Russell Brand

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
And we wonder why western media didn't report any of this..[/QUOTE]

Western media is basically corrupt to the bone. The news given to the people are correct, the problem are the news hide to average Joe.

How can one fight a great media group?

I never thought I find myself defending Russell Brand, who was always an annoying nuisance. However, he has a lot of simple truths to tell and nobody can really argue with what he has to criticise: food banks, corruption, inequality, unelected House Of Lords and many more issues. His basic message that the English politics make the rich people richer and poor people poorer seems to be right for me and it is not only happening in England. He is a comedian and he does not have to found a party to have the right to criticise the system, that is ridiculous. Everybody has the right to criticise the system in a democracy and the claim in that digital spy article - that more social justice in a society leads to maoism or other dictatorships is outright laughable. After all, there are countries with free health care and social justice and they are not to be found in North Korea but in Scandinavia.

"he has a lot of simple truths"

He has a couple. Anyone who keeps himself in the media as much as Brand is eventually going to get something right, but he also has a lot of nonsense he should be embarrassed to have his name attached to.

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]Day dop wrote:[/b]

He essentially does the same as David Icke, sprinkles a few truths in amoungst a whole load of bullshit aimed at a certain audience

You'll notice a lot of his fans are conspiracy theorists and woo-meisters, the latter sucked in by his Deepak Chopra style mystical bollocks type ramblings.
For example, aside from a lot of his childish so called political ideas, he promotes his Trews site as somewhere you can get "the truth" (typical charlatan tactic) - and yet, you find long debunked 9/11 conspiracy theory claims on there. "Thermite!" "WTC7!" (he also retweeted David Icke 9/11 conspiracy theory tweets).
[/QUOTE]
Yikes. Well, thanks for bringing all that forth. Everything I'd read/heard was bang on, but obviously I'd just stumbled upon those few things he was right about. He recently did a rant on Canadian politics that was so completely accurate - and then the next day he's a conspiracy nut. This is why the political left is a complete mess. There's no clear message or organization.

[QUOTE]We need more people like Carl Sagan, not Russell Brand. I don't recall him repeatedly having pissing contests with easy targets or misleading and manipulating the naive. The man only cared to educate and inform. That's what we need.[/QUOTE]
+1[/QUOTE]

This > http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/11/02/russell-brand-s-revolution-for-morons.html

[QUOTE] [b]YourValentine wrote:[/b]

I never thought I find myself defending Russell Brand, who was always an annoying nuisance. However, he has a lot of simple truths to tell and nobody can really argue with what he has to criticise: food banks, corruption, inequality, unelected House Of Lords and many more issues. His basic message that the English politics make the rich people richer and poor people poorer seems to be right for me and it is not only happening in England. He is a comedian and he does not have to found a party to have the right to criticise the system, that is ridiculous. Everybody has the right to criticise the system in a democracy and the claim in that digital spy article - that more social justice in a society leads to maoism or other dictatorships is outright laughable. After all, there are countries with free health care and social justice and they are not to be found in North Korea but in Scandinavia.

[/QUOTE]

Simple truths? It's not hard to bleat on about what people had already became aware of in their 20's is it?
So what about all the misleading crap and absolute horseshit he promotes and comes out with, which is plentiful? (See link above for examples, something I read after I created this thread).
And what does this so called revolution of his amount to? Very little, other than the mostly ill thought out ramblings of a pseudo-intellectual.
And no, he doesn't have to create a party to have the right to criticise the system, of course not. But if he wants change, taking a shot at it just might help. Otherwise, what's he doing? Shamelessly promoting himself and his merchandise (just in time for Christmas) and his latest projects (that's his basic message). It's easy to bleat on about not voting, but like Lydon pointed out, when the young, naive and impressionable follow his lead, and they're getting evicted, Brand'll be alright, safe in his mansion.

Double post - deleted.

Anyone who attacks the messenger and not the message is essentially admitting defeat. And that's exactly what Day Drop is doing. The messenger is a complete ass, the message is still true.

[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]

Anyone who attacks the messenger and not the message is essentially admitting defeat. And that's exactly what Day Drop is doing. The messenger is a complete ass, the message is still true.[/QUOTE]

Which message? For a start off, I'll pick out just one - then we can go from there...

The message about 9/11?

I'll pick out one bit from that too.

Brand considers WTC7 "the mysterious, ignored ‘third tower, building 7"

Ignored? Really? That message is true?

What about the NIST investigations and reports then?

http://www.nist.gov/el/wtc7final_112508.cfm

What about all this?

