Paxman v Brand

quite like brand (in small doses)

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/23/russell-brand-v-jeremy-paxman_n_4151743.html

Very articulate and quite impressive in a way but (typical of revolutionists!) he outlines many of the problems in society but offers absolutely no solutions whatsoever !

Very articulate and quite impressive in a way but (typical of revolutionists!) he outlines many of the problems in society but offers absolutely no solutions whatsoever !

and has just bought a $2.2 million house.

and has just bought a $2.2 million house.

My left wing 'friends' tell me that's irrelevant...

My left wing 'friends' tell me that's irrelevant...

Maybe its just me who has a problem with ex junkies promoting revolution in the UK whilst living in the Hollywood Hills earning his (lots of) money from evil capitalist films and paying his (very little) tax in the US. P'raps its an age thing.

My left wing 'friends' tell me that's irrelevant...

That must be ********...

...you can't have any friends.

That must be ********...

 

 

 

 

...you can't have any friends.

Darn....foiled again...

and has just bought a $2.2 million house.

You sure that's not mouse one of those knock out mice to save it from vivisection?

I agree with what he is saying, the system is f*cked and voting is pointless.

I agree with what he is saying, the system is f*cked and voting is pointless.

What people who spout this rubbish mean is that because the majority of the British voters dont share their views, somehow this equates to a discredited system.

The only way to change a voting system is to vote for a party that shares your opinions on our voting system. How else are you going to change it? One thing for sure , not voting is the least effective way of achieving change. Clowns like Brand dont seem to understand that its everybodies democracy, not just his and likeminded thinkers.

local people vote for a local mp that then represents them at Westminster, it may not be perfect, but its not ****ed. What do you suggest, you and Brand sit down and pick a government for us.

Why on earth do the BBC insist on putting this clown up as some sort of political thinker. His childlike approach to politics is a complete waste of broadcast time.What next Steven Hawkins on strictly come dancing?

What people who spout this rubbish mean is that because the majority of the British voters dont share their views, somehow this equates to a discredited system.

 

The only way to change a voting system is to vote for a party that shares your opinions on our voting system. How else are you going to change it? One thing for sure , not voting is the least effective way of achieving change. Clowns like Grant dont seem to understand that its everybodies democracy, not just his and likeminded thinkers.

 

local people vote for a local mp that then represents them at Westminster, it may not be perfect, but its not ****ed. What do you suggest, you and Grant sit down and pick a government for us.

 

Why on earth do the BBC insist on putting this clown up as some sort of political thinker. His childlike approach to politics is a complete waste of broadcast time.What next Steven Hawkins on strictly come dancing?

I agree that there is no obvious alternative but he is right in that whoever we vote for the environment is still going to be f*cked over, the banks are still going to cream off billions and nothing is going to be done about the growing disparity of wealth.

I agree that there is no obvious alternative but he is right in that whoever we vote for the environment is still going to be f*cked over, the banks are still going to cream off billions and nothing is going to be done about the growing disparity of wealth.

So lets all sit back and say **** it, shall we. Who governs us then?

The only way to change things is revolution or vote. As Brand can't be bothered to even get up the polling booth to try and make a small contribution, I can't see him storming Parliament somehow.

The growing disparities of wealth, does that include Brand who gets paid a fortune as a one trick pony, or is it just bankers and energy bosses that earn obscene amounts?

So lets all sit back and say **** it, shall we. Who governs us then?

 

Well we could give anarchy a go. Might be a laugh.

Brand can be quite a funny articulate chap, but no-one is going to take him remotely seriously in a political discussion.

I thought he was excellent. I can't stand the guy but his message resonated with me.

Who does the government represent?

and has just bought a $2.2 million house.

Tu quoque. It's not an argument against what he says.

Maybe its just me who has a problem with ex junkies promoting revolution in the UK whilst living in the Hollywood Hills earning his (lots of) money from evil capitalist films and paying his (very little) tax in the US. P'raps its an age thing.

Tu quoque again. I expect better from you, tim.

Gotta admire his passion even if he is part of da system now.

 

Who does the government represent?

The voters.

The voters.

Phew, that means they (any party) don't represent me.

Thank feck for that.

Bunch of power mad c*nts the lot of 'em.

