Russel Brand: The time for Revolution is now.

reply to post by crimvelvet


The LSE might have had a Fabian background but it's the most right-leaning British University by miles. Huge Conservative student membership and it basically trains quants, financial analysts and bankers. It's also private which is unusual here.

The notion that it is somehow a sleeping socialist influencer is a fantasy.

Wow!

A mate told me Brand had torn Paxman a new one, but I wasn't expecting this!

I really never thought I'd ever find myself saying anything complimentary about Russell Brand.....I wanted to kill him after the Andrew Sachs thing and generally I thought he was a total pratt!

Where the hell is Brand suddenly getting this from.....Nope actually I don't care, just keep it coming Russell!

Amazed & impressed!

squarehead666
Wow!

A mate told me Brand had torn Paxman a new one, but I wasn't expecting this!

I really never thought I'd ever find myself saying anything complimentary about Russell Brand.....I wanted to kill him after the Andrew Sachs thing and generally I thought he was a total pratt!

Where the hell is Brand suddenly getting this from.....Nope actually I don't care, just keep it coming Russell!

Amazed & impressed!

edit on 2-11-2013 by squarehead666 because: s&p

I have to disagree, Paxman is a wily old dog and always asks the difficult questions. I personally think he enjoyed this exchange and the outcome of it.

reply to post by Horus12

I wouldn't dispute it.

I was merely expressing my amazement at what actually came out of Brand's mouth! I was literally told that "Brand tore Paxman a new one!" (as I said).....But this was rather more than that don't you think?

I am honestly scared that people are taking this man so seriously.

As a young person, I honestly feel bad for all the other young people have allowed themselves to be swindled into believing this occupy wall street neosocialist movement is the answer that solves the problems created by crony capitalism.

Among other things, he talks about this under class that isn't being represented by their government. But why is this? Why is it that even though these people in the "under class", who do vote despite what Russell says, feel like they're getting screwed? The answer is because to the people running, it's a competition to beat the other guy. Historically, the "under class" has proven to vote more liberally. But why? Is it because people who lean right want to purge all poor people who aren't white? Of course not. However this is common perception simply because the people that they continue to vote for repeat this over and over again. They say these things because they want to get elected. And once they get elected, they could give a rats ass about the people who put them there. The truth is that these (not all, mind you) left leaning candidates that claim to represent these people in the under class need poorer people to get elected, and thus, they keep these people poor so that they don't lose their base.

I think all young people should be embarrassed that they've gotten sucked into this system. You need to wake up and realize that you've been taken advantage of. You stand and protest wall street, yet you listen to the lies and propaganda of the left as they talk about holding CEOs and bankers accountable. We young people are so quick to vote these people in with the belief that they hold our interests at heart, but for some reason we are unable to see that it is these very same people that enable wall street and other crony capitalists. (I.E bailing out of the banks, ect.)

I think he makes a good point when he says that the problems of the people aren't being adressed by those who hold power, but for some reason people who preach this sort of message are the first ones in line to hand over their vote to someone who pushes ideas such as Russel, but ends up doing the opposite. They are not represented, but not because of evil capitalists. They aren't represented because the people they keep voting for keep screwing them over. They promise a better way of life, but once they're elected, all they've proven themselves to be good at is lining their own pockets and keep the poor people poor.

Why is it that the people from my generation have this idea that prosperity is something that is granted to you by government? Government doesn't create prosperity. While there are social programs that can be beneficial, expanding the welfare state only creates more problems than it solves.

Socialist egalitarianism? Massive redistribution of wealth and heavy taxation? I don't even know where to begin with how poisonous these ideas are. Most of my generation (people born in the 80s and early 90s) don't have any idea about recent history, or they would know how #ed up places like the U.S.S.R were. They are so reluctant to recognize the hard ships that socialism and communism create. If those systems were so great, and the propserity were to come from the government, why did the U.S.S.R fall apart in 1991? Why doesn't North Korea have the highest standard of living? Why did so many people flee Cuba in the late 1970s and early 1980s? Why is it that they fled to America and not another socialist country?

Russel Brand, while admitting that he has no idea what our current system should be replaced with as far as specifics are concerned, is advocating the removal of the very system that allows for social mobility, and suggest to replace it with a system that forbids it. He is advocating the removal of the idea, "If you work hard enough, you can be successful."

I pose a question to ATS, and to anyone who believes in Russel's way of thinking: if we were to impose massive taxation and massive redistribution of wealth, where is the incentive to work hard? If you cannot reap the rewards of your own hard work and instead are forced to give your hard earned money to someone or something that hasn't earned it, where is your motivation to continue?

My message to other young people: don't fall for this bull#. The soviet union fell for a reason. People fled Cuba for a reason. North Koreas sucks for a reason. Capitalism creates wealth, prosperity, opportunity, and jobs. Big government statism destroys those things. Don't be fooled yet again by his ideas. Use critical thinking skills. The revolution we need isn't political. It is intellectual.

squarehead666
reply to post by Horus12

 

I wouldn't dispute it.

I was merely expressing my amazement at what actually came out of Brand's mouth! I was literally told that "Brand tore Paxman a new one!" (as I said).....But this was rather more than that don't you think?

I agree there was a lot of truth there no matter whether people like Brand or not, or whether people trust his motives. I just thought Paxman looked to enjoy what was being said, in that a truth was being told from a somewhat surprising source.

Regardless of Brand, the working class should be rewarded for their labour.

Consider what Aldus Huxley stated in his novel, “Brave New World“:

“A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude…”

Without even a whimper, this is exactly what has become of the managerial structure of the United States, its States, and its local governmental bodies of counties, cities, and districts.

Shouldn't the incentive to work hard be switched from buying a big house to making a positive difference.
We have our jobs and should try.
But our hobbies or personal actions should give us our real rewards and place in society.

When people are making millions by evil means its not hard to see this system is not fair.

Not an overnight fix but I think this is the direction he is suggesting, change the way we think.

reply to post by UziXxX


What's your motivation to work hard for nothing? Especially in a corporate culture of back stabbers who will stop at nothing to get ahead?

IF you can find something halfway decent to do.

reply to post by guidetube


Your talking about a cultural change. it possible but it rests on us actually agreeing on ideas and working together cohesively. Not going to happen soon. I hate saying this but hip hop and Hollywood are not projecting that image onto the masses.

That's maybe your problem there, America wont be forcing a NWO on the world but the world could force one on America.

reply to post by projectvxn

If you want more start your own business or invest.

yes...

I've done both ..

guidetube
That's maybe your problem there, America wont be forcing a NWO on the world but the world could force one on America.

It is possible most the wars since the 80s have been related to the understanding of this future and an attempt to design leverage and preclude certain vulnerabilities, for the sake of our not being under that pile.

Russell agrees with most of us that things aren't ideal. Is he and Ted Turner, uber-millionaire (billionaire I think), giving away their money to begin?

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." George Orwell

Has there ever been any truer words spoken