The issue I have with Russell Brand is nothing to do with him highlighting issues within society which are swept under the carpet and not exposed by mainstream media or politicians. On my Twitter and various other social platforms I have voiced my anguish against the banks, the corporate elite, governments, Western double standards, the media, privatisation, gentrification and every other tion etc. etc. but today we're here to talk about one man.
The issue I hold with Brand in simply the way in which he goes about doing so. To start simply with his book for me this was in distaste; the cover to start an image of Brands face reminiscent of Che Guevara with the word REVOLUTION across it which gives the idea that Brand is at the forefront, the face of the new revolution he is the man to lead us into free humanity, and self sufficiency. Another problem I hold with the book is to put it simply- why.
Brand wants to 'awaken' the masses but has limited the exposure of his ideologies ( most if not all regurgitated and soaked in colloquialism- which I guess makes for easy reading and engages interest if you aren't of strong political intellect) but why place a price on information that should be accessible to the masses. Brand is within every financial position to have made some of his thoughts and 'ideas' partly free distribution' to schools, universities even posted through our letter boxes as political propagandist material instead he has 'capitalised' (cue the 'money goes to drug rehabilitation' brigade' that old chestnut admirable I am certain) but much like the new release of the T Shirts this revolutionary merchandise is COMMERCIALISING an ethical movement.
His documentary film being bank roll funded? A man in the industry for that long with so many connections has to seek bank roll funding with tax break incentives to create a documentary film? I know young film makers who have made productions off their own backs distributed them through free platforms such as Youtube and have gone viral in a matter of days, this is still a much unanswered question. And yet another example of COMMERCIALISATION.
To continue we have seen time and time again the stigmatisation for those who are anti establishment, those who are for revolution and against the power and influence held within higher classes. That we are nothing less then reckless, wacky, hippy anarchists, who want to destroy the streets whilst donned with V for Vendetta masks and abuse psychedelics. People who are to be feared but not taken seriously.
Brand for me does nothing but perpetuate this, and this is where most of my dislike for him lays, his behaviour. For example the protest where he joined forces with women to protest against raising rent fees outside Number 10 and the notorious moment when a news reporter who was sent to stir controversy, to antagonise ( because that is all they do ) asked Brand about the price of his property. For a man who has been within the media industry for YEARS he should have known better to not entertain such questions so beyond the point of why he was there instead he launched an aggressive rant which the next day took over the headlines instead of the real reason why he was there it became again ALL ABOUT BRAND. Similarly we see outside the RBS building him square face on confront a man simply trying to understand WHY he was there this is a clear primitive sign of intimidation, bullish behaviour which further fuels the idea that revolutionists are uncontrolled aggressors. We often hear the argument in regards to this that Brands outlandish behaviour keeps the movement and ideas relevant, no it keeps him relevant because his behaviours are out weighing the cause.
Brand fails to realise that he has whether he likes it or not has become the face of revolution and therefore indirectly has become the voice and representation to the percentage of people who hold similar views. When he is on television it no longer says Russell Brand Comedian it says Russell Brand Campaigner and he is now up against the big boys. We see the same thing when we look at celebrity figures such as Rihanna who are often condemned for failing to be an adequate role model for young girls to which she replies 'I never intended to be a role model' well its intrinsic it comes with the territory so to speak.
In a conversation with a 'pro Brand' supporter he went on to compare Brand to figures such as MLK and John Lennon and even suggested that he was at threat of assassination. Brand is in NO way as much as a governmental threat to be at risk of having a bullet put through his head or to have conveniently died by cardiac arrest or found hanging from the back of his door- and why is that? Because he is still a MEDIA COMMODITY he continues to make A LOT of people A LOT of money because of his antics.
As Brand continues to be a media commodity it means he can still be monitored by 'the people at the top' he apparently loathes (aka his management) and that is why they let him go about his 'revolutionary' way, because he is being watched, and his actions are scrutinised and the strings continue to be pulled Brand is still firmly under the thumb of the elite; (As is Bob Geldolf as if you still fail to realise that donations do not solve government corruption-but that's for another article).
The sooner you realise the better.
In a conversation with a 'pro Brand' supporter he went on to compare Brand to figures such as MLK and John Lennon and even suggested that he was at threat of assassination. Brand is in NO way as much as a governmental threat to be at risk of having a bullet put through his head or to have conveniently died by cardiac arrest or found hanging from the back of his door- and why is that? Because he is still a MEDIA COMMODITY he continues to make A LOT of people A LOT of money because of his antics.
As Brand continues to be a media commodity it means he can still be monitored by 'the people at the top' he apparently loathes (aka his management) and that is why they let him go about his 'revolutionary' way, because he is being watched, and his actions are scrutinised and the strings continue to be pulled Brand is still firmly under the thumb of the elite; (As is Bob Geldolf as if you still fail to realise that donations do not solve government corruption-but that's for another article).
The sooner you realise the better.
Question Time. A brilliant opportunity. A brilliant disappointment. I am in no way saying that Brand should have all the answers or all the knowledge in the world but it turned into again a Brand Stand Up, throwing snidy, comedic insults to Nigel hardly answering any questions head on and instead relating everything back to him 'knowing where all the money is at the top' and other same old rhetoric's which he knows GETS THE PEOPLE GOING.
When Russell was initially condemned by the entire panel of promoting voter apathy Russell quickly retracted his statement and exclaimed 'Then give us someone worth voting for!' which of course caused a rally of cheers. Later on in the show a man who was later found out to be a UKIP plant asked Brand, 'With your huge following why don't you stand for parliament?!' to which Brand replied 'I don't want to become one of them'. There is a beautiful phrase we are all familiar with 'If you can't beat them join em'' what we fail to realise is that attacking from the outside in many cases falls victim to defeat, revolution has to adapt a sense of 'sophistication' in modern society to stand any chance to achieve anything substantial, we must fight from the inside to break down the infrastructure of government. To use an example, the BNP to which we saw a surge of votes from 2009 to 2010 to the hundreds of thousands it is common knowledge that when the people are in fear or desperation they will go to the extreme ends of the political spectrum and these kinds of parties break through and accumulate mass support from the people and penetrate government we can date this pattern as far back to the Nazi regime. As support for the BNP has decreased UKIP has taken the wheel taken it to the next level and has intern become a recognised political party for the far right. We must also recognise that our current FPTP voting system is a hindrance to democracy we must take into account political processes as much as the candidates themselves.
In a blog entry issued by Brand post air of the show he stated that he tried to concentrate like an adult but his mind kept drifting back to the food bank he had conveniently been to earlier that day because he was told it would help him gain some insight before joining the panel and of course because he is a good person 'y'know'. - Really? It would have been far more admirable of Brand simply confessed 'I was out of my fucking depth' and who wouldn't be? Sat on a panel with vastly politically experienced 'private schooled' ( which really should not come into the equation but there you have it' people. However it is okay to admit you simply didn't have a clue instead of using an act of humanity as an excuse, much like the old 'Sorry I was late I was helping an old woman across the road'.
When Russell was initially condemned by the entire panel of promoting voter apathy Russell quickly retracted his statement and exclaimed 'Then give us someone worth voting for!' which of course caused a rally of cheers. Later on in the show a man who was later found out to be a UKIP plant asked Brand, 'With your huge following why don't you stand for parliament?!' to which Brand replied 'I don't want to become one of them'. There is a beautiful phrase we are all familiar with 'If you can't beat them join em'' what we fail to realise is that attacking from the outside in many cases falls victim to defeat, revolution has to adapt a sense of 'sophistication' in modern society to stand any chance to achieve anything substantial, we must fight from the inside to break down the infrastructure of government. To use an example, the BNP to which we saw a surge of votes from 2009 to 2010 to the hundreds of thousands it is common knowledge that when the people are in fear or desperation they will go to the extreme ends of the political spectrum and these kinds of parties break through and accumulate mass support from the people and penetrate government we can date this pattern as far back to the Nazi regime. As support for the BNP has decreased UKIP has taken the wheel taken it to the next level and has intern become a recognised political party for the far right. We must also recognise that our current FPTP voting system is a hindrance to democracy we must take into account political processes as much as the candidates themselves.
In a blog entry issued by Brand post air of the show he stated that he tried to concentrate like an adult but his mind kept drifting back to the food bank he had conveniently been to earlier that day because he was told it would help him gain some insight before joining the panel and of course because he is a good person 'y'know'. - Really? It would have been far more admirable of Brand simply confessed 'I was out of my fucking depth' and who wouldn't be? Sat on a panel with vastly politically experienced 'private schooled' ( which really should not come into the equation but there you have it' people. However it is okay to admit you simply didn't have a clue instead of using an act of humanity as an excuse, much like the old 'Sorry I was late I was helping an old woman across the road'.
Its time to cut the comedic act, its time to cut the bullshit its time for revolution is be taken seriously and not become a 'phase' or 'novelty' as we have seen recently with the increase of support for the feminist movement. It is time for a plan of action it is time for a change because quite frankly enough is enough. I have no issue again I must stress with Brand highlighting these very important issues it is just not to my taste, no one is perfect and not everyone will be to your taste. Say to your hearts desire I am 'shooting the messenger' don't give a scoff I'm not here for that.