Just watched the whole thing. First saw Russell Brand on Big Brother's Big Mouth. Thought he was absolutely hatstand, probably on something but brilliant all the same. I also got the impression that he'd f**k a right load of people off instantly.

There are still shades of manic in this interview. He talks quickly; has a lot of points to make, but I'm in agreement of much of what he says.

He is spot-on about an unrepresented underclass. Tories tend to see these things in very simplistic terms; remove someone's benefits and they'll have to get a job. Nah, they'll find other means to maintain an income, probably criminal. I still think a lot of the destruction in the UK riots was borne of the attitude "f*ck it, it'll never be mine anyway". The bottom rung of the ladder is now too big a leap for a lot of folk.

Think it'll be quite interesting to see how Brand's foray into politics evolves. He's recounted his life of drugs and debauchery in some detail, so the usual political tricks, such as revealing drug use or perversion aren't going to work. Yes, we know

Tu quoque. It's not an argument against what he says.

Tu quoque again. I expect better from you, tim.

Its true, I am jaundiced about Brand. Something about him evokes a visceral dislike. I agree with his central theme that the system is flawed - but its hard to hear that message from a non resident millionaire revolutionary.

What people who spout this rubbish mean is that because the majority of the British voters dont share their views, somehow this equates to a discredited system.

 

The only way to change a voting system is to vote for a party that shares your opinions on our voting system. How else are you going to change it? One thing for sure , not voting is the least effective way of achieving change. Clowns like Brand dont seem to understand that its everybodies democracy, not just his and likeminded thinkers.

 

local people vote for a local mp that then represents them at Westminster, it may not be perfect, but its not ****ed. What do you suggest, you and Brand sit down and pick a government for us.

 

Why on earth do the BBC insist on putting this clown up as some sort of political thinker. His childlike approach to politics is a complete waste of broadcast time.What next Steven Hawkins on strictly come dancing?

Been burned so many times.

Worked for a party that had as its key campaign promise a plan to regulate the car insurance industry. When they got elected, they changed their minds because of the pressure from the industry.

During another campaign the Prime Minister ridiculed the opposition's plan to impose a system of wage-and-price control. When he was re-elected, after a couple of months he announced his own plan to impose wage and price controls.

Liberal parties here invariably campaign from the left (during elections) and then govern from the right.

Right-wing parties focus during campaigns on helping the middle-class; if they get elected they cut taxes to help their rich friends, and help pay for it by cutting services and raising fees - which primarily hits the middle-class.

Right-wing parties often campaign on a law-and-order platform; and once elected, within a few years, lots of their MPs, advisors, and rich friends are discredited for criminal activity - often to do with illegal campaign funding and violations of election law.

Parties campaign on a particular manifesto; when they get elected they pursue major policies that they hid from the public. They had a hidden agenda.

These days it is very hard to believe that they will do what they say. This sort of dishonesty and cynicism undermines the system. And yet I still support and give money to the party of my choice. Go figure!

Just watched the whole thing. First saw Russell Brand on Big Brother's Big Mouth. Thought he was absolutely hatstand, probably on something but brilliant all the same. I also got the impression that he'd f**k a right load of people off instantly.

 

There are still shades of manic in this interview. He talks quickly; has a lot of points to make, but I'm in agreement of much of what he says.

 

He is spot-on about an unrepresented underclass. Tories tend to see these things in very simplistic terms; remove someone's benefits and they'll have to get a job. Nah, they'll find other means to maintain an income, probably criminal. I still think a lot of the destruction in the UK riots was borne of the attitude "f*ck it, it'll never be mine anyway". The bottom rung of the ladder is now too big a leap for a lot of folk.

 

Think it'll be quite interesting to see how Brand's foray into politics evolves. He's recounted his life of drugs and debauchery in some detail, so the usual political tricks, such as revealing drug use or perversion aren't going to work. Yes, we know

i do love the way pap goes straight on about the tories...as if they are somewhat different from the others

i do love the way pap goes straight on about the tories...as if they are somewhat different from the others

Pretty sure they're different from the perspective of someone who is now living in B+B accommodation as a result of any of the benefit caps.

Pretty sure they're different from the perspective of someone who is now living in B+B accommodation as a result of any of the benefit caps.

ok then

Pretty sure they're different from the perspective of someone who is now living in B+B accommodation as a result of any of the benefit caps.

