Jeremy Paxman vs Russell Brand
Discussion
He now seems like a bit of an a_hole. Spouting soundbites, no substance; have his brains been addled by activities earlier in his life I wonder. He talks down a system which has enabled him to become well known and probably quite wealthy and which gives him a platform to say what he has just said; without being put in prison / given 1000 lashes etc. I wonder what sort of uncorrupt socialist utopia he envisages? Let's look at human history of such experiments - China (Mao), Russia (Stalin), Cuba, National Socialism (Nazi). It's not a good track record. I just wonder what he actually would want in a system. It seems as if he wants a system which would never have allowed him to become well known and wealthy in the first place. As someone well known once said (something like): our system has its faults, but it's the best there is.
Mr_B said:
The fatal flaw being he wants change , but has no idea or answers to anything. Everyone wants change in some way, but it's a bit pointless when you don't know what you want to change to.
So our political system is completely unable to respond to the simple fact that exponential growth on a world with finite resources is bound to brake down at some point. Catastrophically. Our only hope is Russell Brand.
I need to a)learn to farm, b)learn to shoot, c)find a place that will allow me to do these things.
mattnunn said:
The French revolution was not a war, the Bolshevik revolt was not a war (well perhaps a bit), the various overnight revolutions in Eastern Europe were not wars. The balance of wealth and power is sooooo heavily in the hands of so few that a true social revolution that actually was built on a solid support from the masses and a shared vision of the future would be over in seconds and fairly bloodless, in my opinion.
So, which of those is supposed to make me think "mmm, that sure solved some problems!"The French Revolution gave us some neat literature I guess. Apart from that... pretty much all horrible both before, after, and during. Most people don't spend revolutions thinking about social structures - they spend them thinking "where is my next meal coming from, can I feed my family, am I going to wake up tomorrow?" They'll only revolt if things have gotten so bad that's what they're dealing with already. So no, I'm not looking forward to that scenario, not one bit.
L'enfer, c'est les autres.
Edited by paranoid airbag on Sunday 27th October 17:44
GON.
And were the king on’t, what would I do?
SEB.
Scape being drunk, for want of wine.
GON.
I’ th’ commonwealth I would, by contraries,
Execute all things; for no kind of traffic
Would I admit; no name of magistrate;
Letters should not be known; riches, poverty,
And use of service, none; contract, succession,
Bourn, bound of land, tilth, vineyard, none;
No use of metal, corn, or wine, or oil;
No occupation, all men idle, all;
And women too, but innocent and pure;
No sovereignty—
SEB.
Yet he would be king on’t.
ANT.
The latter end of his commonwealth forgets the beginning.
GON.
All things in common nature should produce
Without sweat or endeavor: treason, felony,
Sword, pike, knife, gun, or need of any engine,
Would I not have; but nature should bring forth,
Of it own kind, all foison, all abundance,
To feed my innocent people.
SEB.
No marrying ’mong his subjects?
ANT.
None, man, all idle—w
es and knaves.
GON.
I would with such perfection govern, sir,
T’ excel the golden age.
SEB.
’save his Majesty!
ANT.
Long live Gonzalo!
And were the king on’t, what would I do?
SEB.
Scape being drunk, for want of wine.
GON.
I’ th’ commonwealth I would, by contraries,
Execute all things; for no kind of traffic
Would I admit; no name of magistrate;
Letters should not be known; riches, poverty,
And use of service, none; contract, succession,
Bourn, bound of land, tilth, vineyard, none;
No use of metal, corn, or wine, or oil;
No occupation, all men idle, all;
And women too, but innocent and pure;
No sovereignty—
SEB.
Yet he would be king on’t.
ANT.
The latter end of his commonwealth forgets the beginning.
GON.
All things in common nature should produce
Without sweat or endeavor: treason, felony,
Sword, pike, knife, gun, or need of any engine,
Would I not have; but nature should bring forth,
Of it own kind, all foison, all abundance,
To feed my innocent people.
SEB.
No marrying ’mong his subjects?
ANT.
None, man, all idle—w
es and knaves.GON.
I would with such perfection govern, sir,
T’ excel the golden age.
SEB.
’save his Majesty!
ANT.
Long live Gonzalo!
A bit late but I watched this last night.
Brand is a deeply bitter and cynical individual. He presents an image of this bumbling and slightly goofy guy with a sense of injustice about corporate greed and the planet, but he knows exactly what his agenda is. He is marketing himself squarely to idiotic students and alcoholics, sowing confusion and anger for no real purpose. His only aim I'm sure is to make himself more famous and talked about.
