroded in favor of more representational forms of governance.

The Industrial Workers of the World labor union uses multiple levels of democracy, including delegative democracy. Local branches are controlled directly democratically by local members. These branches once per year elect, and vote on direction for, delegates to send to a yearly general convention, at which they carry out deliberations and construct referendums. The convention has no power to make and enforce decisions on its own; changes are accomplished by way of mailed referendum ballot. This yearly ballot is also used to elect members to various union administrative roles. Alternatively to the delegative process, members may add proposals to the ballot by initiative.
Some other organisations are run on the same basis.
 
You could be right about Brand. Maybe he did have in mind what the Pirate Party propose. I don't know. But it wasn't me who made the comparison to 1871 in Paris but whoever wrote the wikipedia article I gave a link to. This is what it says:

Some other organisations are run on the same basis.

Well spotted:thumbs:
 
Its not looking good

Just putting this here

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=Russell brand pua

There's a string of associations with 'pickup artists' dating back years.

I could only see Neil Strauss (didn't watch the youtube vid), from 2011, and then lots of posts on pua blogs/forums about Brand. Grim, obviously, but people need to be given space to change and iirc he's said he's trying to address his sexism, he needs to be given space to show that he is, his denouncement of Julien Blanc does show that, although if he's not said anything about Neil Strauss in that, or his past association with at least one pua wanker, then that's a bit suss really.
I suppose I should see exactly what he's said recently about his sexism, but I certainly cba tonight.
 
I could only see Neil Strauss (didn't watch the youtube vid), from 2011, and then lots of posts on pua blogs/forums about Brand. Grim, obviously, but people need to be given space to change and iirc he's said he's trying to address his sexism, he needs to be given space to show that he is, his denouncement of Julien Blanc does show that, although if he's not said anything about Neil Strauss in that, or his past association with at least one pua wanker, then that's a bit suss really.
I suppose I should see exactly what he's said recently about his sexism, but I certainly cba tonight.

Agree with that tbh.
 
Back
Top Bottom