Surely the ex Labour prime minister, Tony Blair will share some of his £50 million wealth accumulated in the wake of his tenure to help those afflicted by coalition rule, eh ??

Surely the ex Labour prime minister, Tony Blair will share some of his £50 million wealth accumulated in the wake of his tenure to help those afflicted by coalition rule, eh ??

I very much doubt he will. Not really sure it's worth offering up Tony Blair as an example of a Labour politician. He should be up before the Hague for being a war criminal, imo. Besides, my point was about the disenfranchisement of the underclass, not mindless whattabouttery. The Conservatives seem to be particularly distant from that section of society, as their ill-thought out policies are proving.

Good vocab

I very much doubt he will. Not really sure it's worth offering up Tony Blair as an example of a Labour politician. He should be up before the Hague for being a war criminal, imo. Besides, my point was about the disenfranchisement of the underclass, not mindless whattabouttery. The Conservatives seem to be particularly distant from that section of society, as their ill-thought out policies are proving.

again, you say that as if they are different from any others??

Besides, my point was about the disenfranchisement of the underclass, not mindless whattabouttery.

The underclass are disenfranchised? When did that happen? On what basis are they no longer permitted a vote? Has legislation been passed that I missed that only allows home owners the vote, or is there some attainment of an educational qualification now needed?

Regarding the idiot Brand, I'm with Buctootim. If Brand feels that strongly about it, why doesn't he stand for Parliament himself to represent the interests of the underclass? Oh yes, because he can't even be bothered to vote, let alone rouse himself beyond self-publicising himself to earn peoples' respect by doing something more positive.

again, you say that as if they are different from any others??

On that score I think they are. Conservative governments seem to coincide with a lot of civil unrest. Toxteth, pitched battles with miners, poll tax riots and the recent UK wide riots are recent examples.

On that score I think they are. Conservative governments seem to coincide with a lot of civil unrest. Toxteth, pitched battles with miners, poll tax riots and the recent UK wide riots are recent examples.

yeah. Labour were much better

Conservative governments seem to coincide with a lot of civil unrest

Yep, spooky that.

People that like to cause a bit of aggro waiting until a Tory government gets into power before they run riot shocker...

On that score I think they are. Conservative governments seem to coincide with a lot of civil unrest. Toxteth, pitched battles with miners, poll tax riots and the recent UK wide riots are recent examples.

The only party who are willing to make unpopular decisions if there is a bigger picture to consider.

The only party who are willing to make unpopular decisions.

labour do too, I was there in 2003

labour do too, I was there in 2003

Lots of "civil unrest" at the time I would imagine...?

Lots of "civil unrest" at the time I would imagine...?

saying that, he was voted back in 2 years later. could not have been that much of a big deal. the illegal war that resulted in 1m dead etc

saying that, he was voted back in 2 years later. could not have been that much of a big deal. the illegal war that resulted in 1m dead etc

It wasn't that big a deal to the people in the country who were unaffected. Humanity is fundamentally selfish in nature.

The underclass are disenfranchised? When did that happen? On what basis are they no longer permitted a vote? Has legislation been passed that I missed that only allows home owners the vote, or is there some attainment of an educational qualification now needed?

 

Regarding the idiot Brand, I'm with Buctootim. If Brand feels that strongly about it, why doesn't he stand for Parliament himself to represent the interests of the underclass? Oh yes, because he can't even be bothered to vote, let alone rouse himself beyond self-publicising himself to earn peoples' respect by doing something more positive.

Way to miss the point, Wes. The reason Brand doesn't vote is because whatever he chooses, too many choices have been made for him up-front. From an electoral perspective, much of the country is disenfranchised. Even if you're lucky enough to live in one of the 150 or so places that actually make a difference, I still don't think you have much of a choice. Democracy as practised here is just the chance to elect your autocrats, with two exceptions. First, our autocrats have the veneer of legitimacy through the ballot box. Second, they're still scared of the public. Boiled down, representative democracy is manifested as a series of transient autocracies kept in check by "public opinion" (whatever the f**k that really is).

The only party who are willing to make unpopular decisions if there is a bigger picture to consider.

That's patently untrue. Tuition fees say hello. So does Iraq, funnily enough.

That's patently untrue. Tuition fees say hello. So does Iraq, funnily enough.

so, not so different then?

That's patently untrue. Tuition fees say hello. So does Iraq, funnily enough.

