russell brand - C or D?

Imagine being annoyed by someone rallying against ghovernemtns and corportates

ether russell brand and the Westminster establishment

rampant misogynist

hahahehe

Ah, so it was an "offhand remark". Wishing someone to be binned. Unlike a considered opinion. Good luck with that.

I didn't intend to single you out Lex, but your response is exactly what I hear all around me from (ultra-)conservative peeps: "Oh Russell Brand, I wish he would should the fuck up!" Instead of actually explaining why he should.

Xps etc

Should=shut

luckily the debate on russell brand and the reasons he should get in the bin are not solely confined to this thread, you could look at what people - not ultra-conservatives! - are saying elsewhere, and have been saying at length for months, for a hint or two

ether russell brand and the Westminster establishment

― keep the meat alive: pampas grass (wins), Monday, October 27, 2014 7:45 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yes

Some great misspellings here: Ether Russell Brand, etc

any given offhand remark on ilx

there's no such thing, imo

also just because russell brand blathers on about how he's anti-establishment, that doesn't mean he's anything other than a different kind of establishment and not really threatening the establishment at all

Uh xxp

anyway it's about time the widespread problem of bin threats against male comedians was taken seriously

luckily the debate on russell brand and the reasons he should get in the bin are not solely confined to this thread, you could look at what people - not ultra-conservatives! - are saying elsewhere, and have been saying at length for months, for a hint or two

― lex pretend, Monday, October 27, 2014 7:48 PM (34 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Luckily. And "people" have been saying things! Saying things "elsewhere" too! Oh my... Amazing. Yeah, that really lets you off the hook. Everything better than saying how you feel yourself. Say he needs to be binned, and when asked why say it has been discussed by "people". Splendid.

Dude I really don't think lex is being evasive

Dismissive, yeah. Which is allowed!

first they binned the comedians, and i did nothing

russell binned

dammit shoulda wrote "first lex binned the comedians" fucked up my callback

I mean, I *get* that Brand seems able to reach a specific audience who do not typically GAF about the left or about politics in general. But I do think that it's perfectly valid, that if someone is given an audience, to ask what their message actually consists of.

Because Brand doesn't ever seem to go any further than a kind of gestural politics akin to wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt - in fact, worse than that, turning up wearing a T-shirt of his face photoshopped onto a Che Guevara shirt and acting like this is some kind of radical stance.

And it's that self-aggrandisement that really irks. It doesn't feel like a publicity campaign for any stance in politics, it feels like a publicity campaign for Brand and his ~brand~, using vaguely left-flavoured poses and images as a prop. Like, the example Bragg gives, of Brand turning up at the E15 Mothers - it doesn't feel like he's trying to bring attention to their struggle, it feels like he is using their struggle to add a genuine sheen to the Brand brand. Like one of those celebrity 'activists' who find it most important to be seen - or more importantly *photographed* supporting certain causes, than it is to do a damn thing about them. I find that gross; it's like he's using people's actual actions as an accessory to look cool.

It's like "revolutionary sloganism and vaguely leftie politics" is something he read in a late-60s era rock biography of "How To Be Mick Jagger". And like Jagger, the politics is a sham, a pose, a fashionable gee-gaw he can wear as a T-shirt without ever having to back it up or explain it in any way beyond "Yeah, the government sucks now."

p.s. who the fuck is our ~new contrarian~ sock? I can't keep track any more.

Branwell: Not a sock, new ID due to unfortunate circumstances, explained on 77.

Really don't mean it bad, heart Lex, just don't get why someone is dismissed just because he is a comedian entering the discourse. Still don't.

I think it's important and worthwhile to at least try and separate Russell Brand the loudmouthed misogynist dandy comedian with Russell Brand's overall message and belief system. Seems that most people have trouble separating the two, understandably. But if Tony Benn, Barbara Castle,Gandhi and however many other benign thinkers were to have their personal characters sullied, would it make their ideals any less valid?
How much use are entities like Owen Jones, Monbiot, the Occupy movement etc really, when rhe majority of non-voters probably feel neither here nor there about them, and right-wingers simply ignore them. All they do is galvanise existing left voters to continue what they're doing.
I don't want to be capn save a brand here, as he's done a lot of stupid useless shit and still does a lot of stupid useless shit, but I don't see anything interesting or beneficial happening on the political landscape unless people like him start making a racket and getting up people's noses.

