Russell Brand - Moving Right

Van Piorsing said:
Yup, it's the conspiracy. Me and my few installed shills here are working hard through Bilderberg funding to stop Russell Brand and his socialism agenda.

You've uncovered us. Great job. I'm really impressed. 9/11 was an inside job, Sandy Hook was a staged hoax with actors and Bill Cosby is a hero.

Now my benefactors shall exterminate me in FEMA camp 2 for being exposed.
Click to expand...
You laugh, but look at what he (and others) have actually achieved with the New Era estate. And Brand's continuing to tackle several small scale causes like that, he's not just 'prancing around for the cameras' as he's regularly accused of.

I can understand not liking his personality, thinking he gets too much press attention, or disagreeing with him politically, but he's in the process of doing a lot of good for the 'common man' (ugh, horrible phrase), and has to be commended for that. Would you prefer he was doing nothing, like practically every comparable famous personality? Apathy around some of these causes is appalling, it's a disgrace that they're not picked up by the wider media and made common knowledge.
 
ThierryHenry said:
You laugh, but look at what he (and others) have actually achieved with the New Era estate. And Brand's continuing to tackle several small scale causes like that, he's not just 'prancing around for the cameras' as he's regularly accused of.

I can understand not liking his personality, thinking he gets too much press attention, or disagreeing with him politically, but he's in the process of doing a lot of good for the 'common man' (ugh, horrible phrase), and has to be commended for that. Would you prefer he was doing nothing, like practically every comparable famous personality? Apathy around some of these causes is appalling, it's a disgrace that they're not picked up by the wider media and made common knowledge.
Click to expand...
The thing is, I love his personality. He's quite great and dynamic, always being nice to grey people and mixing it with lots of entertainment value which makes him interesting chap to listen to. Like you said, it's also about getting some attention so he can have reasonable platform to speak about the problems and expanding the global consciousness. Yes, he also has an ego but who doesn't these days ?

It's just every time I hear big word like Revolution and something like socialism being attached to each other as a Russell Brand's answer to the problems packet it makes me wanna troll him to death. To revolutionize is not to go back to socialism but it is to go forward but we know that he's still quite young so he may someday naturally evolve because right now he's basically advocating for giving even more power to the government and that idea was not always necessarily good for 'common man'. (Terrible, terrible phrase.)
 
Van Piorsing said:
Yup, it's the conspiracy. Me and my few installed shills here are working hard through Bilderberg funding to stop Russell Brand and his socialism agenda.

You've uncovered us. Great job. I'm really impressed. 9/11 was an inside job, Sandy Hook was a staged hoax with actors and Bill Cosby is a hero.

Now my benefactors shall exterminate me in FEMA camp 2 for being exposed.
Click to expand...

Lolwut? I've not seen you defending rich elites, nor do I think anyone who doesn't like Russell Brand is a Freemason, ya bloody loon
 
soap said:
Lolwut? I've not seen you defending rich elites, nor do I think anyone who doesn't like Russell Brand is a Freemason, ya bloody loon
Click to expand...
You're not long enough here my hippie friend, back when I defended them Jewz and their Redcafe leader - Jasonrh, a 5th dimensional lizard from Draco system.

jasonrh-fab.jpg
 
How bizarre. The more I hear from Brand, the more it seems he has a knack for describing problems without providing any tangible, realistic solutions to solve them.

Campaigning for the eradication of the nation state being the recent example.
 
His video about the Germanwings incident is one of his better ones I think. He repeats himself a bit, which is inevitable I supposes given the man makes a video every other day or something. I've long thought that rising rates of mental illness is indicative of a society that is fundamentally flawed, nice to hear someone with such a wide audience talking about this.
 
Eboue said:
I think there is no way to know but it seems reasonable to me. Remember the much more severe stigma too.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the increased incidence of depression does seem real. You can't put it all down to better diagnosis, as there hasn't been a parallel increase in other mental illnesses, like phobias.

Lots of plausible theories as to why this might be. Mainly down to people living longer and with more chronic illnesses. Having most of the population dying young is a great way to keep rates of depression down.
The growing burden of chronic diseases, which arise from an evolutionary mismatch between past human environments and modern-day living, may be central to rising rates of depression. Declining social capital and greater inequality and loneliness are candidate mediators of a depressiogenic social milieu. Modern populations are increasingly overfed, malnourished, sedentary, sunlight-deficient, sleep-deprived, and socially-isolated. These changes in lifestyle each contribute to poor physical health and affect the incidence and treatment of depression.
Click to expand...
 
Raoul said:
Did he propose any realistic solutions?
Click to expand...

Mainly to stop condemning people with mental health issues by acknowledging that most of us have them at some point or another to a certain extent, or at lesst the propensity for "madness". Watch it for a more articulate explanation of course.

Eboue said:
I think there is no way to know but it seems reasonable to me. Remember the much more severe stigma too.
Click to expand...

Even if it has stayed the same (I really doubt it) then it should still tell you something is very wrong when, according to his video, 50% of Americans will seek treatment for mental health issues at some point in their lives.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
That doe sound absurdly high. Although it will depend on the criteria used. Might be that anyone who ever asks their doctor for something to help them sleep gets classified as seeking treatment for "mental health issues".
Click to expand...

Possibly, it could also be an estimation of how many people suffer from it in total and not how many seek help, now I think about it I don't actually remember. Either way it's worrying if true.
 
From my own experience, working with Anxiety, OCD, Phobia's (Schema therapy), I can honesty say, that there has been a dramatic increase in those people aged (14-24) being referred. Although, the last 3 years have seen a sharp decline, but this is typically due to lack of funding, and antidepressants being preferred over therapeutic resources. Even access to a CPN, has seen a massive decline, and to be fair to most GP's lack a detailed understanding of Anxiety etc.
 
I'm assuming the second edition of his book with the new 'Vote Labour' last chapter will be ready for Xmas.

Revolution, revolt, rise up, vote labour, revolting.

:lol:
 
Eyepopper said:
I'm assuming the second edition of his book with the new 'Vote Labour' last chapter will be ready for Xmas.

Revolution, revolt, rise up, vote labour, revolting.

:lol:
Click to expand...

You've got to wonder if it was his intention all along. Perk up the interest of a disillusioned section of voters by saying "vote for nobody, we need anarchy, we need to change the system" and after getting the interest and a bit of a following he then switches to "oh actually it's Labour who already do the right things, what a great guy Milliband is" and he pushes a portion of swing voters his way.

Giving him too much credit?
 
I don't think Russell Brand is a conspiratorial invention of the Labour Party if that's what you're suggesting, no.
 
Pexbo said:
You've got to wonder if it was his intention all along. Perk up the interest of a disillusioned section of voters by saying "vote for nobody, we need anarchy, we need to change the system" and after getting the interest and a bit of a following he then switches to "oh actually it's Labour who already do the right things, what a great guy Milliband is" and he pushes a portion of swing voters his way.

Giving him too much credit?
Click to expand...

Definitely.

He's always been quite impulsive. Obviously been influenced by someone who talked some sense into him, fairly recently.
 
ThierryHenry said:
I don't think Russell Brand is a conspiratorial invention of the Labour Party if that's what you're suggesting, no.
Click to expand...


Yes that's what I was suggesting. 39 years in the making, their plans are finally coming to fruition.
 
Uzz said:
Why has he changed his mind? I saw a click baity article about it but didn't want to take the bait.
Click to expand...

He's realised what everyone else has realised years ago - abstaining is not a voting option, it's conceding your voting option and he feels that Labour is the lesser of the evils.

It's quite funny actually, after spending months urging people to not to vote in order to show their dismay at the options available, he's essentially saying "well actually that's not going to help anyone, we should just support the party that best suits our interests".

Fight the power Russel.
 
Pexbo said:
He's realised what everyone else has realised years ago - abstaining is not a voting option, it's conceding your voting option and he feels that Labour is the lesser of the evils.

It's quite funny actually, after spending months urging people to not to vote in order to show their dismay at the options available, he's essentially saying "well actually that's not going to help anyone, we should just support the party that best suits our interests".

Fight the power Russel.
Click to expand...
Thanks.

I actually thought that if he had to vote, he'd go for Green.

But, yea, that is a little short sighted of him...but this might've been his goal all along (as you suggested earlier). Now, he'll announce a 50 day tour starting next week...
 
Pexbo said:
He's realised what everyone else has realised years ago - abstaining is not a voting option, it's conceding your voting option and he feels that Labour is the lesser of the evils.

It's quite funny actually, after spending months urging people to not to vote in order to show their dismay at the options available, he's essentially saying "well actually that's not going to help anyone, we should just support the party that best suits our interests".

Fight the power Russel.
Click to expand...

And he's also done it after the deadline to register for voting, which seems rather counter-productive considering he may have convinced some of his followers not to vote.
 
He changed his mind because labour are the party of the people, honest to the core and devoid of a single tie to big business, clearly.
 
Eyepopper said:
He changed his mind because labour are the party of the people, honest to the core and devoid of a single tie to big business, clearly.
Click to expand...

While you're probably being facetious, they are a damn-sight less inclined to bend over and felate big businesses than the Tories...
 
ipodnani said:
While you're probably being facetious, they are a damn-sight less inclined to bend over and felate big businesses than the Tories...
Click to expand...

Yes I hear it takes two drinks, and sometimes even dinner!
 
To be fair to him, his stance was pretty much vote Labour to prevent another 5 years of the Tories, not "Ed is a top lad and them Labour fellas are paragons of the common people". He did ask voters in Brighton Pavillion to continue to vote Green.

What will be interesting is how he responds to a Labour government that possibly renegs on their promises.
 
Kaos said:
To be fair to him, his stance was pretty much vote Labour to prevent another 5 years of the Tories, not "Ed is a top lad and them Labour fellas are paragons of the common people". He did ask voters in Brighton Pavillion to continue to vote Green.

What will be interesting is how he responds to a Labour government that possibly renegs on their promises.
Click to expand...

The problem is though that his whole gimmick/approach has been that he's anti-establishment. I don't see how then turning round and saying, "Vote Labour" doesn't contradict that, even if they align to his views more than the Tories.
 
Kaos said:
To be fair to him, his stance was pretty much vote Labour to prevent another 5 years of the Tories, not "Ed is a top lad and them Labour fellas are paragons of the common people". He did ask voters in Brighton Pavillion to continue to vote Green.

What will be interesting is how he responds to a Labour government that possibly renegs on their promises.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is exactly what people are not getting. I'm pretty sure his party of choice is the greens, but on a practical level if he wants to get the Tories out, Labour is the only option. He hasn't really changed position (he still wants the tories out), he is just now advocating a way in which to practically do that.
 
Cheesy said:
The problem is though that his whole gimmick/approach has been that he's anti-establishment. I don't see how then turning round and saying, "Vote Labour" doesn't contradict that, even if they align to his views more than the Tories.
Click to expand...

Considering that another 5 years of a Murdoch-led Tory government is pretty much the worst scenario for the anti-establishment, it would make sense to do what was possible to prevent that for the sake of damage limitation. Its a case of pragmatism over ideology.

HabeasC said:
Yeah, this is exactly what people are not getting. I'm pretty sure his party of choice is the greens, but on a practical level if he wants to get the Tories out, Labour is the only option. He hasn't really changed position (he still wants the tories out), he is just now advocating a way in which to practically do that.
Click to expand...

Spot on.
 
Brand advocated not voting under the guise that it didn't matter who one voted for because the outcome would remain the same (Big business would continue to control policy and operate to its own benefit). A chat with Ed Milliband apparently changed his mind about that paradigm and now he advocates/promotes voting Labour because Ed will reputedly listen to the people.

It reeks of naivety and I also have suspicions that Cameron labelling him a "joke" may well have forced an ego response that appears rash at best.

Of course Milliband was going to turn up and try to appease him and say what he wanted to hear, no sane politician would agree to the experience otherwise. Ed didn't even vocalise the concept particularly well in the interview let alone outline policy to bring about necessary changes. This only further confuses me as to what Brand is actually doing here and whether he is just an incredibly susceptible individual.

Brand has long been raving about how the political system is broken and therefore defunct, "change could only come from outside this framework" to paraphrase. Championing Labour clearly goes against this ideal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.