Russell Brand on Revolution

[stethoscope]

That post from Diana9 is no better an example of the dead end tunnel this stuff will lead. And which gets in the way of proper grassroots organising. It's not such a big jump from that post to conspiraloonery.

 

[Pickman's model]

That post from Diana9 is no better an example of the dead end tunnel this stuff will go. And which gets in the way of proper organising. It's not such a big jump from that post to conspiraloonery.

that post is conspiraloonery

 

[DotCommunist]

it was full of wake up and listen sheeple. Diana is a joke, not been able to take seriously since the 'whispering in the warehouses' comment. Some peculiar late 19th century view of labour there.

 

[ViolentPanda]

No more heroes, anymore

That's the way it should be.

 

[Wilf]

http://blog.squandertwo.net/2014/12/an-open-letter-to-russell-brand.html?m=1

"Much as I disagree with most of your politics, I've always rather liked you. You do a good job of coming across as someone who might be fun to be around. Turns out, that's an illusion.
Because, you see, Russell, when you accosted me, you started speaking to me with your nose about two inches from mine. That's pretty fucking aggressive, Russell. I'm sure you're aware of the effect. Putting one's face that close to someone else's and staring into their eyes is how primates square off for a fight.
I've been thinking about this the last couple of days, Russell, and I can honestly say that the only other people ever to talk to me the way you did were school bullies. It's been nearly a quarter of a century since I had to deal with such bastards, so I was caught quite off my guard. Nice company you're keeping. Now I think about it, they used to ruin my lunchtimes too.

Hmmm... can't say I was very impressed with that (the rest of the blogpost, not the bit you quote). It makes useful points about Brand's actions being shaped by what his camera crew can capture - and also about ordinary workers getting caught up in 'actions'. But the rest of it was a pretty run of the mill defence of banking.

 

[el-ahrairah]

http://blog.squandertwo.net/2014/12/an-open-letter-to-russell-brand.html?m=1

"Much as I disagree with most of your politics, I've always rather liked you. You do a good job of coming across as someone who might be fun to be around. Turns out, that's an illusion.
Because, you see, Russell, when you accosted me, you started speaking to me with your nose about two inches from mine. That's pretty fucking aggressive, Russell. I'm sure you're aware of the effect. Putting one's face that close to someone else's and staring into their eyes is how primates square off for a fight.
I've been thinking about this the last couple of days, Russell, and I can honestly say that the only other people ever to talk to me the way you did were school bullies. It's been nearly a quarter of a century since I had to deal with such bastards, so I was caught quite off my guard. Nice company you're keeping. Now I think about it, they used to ruin my lunchtimes too.

that blogger is a total shit though. i'd hesitate to use them as any sort of comment considering they are cheerleaders for tory economics.

 

[Jean-Luc]

that blogger is a total shit though. i'd hesitate to use them as any sort of comment considering they are cheerleaders for tory economics.

I wouldn't use this either:

 

[el-ahrairah]

me neither.

 

[Buckaroo]

Hmmm... can't say I was very impressed with that (the rest of the blogpost, not the bit you quote). It makes useful points about Brand's actions being shaped by what his camera crew can capture - and also about ordinary workers getting caught up in 'actions'. But the rest of it was a pretty run of the mill defence of banking.

Yeah don't really care much about his lunch or his views but didn't know RB was making a film about himself acting the revolution, shouting. The recent burst of activity makes a bit more sense now as content filler. No doubt there'll be a toy action figure and a promo tie in with that cereal café etc

 

[butchersapron]

I wouldn't use this either:

Are you suggesting people on here have?

 

[danny la rouge]

I wouldn't use this either:

Relevance?

 

[Jean-Luc]

Are you suggesting people on here have?

No, only that their views are in line with public opinion.

 

[butchersapron]

No, only that their views are in line with public opinion.

Whose views? I really don't know what you're saying here or why you posted that filth.

 

[Wilf]

No, only that their views are in line with public opinion.

So, you were seeking to point out that if urbanites find Brand unfunny and a hypocrite, they have majority support? That's what you were saying, and nothing else?

 

[Jean-Luc]

Yes I was pointing out that most people share the view that he is a hypocrite. I don't know whether it's true or not, but not many people here seem prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. I know he's got an unsavoury past, dabbles in New Age mumbo-jumbo, and that the revolution doesn't need celebrity endorsement but I'm surprised at the hatred of the man shown by some here to the total exclusion of what he is trying to say about what's wrong with the world and the alternative even though they would probably agree with it.