He's got the contorted, angry face of an alcoholic, and the inane habit of blaming the rest of the world for his drug addiction and other problems.
A truly vile man in my opinion.
Brand is a deeply bitter and cynical individual. He presents an image of this bumbling and slightly goofy guy with a sense of injustice about corporate greed and the planet, but he knows exactly what his agenda is. He is marketing himself squarely to idiotic students and alcoholics, sowing confusion and anger for no real purpose. His only aim I'm sure is to make himself more famous and talked about.
He's got the contorted, angry face of an alcoholic, and the inane habit of blaming the rest of the world for his drug addiction and other problems.
A truly vile man in my opinion.
AJS- said:
inane habit of blaming the rest of the world for his drug addiction and other problems.
This simply isn't so. In this interview he merely states that drug addiction is something found within impoverished population. Sadly that is a fact. He is on record many times, taking responsibility for his own addiction. Russell Brand states that he was asked to edit the New Statesman as a novelty. Yes, there is little doubt that he knew he would get publicity by doing so, but it was Newsnight that approached him, asking for his opinions. (Opinions shared by others, when you see the likes of David Laws MP who has just returned to Government after he overclaimed £40k in expenses. If someone overclaimed that amount of benefit they would be imprisoned.) Brand also states that he is in no way qualified to offer up or administrate an alternative to the current system of government, but are we saying that only those that can, should be able to question it?
Interesting to read Robert Webb's reply to Brand in the New Statesman: http://www.newstatesman.com/2013/10/russell-choosi... Sure, it's a left wing response, but at least it's a call to action, rather than Brand's call to drop out.
It's not the only one to call him out on not really offering anything other than an easy way out. Blaming the system for everything is teenage rebel stuff, not the response of an adult that (like it or not) is an opinion former for some parts of the population. Brand should remake Citizen Smith.
It's not the only one to call him out on not really offering anything other than an easy way out. Blaming the system for everything is teenage rebel stuff, not the response of an adult that (like it or not) is an opinion former for some parts of the population. Brand should remake Citizen Smith.
Tuna said:
Interesting to read Robert Webb's reply to Brand in the New Statesman: http://www.newstatesman.com/2013/10/russell-choosi... Sure, it's a left wing response, but at least it's a call to action, rather than Brand's call to drop out.
It's not the only one to call him out on not really offering anything other than an easy way out. Blaming the system for everything is teenage rebel stuff, not the response of an adult that (like it or not) is an opinion former for some parts of the population. Brand should remake Citizen Smith.
Having read that, I now understand Webb actually portrays himself in that sitcom he did.It's not the only one to call him out on not really offering anything other than an easy way out. Blaming the system for everything is teenage rebel stuff, not the response of an adult that (like it or not) is an opinion former for some parts of the population. Brand should remake Citizen Smith.
Tuna said:
Interesting to read Robert Webb's reply to Brand in the New Statesman: http://www.newstatesman.com/2013/10/russell-choosi... Sure, it's a left wing response, but at least it's a call to action, rather than Brand's call to drop out.
It's not the only one to call him out on not really offering anything other than an easy way out. Blaming the system for everything is teenage rebel stuff, not the response of an adult that (like it or not) is an opinion former for some parts of the population. Brand should remake Citizen Smith.
that was a well written article, has made me think about the fact i did not vote at the last election.It's not the only one to call him out on not really offering anything other than an easy way out. Blaming the system for everything is teenage rebel stuff, not the response of an adult that (like it or not) is an opinion former for some parts of the population. Brand should remake Citizen Smith.
Crikey, a Lib Dem talking sense!
Sir Menzies Campbell Lib Dem MP for North East Fife said:
There are no great divides in principle between the three parties.
By and large we're all in favour of the mixed economy, we're all by and large - with some exceptions -in favour of state education, the kind of things which were battles between different parties have disappeared.
In addition to that, politics has become a question of management: can you manage the economy better than I can?
The third thing, rather paradoxically, is that the information technology revolution has meant that the age of deference has been swept aside, and I'm in no doubt whatsoever that there were people in the House of Commons 20, 30, 40 years ago who were a lot less than the perfect MP, but of course in those days no-one knew.
On the whole question of executive pay: 50 years ago, my mother wouldn't have had the slightest idea what the director general of the BBC was paid, and she wouldn't have thought it was her business, but now because information is better available people are better informed and inevitably people are less charitable.
