Russell Brand.

Diddums · 24 Dec 2014 at 12:53

Like Algae, Russell Brand thrives on light. Being in the spotlight, to be exact. I personally think it's a way for him to prevent relapsing to drugs, because if he does, the whole world will know about it within minutes.

He just parrots what the public want to hear on Today's Trendy Ehrmahgehrd We Need To Fix This topic, and the sheeple lap it up like mothers milk.

If he somehow manages to have an effect on anything, then good on him. Until then, he's just an attention seeking clown with his own personal agendas hidden behind his mask of righteousness.

TL;DR? He's a tool.

easyrider · 24 Dec 2014 at 12:54

Janesy B said:
Or because you can't.

I just CBA

Janesy B · 24 Dec 2014 at 12:56

easyrider said:
I just CBA

But you CBA to give someone a hard time instead?

FinglisHobbit · 24 Dec 2014 at 13:14

Janesy B said:
But you CBA to give someone a hard time instead?

He would be going round in circles.

People are repeating the same stuff.

easyrider · 24 Dec 2014 at 13:17

FinglisHobbit said:
He would be going round in circles.

People are repeating the same stuff.

This

fez · 24 Dec 2014 at 13:56

Brand appeals to people because he sounds very eloquent but in a down to earth manner and it makes them feel more intelligent for supporting him. His ideas are overly simplistic and ignore the huge number of issues surrounding the causes that he claims to support.

I have no doubt that he is a clever guy but he is not working in a way that would actually help fix any of these problems he is merely playing up to a romanticised notion of leading a revolution. He doesn't have reasoned discussions with people he just makes fun of them to get cheap laughs and give the impression that he is smarter and correct in his assertions.

Threepwood · 24 Dec 2014 at 14:03

Just, wow.

Let's take the recent New Era estate: Did Brands support help secure the homes of 93 families?

I would say it was vital to their success.

fez · 24 Dec 2014 at 14:19

Threepwood said:
Just, wow.

Let's take the recent New Era estate: Did Brands support help secure the homes of 93 families?

I would say it was vital to their success.

Brilliant, 93 families still in their homes may in some way have been helped by his association. Thats a complete irrelevance in the grand scheme of things and he didn't mastermind anything.

Threepwood · 24 Dec 2014 at 14:43

Okay, so you believe that only maybe did his support help.

I guess there is a chance of that, even without the massive media coverage it gained after Brand got involved.

fez · 24 Dec 2014 at 14:47

Threepwood said:
Okay, so you believe that only maybe did his support help.

I guess there is a chance of that, even without the massive media coverage it gained after Brand got involved.

Yeah because media coverage solves problems doesn't it.

Threepwood · 24 Dec 2014 at 15:04

Yes, media coverage can help solve problems.

What are you saying between the lines?

fez · 24 Dec 2014 at 16:36

I'm saying that people who believe Russell Brand is seriously going to make any difference to politics or any large scale serious issues in this country are deluded. There is no reason why he couldn't be a positive force in this area but his personality the way he goes about things will not make the difference he hopes it will.

He is covered by the populist media because he is a celebrity and some people like to get behind him as he is flavour of the day and sells papers etc. Its easy to criticise the system and point out its flaws and inequalities yet its a whole different ball game to replace it with something that does work.

Threepwood · 24 Dec 2014 at 16:49

I meant about the media, not Russell Brand.

Nitefly · 24 Dec 2014 at 16:52

Jono8 said:
Riddle me this.

Russell has publicly stated he is willing to die for revolution and that ""There’s no point doing it if you’re not."

He also (apparently) wants a redistribution of wealth. Why then, does he not lead by example and redistribute his wealth to every person in the United Kingdom, or perhaps more beneficially, to those who are starving, ill and cold this Christmas?

He is willing to die for his revolution, yet he still rents a property in a trendy part of London for 76k a year.

How many lives could he potentially save and improve by moving outside of London and renting somewhere for £600 a month and giving the difference to those in need?

He is willing to die for revolution (ie a revolution that he claims will improve the lives of the people of the United Kingdom and make our society more fair), but not give up his wealth and cushy lifestyle to lead by example?

It is utter, utter crap and anyone who actually believes a word that comes out of his mouth is deluded.

I think it's a bit unfair to suggest that you can't be critical of the system as a whole unless you give all of your money away.

Jono8 · 24 Dec 2014 at 18:28

Nitefly said:
I think it's a bit unfair to suggest that you can't be critical of the system as a whole unless you give all of your money away.

It is absolutely not unfair. If he is genuinely so passionate about the redistribution of wealth that he is willing to die for his cause he should absolutely lead by example and give his vast wealth to those more in need of it.

The reason he does not, is because what he preaches is totally disingenuous and it is all a ploy to.make himself richer and more popular off the backs of those stupid enough to believe him.

BunnyKillBot · 24 Dec 2014 at 19:47

Jono8 said:
It is absolutely not unfair. If he is genuinely so passionate about the redistribution of wealth that he is willing to die for his cause he should absolutely lead by example and give his vast wealth to those more in need of it.

Should he? Right now he is a rich man in a poor mans world. If he didn't have a fortune, he would be a poor man in a poor mans world. Accommodation, outfits, lighting, makeup, travel to filming locations, associations with rich clients - life costs. I could, maybe, put on a christmas panto at the local arts group, with the right connections and a couple of quid.

Why do people wear suits to work? Because it creates the illusion of power and prosperity. How acrimoniously do you greet the beggar that asks you for any spare change when he says god bless you and you walk away. Like it or not, we bow to the illusion of power, power begat power, money is power and power is required for the proliferation of any human work.

Ask a rich man to give away his wealth - you might as well ask david cameron to wear a jeans and t-shirt to the houses of parliament and see how seriously the country takes him gettin' down with the kids.

Jono8 · 24 Dec 2014 at 19:56

BunnyKillBot said:
Should he? Right now he is a rich man in a poor mans world. If he didn't have a fortune, he would be a poor man in a poor mans world. Accommodation, outfits, lighting, makeup, travel to filming locations, associations with rich clients - life costs. I could, maybe, put on a christmas panto at the local arts group, with the right connections and a couple of quid.

Why do people wear suits to work? Because it creates the illusion of power and prosperity. How acrimoniously do you greet the beggar that asks you for any spare change when he says god bless you as you walk away. Like it or not, we bow to the illusion of power, power begat power, money is power and power is required for the proliferation of any human work.

So what. He claims to care so passionately about how unfair and corrupt our society is, yet is not willing to give his own vast wealth away to those that may well die from starvation or the cold this winter.

Let us remember that his cause is to redistribute the wealth in the world and make a more just and fair society. An admirable cause, but nothing but a publicity stunt unless he leads by example and redistributes his own wealth.

what is he waiting for? Is he waiting for the bankers he harps on about to back down and redistribute their wealth first? Pathetic if so.

Nitefly · 24 Dec 2014 at 20:05

Jono8 said:
It is absolutely not unfair. If he is genuinely so passionate about the redistribution of wealth that he is willing to die for his cause he should absolutely lead by example and give his vast wealth to those more in need of it.

The reason he does not, is because what he preaches is totally disingenuous and it is all a ploy to.make himself richer and more popular off the backs of those stupid enough to believe him.

Giving up his personal wealth would not change the things he is campaigning for in the slightest, so I don't really get your point.

As a side note, I think you can distinguish between individuals who have made comfortable lives for themselves against people who profiteer at the public's expense.

Jono8 · 24 Dec 2014 at 20:44

Nitefly said:
Giving up his personal wealth would not change the things he is campaigning for in the slightest.

Absolute rubbish. I thought he wants a more fair and just society?

Im sure he would therefore be distraught that he will have a christmas filled with expensive gifts, food and drink whilst those less fortunate than him have nothing. He could really make a huge difference to potentially thousands of peoples Christmases by donating 99% of his wealth. But will he? Ha, don't make me laugh.

BunnyKillBot · 24 Dec 2014 at 20:58

Jono8 said:
So what ...

To be quite frank, i stopped reading what ever dribble you wrote here. So what. What ever. Meh. Who gives a. I forgot this wasnt speakers corner, and internet trolls have the intellectual and communicative capacity as a... troll.

Enjoy your christmas my good sir. Or not. Whatever. So What. Dont care really.