I don't think he's funny either.

 

[Wilf]

Yes I was pointing out that most people share the view that he is a hypocrite. I don't know whether it's true or not, but not many people here seem prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. I know he's got an unsavoury past, dabbles in New Age mumbo-jumbo, and that the revolution doesn't need celebrity endorsement but I'm surprised at the hatred of the man shown by some here to the total exclusion of what he is trying to say about what's wrong with the world and the alternative even though they would probably agree with it.

I don't think he's funny either.

Slightly off piste and because I'm feeling quite generous, I'm not too worried about pushing the 'hypocrite - he's still got all of his millions' charge. I'd accept that if any millionaire wants to start doing anti-capitalism there's no obvious ethical, consistent or easy way of doing it. Dammed if he does, dammed if doesn't type thing. Same time, some slebs manage to donate and even occasionally get involved in things, without it being as me-me as Brand manages. Even more so, when it comes to rich slebs falling into said dammed if he does, dammed if he doesn't dilemma, well tough shit, tough shit if he hasn't left himself any room to 'do politics' in a genuinely participatory way. Go and deliver some leaflets, go and make the tea, go and do the real stuff of solidarity - and then come back and do your book.

 

[Pickman's model]

So, you were seeking to point out that if urbanites find Brand unfunny and a hypocrite, they have majority support? That's what you were saying, and nothing else?

only that and nothing more

 

[frogwoman]

[QUOTE="Jean Luc" post: 13598704]I was pointing out that most people share the view that he is a hypocrite. I don't know whether it's true or not, but not many people here seem prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. I know he's got an unsavoury past, dabbles in New Age mumbo-jumbo, and that the revolution doesn't need celebrity endorsement but I'm surprised at the hatred of the man shown by some here to the total exclusion of what he is trying to say about what's wrong with the world and the alternative even though they would probably agree with it.

I don't think he's funny either.[/QUOTE]

You don't get it.

It's actively damaging to have someone with such credentials, a millionaire celeb at that who has made a fortune from the system he is criticising, endorsing leftist causes, espousing pseudo revolutionary rhetoric, especially because that individual has been linked to now both PUA shit and conspirKslacy theory bollocks and shown precious little sign of recanting it beyond a few half hearted denials, and even more damaging to have everyone act like it's not an issue. Like comrade delta never happened, like tommy Sheridan never happened, like none of these lessons have been learned. Exactly what kind of a message does it sent out when fucking ukip has a better policy on sexism than we sem to and anyone questioning the open armed acceptance of some rapey millionaire misogynist is attacked? And we wonder why people don't take us seriously based on our critiques of identity politics and say class is more important when we can't even apply that to ourselves? Jesus.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/entertainment/articles/2010-04/28/gq-film-russell-brand-seduction-tips-

"It's better to strike in the street or at the bus stop, or perhaps near a hedge."

"Seduction is an incremental war of attrition"

Jesus fuck

 

[articul8]

"It's better to strike in the street or at the bus stop, or perhaps near a hedge."

I thought to call him "rapey" was a bit of a stretch, but that is getting extremely close...

 

[DotCommunist]

[QUOTE="Jean Luc" post: 13598704]I was pointing out that most people share the view that he is a hypocrite. I don't know whether it's true or not, but not many people here seem prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. I know he's got an unsavoury past, dabbles in New Age mumbo-jumbo, and that the revolution doesn't need celebrity endorsement but I'm surprised at the hatred of the man shown by some here to the total exclusion of what he is trying to say about what's wrong with the world and the alternative even though they would probably agree with it.

I don't think he's funny either.

You don't get it.

It's actively damaging to have someone with such credentials, a millionaire celeb at that who has made a fortune from the system he is criticising, endorsing leftist causes, espousing pseudo revolutionary rhetoric, especially because that individual has been linked to now both PUA shit and conspirKslacy theory bollocks and shown precious little sign of recanting it beyond a few half hearted denials, and even more damaging to have everyone act like it's not an issue. Like comrade delta never happened, like tommy Sheridan never happened, like none of these lessons have been learned. Exactly what kind of a message does it sent out when fucking ukip has a better policy on sexism than we sem to and anyone questioning the open armed acceptance of some rapey millionaire misogynist is attacked? And we wonder why people don't take us seriously based on our critiques of identity politics and say class is more important when we can't even apply that to ourselves? Jesus.[/QUOTE]