"Compilation of Scientific Literature that Directly Cites to and Support's NIST's WTC 7 report's methodologies and conclusions"
http://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/294k95/compilation_of_scientific_literature_that/

Or this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PpsCCTMP8w

Or that? http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

Or all the dumb conspiracy theories that took advantage of peoples confusion - for profit, as the conspiracy theory business tends to do when there's a tragedy of some kind.




Right. This was just one of his messages that I mentioned, (WTC7) and me pointing people in the direction that reveals his message is completely wrong (one of many examples) is me admitting defeat? Well, no.
It'd be attacking the messenger only if I hadn't drawn attention to the shitty messages.

[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]

I don't like Russell Brand, I do think he's a narcissist and I do think he's extremely annoying (not to say flat-out distasteful) and he thinks he's waaaay funnier than he is, but that doesn't mean he can't get it right sometimes. And lately, he's been getting things right quite a lot. Who knows? Maybe he's just improving himself.[/QUOTE]

There's not that much difference in your basic message other than I've elaborated more on several points, and given examples of what he gets wrong (lately as well). I've said myself that he sprinkles truths in amoungst all the bull (tried and tested method). The main difference with what you've wrote, is that what you're saying is a tad more optimistic at the end, whereas I see no reason to be. After all, he says nothing new.

I don't consider it too far fetched that Brand got his basic ideas on how to market himself in the business of cunningly working on peoples distrust and insecurities from Icke (like I say, they're pally).

https://twitter.com/rustyrockets/status/378263593915273216

There is a spot in London called Speaker's Corner:

http://www.offtolondon.com/hyde_speak.html

[QUOTE] [b]Donna13 wrote:[/b]

Attention is like an addiction for some of these celebrities. They are completely self-focused, regardless of what "causes" or political opinions they say they have. No, they do not care about society or other individuals or making things better. They care about numbers of Twitter followers, and whether or not they are making the headlines. Ha. Very similar mindset to some (not all) politicians, actually.

I didn't realize Russell Brand was trying to be a voice of reason regarding things beyond his own personal life, until seeing what RW linked to here. It is very easy to be contrary and to pander to the new generation of young people who do not feel empowered. But finding fault with political leaders is level one on the intelligence scale. Finding solutions and bringing diverse and conflicting sides together or creating peace out of war - that is level four (to put it in gaming terms).[/QUOTE]

Exactly.

I don't want anyone agreeing with me completely, because I only have about 80 percent confidence in any point I ever make. Ha.

But I would like to make another point on this subject - sort of this subject. I think there is nothing wrong with voicing a complaint or protesting with others if it is for a good cause, but when a person is mixed up about their facts, or is purposely trying to mislead others with propaganda, and get others riled up over false assumptions or false conclusions, then that is not a good use of free speech and other rights. It seems it is now a trend to just want to get angry about something and, if needed, make up nonsense to justify the anger. Then the anger can become justification for violence or other destruction, or just nasty comments.

[QUOTE] [b]Donna13 wrote:[/b]

I don't want anyone agreeing with me completely, because I only have about 80 percent confidence in any point I ever make. Ha.

But I would like to make another point on this subject - sort of this subject. I think there is nothing wrong with voicing a complaint or protesting with others if it is for a good cause, but when a person is mixed up about their facts, or is purposely trying to mislead others with propaganda, and get others riled up over false assumptions or false conclusions, then that is not a good use of free speech and other rights. It seems it is now a trend to just want to get angry about something and, if needed, make up nonsense to justify the anger. Then the anger can become justification for violence or other destruction, or just nasty comments.[/QUOTE]

You could say exactly the same about many politicians, Donna :-) There would be more value in getting rid of those who have power and use all this hate speech than get all wound up about a comedian who writes a book of no consequence which nobody must buy. I have many friends in England and you can feel how the society drifts apart, just look at the riots in London last year, the Scottish referendum and the success of UKIP in the elections of the European parliament. Not to mention Brian May's rants about fox hunting and badger skulling ;-)

Yeah, the British are not afraid of complaining, which is good (if it doesn't cause riot-like destruction) and it is true that politicians purposely mislead people by either what they say or don't say. And there are plenty of issues to complain about. But when a person has adoring fans and they use that advantage to make false statements and confuse the easily confused, it is in its own category of pretty disgusting behavior.

I don't really care about what Russell Brand does too much, but with the recent example of some here thinking that he is the voice of reason - it just shows how easily some people can be fooled into looking up to someone who is basically a jerk.