An example of a domestic policy that was designed to ensure that the university system can continue as it exists albeit at a very high cost (literally) against a policy that had zero effect on 99% of the domestic populace and had extreme outside pressure to make happen. Incomparable.

The underclass are disenfranchised? When did that happen? On what basis are they no longer permitted a vote? Has legislation been passed that I missed that only allows home owners the vote, or is there some attainment of an educational qualification now needed?.

Spot on.

Did you see that idiot choir boy leftie Owen Jones on question time last night. He was bemoaning the lack of working class and people who speak to them standing for parliament. Dimble then asked if he'd stand , "no" he said. I guess its much more lucrative to write and talk about it than actually work at the coal face. It did make me laugh that his reply and rant was almost the same as the great Satan Peter Hitchens, until Hitchens then said that the establishment had let too many immigrants in. Little Owen got so excited his voice nearly broke.

Spot on.

 

Did you see that idiot choir boy leftie Owen Jones on question time last night. He was bemoaning the lack of working class and people who speak to them standing for parliament. Dimble then asked if he'd stand , "no" he said. I guess its much more lucrative to write and talk about it than actually work at the coal face. It did make me laugh that his reply and rant was almost the same as the great Satan Peter Hitchens, until Hitchens then said that the establishment had let too many immigrants in. Little Owen got so excited his voice nearly broke.

Yes. It's one of the biggest things with the political system that I hate. As things stand politics is a more closed shop then ever, inhabited by people who have chosen the political game as a career rather then a calling.

All career politicians, regardless of leaning and party should in my opinion be disposed of. There should be an entry criteria into politics, be it minimum age, outside career, etc. It would encourage those who have lived and experienced the political/social spectrum to actually make the rules rather then those who have no idea outside of their own immediate sphere.

It would also give greater scope for people like Owen Jones to put up or shut up.

An example of a domestic policy that was designed to ensure that the university system can continue as it exists albeit at a very high cost (literally) against a policy that had zero effect on 99% of the domestic populace and had extreme outside pressure to make happen. Incomparable.

I think you're underestimating this.

Any kid bright enough to go to Uni is affected, as are parents. If we have people that are deterred by the costs of University, we could also be losing out on real talent within our midst.

I think you're underestimating this.

 

Any kid bright enough to go to Uni is affected, as are parents. If we have people that are deterred by the costs of University, we could also be losing out on real talent within our midst.

Despite them actually being better off on a month to month basis then under the current system? (I personally would be approx 80 quid better off) They will owe more overall but would have more to spend in that crucial period after graduation with a higher thresh-hold until they need to start paying back and capped contribution quantities per month. Also, if you never breach that thresh-hold there is no need to pay the money back at all.

It also ensures that the universities themselves can continue to operate in the current quantity around the country and with the current variety of courses. Had the system continued it would have been unsustainable and every kid would have suffered, or, even worse, it would have had to revert to something as terrible as no pay up front? No chance!

Not to mention the loses of jobs in all the ancillary services, service industries and 'establishments' that students make use of in the cities/towns where Universities are present.

Way to miss the point, Wes. The reason Brand doesn't vote is because whatever he chooses, too many choices have been made for him up-front. From an electoral perspective, much of the country is disenfranchised. Even if you're lucky enough to live in one of the 150 or so places that actually make a difference, I still don't think you have much of a choice. Democracy as practised here is just the chance to elect your autocrats, with two exceptions. First, our autocrats have the veneer of legitimacy through the ballot box. Second, they're still scared of the public. Boiled down, representative democracy is manifested as a series of transient autocracies kept in check by "public opinion" (whatever the f**k that really is).

I think you're underestimating this.

 

Any kid bright enough to go to Uni is affected, as are parents. If we have people that are deterred by the costs of University, we could also be losing out on real talent within our midst.

Anybody deterred by the "costs" of going to university is too thick to go to university. The fees are a deferred tax, not payable until you reach a higher than average salary, which you will presumably earn because of your additional education.

I think you're underestimating this.

 

Any kid bright enough to go to Uni is affected, as are parents. If we have people that are deterred by the costs of University, we could also be losing out on real talent within our midst.

Anybody deterred by the "costs" of going to university is too thick to go to university. The fees are a deferred tax, not payable until you reach a higher than average salary, which you will presumably earn because of your additional education.