it has been ably demonstrated that the political classes as a whole have a real problem with these rape and 'misconduct'. From healey to galloway to cyril smith they've been at it, the party vehicle whatever its stripe gives them the space to do so.
The problem is you expect this from tories and right wingers- not all have such views but the people they voted for (labour PIE, lib dem filth..the list grows ever on)
With left wing voices, well nobody is asking for 100% purity because thats impossible. But being involved with PUA stuff, sharing space with anti-semites...sincerety is all well and good. Absolute credulous borderline shit with brand. Well. If he was really that sincere about addressing these matters he'd do so quietly and thoroughly. I see no sign of this.

 

[DotCommunist]

fuck knows whats going on with the quote function here, its come out mangled.

 

[Wilf]

well nobody is asking for 100% purity because thats impossible. But being involved with PUA stuff, sharing space with anti-semites...sincerety is all well and good. Absolute credulous borderline shit with brand. Well. If he was really that sincere about addressing these matters he'd do so quietly and thoroughly. I see no sign of this.

That's exactly it. We've all done, said and believed things we'd later regret and he's got as much leeway as the rest of us in that respect. But if he wants to do politics, wants to make some claims, wants to reinvent himself, he can't ignore the things you mention. Nor, for that matter can his supporters, who see to have gone a bit quiet on this thread.

 

[benedict]

Looks like his upcoming feature-length documentary 'Brand' is in post-production and scheduled for a 2015 release.

Russell Brand's spiritual and biographical journey meeting with a fascinating range of people - American Marines, Kenyan orphans, socialists and death row inmates - challenging and empowering people to stage a non-violent revolution.

Featuring Cameron Diaz, David Lynch, Mike Tyson, Noel Gallagher, and Simon Amstell. Among others.

 

[danny la rouge]

nobody is asking for 100% purity because thats impossible. But being involved with PUA stuff, sharing space with anti-semites...sincerety is all well and good. Absolute credulous borderline shit with brand. Well. If he was really that sincere about addressing these matters he'd do so quietly and thoroughly. I see no sign of this.

exactly.

 

[frogwoman]

That's exactly it. We've all done, said and believed things we'd later regret and he's got as much leeway as the rest of us in that respect. But if he wants to do politics, wants to make some claims, wants to reinvent himself, he can't ignore the things you mention. Nor, for that matter can his supporters, who see to have gone a bit quiet on this thread.

That's the thing. There are ex fash who become anti fash and joined afa etc, the difference is that they make a thorough, honest denunciation of their previous views. Everyone makes mistakes, that's not the point.

 

[Jean-Luc]

With left wing voices, well nobody is asking for 100% purity because thats impossible. But being involved with PUA stuff, sharing space with anti-semites...sincerety is all well and good. Absolute credulous borderline shit with brand. Well. If he was really that sincere about addressing these matters he'd do so quietly and thoroughly. I see no sign of this.

I'm trying to be objective as to whether he's sincere or not by listening to both sides, but are you saying that what he says in the first minute and a half of this video is insincere?



Maybe it isn't, but it must be a sign of something, of some movement on his part. What would he, or anyone else who's expressed such views in the past, have to do to convince you that they no longer held them?

 

[Pickman's model]

fuck knows whats going on with the quote function here, its come out mangled.

you bust it

 

[DotCommunist]

That's the thing. There are ex fash who become anti fash and joined afa etc, the difference is that they make a thorough, honest denunciation of their previous views. Everyone makes mistakes, that's not the point.

'I see you have some questionable tattoos. Here is a cheeegrater and some valium. Let me know when you are done'

while you can't expect brand the brand to remember everything and every person he met during his coke n booze phase, you can expect him to look back and recoil in horror at that 'person i once was'
not seeing much of that. And everytime you lay a righteous line about nil hour contracts or whatever the latest iniquity is some cunts going to chirp 'parklife' just after you finish talking

woop de fucking doo

 

[DotCommunist]

I'm trying to be objective as to whether he's sincere or not by listening to both sides, but are you saying that what he says in the first minute and a half of this video is insincere?



Maybe it isn't, but it must be a sign of something, of some movement on his part. What would he, or anyone else who's expressed such views in the past, have to do to convince you that they no longer held them?

not be him basically. I don't expect left wing voices to be monks but come on.

AndI haven't once doubted his sincerity.