Oh FUCK YOU and your government-naming antics, whoever you are. Clean-up operation on aisle sock, please.

it's getting to the stage where we need a rolling thread for people doing that

I have just lost patience for people saying "oh, let's overlook the guy's rampant misogyny because he's vaguely left-flavoured, right?" and those kind of arguments. I'm really done with them. That is not a revolution, that is a change in management.

^^^^

Yes but that's not really what anyone's saying

It'd be one thing if he really renounced that shit, and he does seem like a person capable of a fair amount of self-examination

well exactly, his defenders aren't saying a damn thing about his misogyny, branwell's point entirely

Xpost Yes it would. At least it would be a step in the right direction. But that goes without saying.

My internet connection is going; can people just FP that government-naming post until someone does something about it? really appreciate that. Thanks.

Posted on mrf

Brand is a misogynist. Furthermore he is pretty much clueless about anything. I've no trouble admitting that. But that still doesn't make it right to just want to 'wish him away' and not listening to him. We've had enough Tories doing that. Why follow that dreadful example?

Apologies Branwell, didn't know it was off limits. Can a mod please rectify that?

soz what is wrong with wishing clueless misogynists away again?

Amory m8 you don't need to worry, brand's voice will be heard

The thing is, it seems impossible to have a discussion about the various merits and demerits of Brand's message without someone saying 'but don't forget he's a mysoginist', 'but don't forget he's a comedian', 'but he used to be a junkie', 'he has a funny annoying voice', 'he's a self aggrandising self promoter and media whore', 'he wears funny trousers', 'he's rich a do famous', 'he called his book My Booky Wook'. Everyone knows these things, and while I don't wish to downgrade or make light of his misogyny, none of the above factors actually make that much difference as to the overall message and the kind of potential impact it could have on the non-voting public.

Rich a do? Rich and. Typing on phone

xps Life's short enough without having an imperative to take the court jester's insights into political economy seriously

'he's rich a do famous'

Are you smoking his fucking book or what

his points and outlook are stupid and incoherent and dont stand by themselves in any way shape or form, whatever reason the usual suspects find against a straight white guy (private schooled wasnt he?) are as usual just the dog drooling at the dinner bell

Deems you should introduce the 1st half of that para to the 2nd half

I'm saying there's no connection

The former isn't a point the latter are holding against him?

It's easy to be cynical when a celebrity gets their photo taken with starving children or preaches about rainforests or campaigns for the removal of landmines. But if their motives, self serving or not, at least make some beneficial difference or motivate others to join in the good work, then who exactly is losing out?

http://nomorepage3.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Russell-Tweet.jpg

He's post-sexist, not a misogynist

yes russell rose from her vagina like a phoenix

The edited/missing posts here maybe have made this thread difficult to be certain in comprehension but let's be clear: Brand is an idiot. His overall message seems no more complicated than "oh no the system is broken and bad people get away with doing bad things" which is not really an insight - and that's not a message you have to be on a liberal side to identify with - and his method of dealing with that, "don't vote", is completely disempowering to the minority voices and groups that he claims to care about but actually seems to be using to massage his public ego. Like, if he can't see how saying "don't use your voice" is a contradiction to "people in power need their privilege checked", then he absolutely does not deserve any position of influence in any post-coalition voice of protest I want to be part of. I am not willing to settle for "well it's better than nothing" and I think it is patronising to think anyone should accept it.

Also I'm sure he could do something about his live set on DVD, the one where he basically says "oh Sachsgate was really just a big lol" and doesn't seem to acknowledge how #banterculture is why women still don't seem to have safe spaces or sexual liberties (because who, male or female, needs respect or privacy?), he could easily denounce it or been seen to be doing something to delete it from his career narrative.

Fuck this guy, basically

Huh so people really hate this guy? He seems relatively harmless from this side of the pond.

Why I am I not surprised that a worthless fuck like you is a Brand apologist as well as many other worthless fucking things?

Oh you