Russell Brand showed a real lack of self-awareness: everything's wrong, but absolutely no suggestions as to how it would be put right.
If Russell Brand were the prime minister, imagine what kind of country it would be - if you possibly can.
By and large we're all in favour of the mixed economy, we're all by and large - with some exceptions -in favour of state education, the kind of things which were battles between different parties have disappeared.
In addition to that, politics has become a question of management: can you manage the economy better than I can?
The third thing, rather paradoxically, is that the information technology revolution has meant that the age of deference has been swept aside, and I'm in no doubt whatsoever that there were people in the House of Commons 20, 30, 40 years ago who were a lot less than the perfect MP, but of course in those days no-one knew.
On the whole question of executive pay: 50 years ago, my mother wouldn't have had the slightest idea what the director general of the BBC was paid, and she wouldn't have thought it was her business, but now because information is better available people are better informed and inevitably people are less charitable.
Russell Brand showed a real lack of self-awareness: everything's wrong, but absolutely no suggestions as to how it would be put right.
If Russell Brand were the prime minister, imagine what kind of country it would be - if you possibly can.
Art0ir said:
Crikey, a Lib Dem talking sense!
Do you have the source for that? Couldn't find it in a quick Google.Sir Menzies Campbell Lib Dem MP for North East Fife said:
There are no great divides in principle between the three parties.
By and large we're all in favour of the mixed economy, we're all by and large - with some exceptions -in favour of state education, the kind of things which were battles between different parties have disappeared.
In addition to that, politics has become a question of management: can you manage the economy better than I can?
The third thing, rather paradoxically, is that the information technology revolution has meant that the age of deference has been swept aside, and I'm in no doubt whatsoever that there were people in the House of Commons 20, 30, 40 years ago who were a lot less than the perfect MP, but of course in those days no-one knew.
On the whole question of executive pay: 50 years ago, my mother wouldn't have had the slightest idea what the director general of the BBC was paid, and she wouldn't have thought it was her business, but now because information is better available people are better informed and inevitably people are less charitable.
Russell Brand showed a real lack of self-awareness: everything's wrong, but absolutely no suggestions as to how it would be put right.
If Russell Brand were the prime minister, imagine what kind of country it would be - if you possibly can.
By and large we're all in favour of the mixed economy, we're all by and large - with some exceptions -in favour of state education, the kind of things which were battles between different parties have disappeared.
In addition to that, politics has become a question of management: can you manage the economy better than I can?
The third thing, rather paradoxically, is that the information technology revolution has meant that the age of deference has been swept aside, and I'm in no doubt whatsoever that there were people in the House of Commons 20, 30, 40 years ago who were a lot less than the perfect MP, but of course in those days no-one knew.
On the whole question of executive pay: 50 years ago, my mother wouldn't have had the slightest idea what the director general of the BBC was paid, and she wouldn't have thought it was her business, but now because information is better available people are better informed and inevitably people are less charitable.
Russell Brand showed a real lack of self-awareness: everything's wrong, but absolutely no suggestions as to how it would be put right.
If Russell Brand were the prime minister, imagine what kind of country it would be - if you possibly can.
Newsnight had him on again last night. This time it was Evan Davis vs Russell Brand:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqsFp0J22Hc
He has a right to say what he wants to say but I don't see why the BBC should give him 15 minutes of air time just so he can plug his book.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqsFp0J22Hc
He has a right to say what he wants to say but I don't see why the BBC should give him 15 minutes of air time just so he can plug his book.
Who was utterly lame to defend what he his charging money for people to read in his book. Like Boris, they are very good as going off on a tangent using their personality to divert from answering any question.Brand is a big-haired 18th century ponce who flounces around theatrically spouting his opinions, naming all of the problems but none of the solutions, and what has he got to show for it? A load of money and a string of model-quality lovers.
I dislike the guy, but I'd trade places with him in a heartbeat
I dislike the guy, but I'd trade places with him in a heartbeat
V8Ford said:
Brand is a big-haired 18th century ponce who flounces around theatrically spouting his opinions, naming all of the problems but none of the solutions, and what has he got to show for it? A load of money and a string of model-quality lovers.
I dislike the guy, but I'd trade places with him in a heartbeat
Sums it up nicely. The downside of 24/7 TV.I dislike the guy, but I'd trade places with him in a heartbeat
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff