| Day dop 30.10.2014 11:32 |
Anyone else here who thinks the guy is an irritating narcissistic self obsessed fuckwit, who is doing little else other than essentially promoting himself? |
| The Real Wizard 30.10.2014 15:26 |
No. He's a breath of fresh air that's much needed in today's world of propaganda being bombarded at us from every angle. Ad hominem attacks like this are exactly why we need more people like him. |
| noorie 30.10.2014 16:51 |
Actually I love most of Russell Brand's opinions, although some are incredibly naive. I think he presents his views in a very straightforward, but fantastically witty way, so you want to keep listening to him. And he is very open and honest. However, at times I find he tries too hard to maintain the 'sexy shagger' image. But what the heck - we love it! |
| mooghead 30.10.2014 17:19 |
I used to think he was cool but he is starting to believe his own hype and drown in it. He is articulate, he talks sense but he is rapidly becoming one of those people he hates... |
| The Real Wizard 31.10.2014 11:33 |
I don't know what you guys have been reading, but this is the absolute best piece that came out after Robin Williams died. link He's so in touch, articulate and well informed. |
| Day dop 31.10.2014 13:36 |
He essentially does the same as David Icke, sprinkles a few truths in amoungst a whole load of bullshit aimed at a certain audience - in the case of Brand, those in their teens and 20s, particularly those who are distrusting. He's tapped into that audience quite cunningly, and for sure, found his niche in the marketplace. I don't see as that's much of a breath of fresh air. It's certainly nothing new. 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). Anything anti-establishment will do, even if it's outright horseshit. If he was serious about making change, he'd put a party together himself. As for him being articulate, to me, it seems forced, as if he's read a dictionary in order to over-compensate for his lack of education. From DigitalSpy, worth a read: link |
| Day dop 31.10.2014 13:59 |
The Real Wizard wrote: No. He's a breath of fresh air that's much needed in today's world of propaganda being bombarded at us from every angle. Ad hominem attacks like this are exactly why we need more people like him.Fuckwit is ad hominem sure, but he's admitted he's a narcissist himself, if it wasn't already obvious. And it seems to me, that's all this whole exercise is with him - narcissism on the grand scale. All talk, little substance. If anyone automatically thinks Brand going on protests makes him sincere (and it's not just about self promotion) then why can't the same could be said of Alex Jones and David Icke being as they go on protests too, being as they play a game that's not so dissimilar. (And Brand is pally with those, Icke in particular. Not that it's a case of guilty by association, but that may well be where he got some of his ideas). 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. Brand is a part of everything he claims to dislike. Part of what dumbs down society - celebrity worship. And his views - the ones that are true - aren't anything that any reasonably intelligent person wouldn't have already figured out in their 20's. |
| matt z 01.11.2014 06:32 |
He's popular and yet he's willingly giving himself to the crack shit and humorless cavalcade of "certainty" brought on by years of self inflated values*(never willingly upheld) I admire the guy for his willingness to put a face and a mirror on conflicts. Everything can be really readily and easily analyzed by a skeptic society. And any of his claims can be attributed to "bleeding heart" banality but the truth is there is NO public persona that can espouse compassion and reality to people. IF .... HE as a piece of the machinations can give Boca/voice to a contrary opinion of things that isn't comforting then I welcome him being "confrontational" It's all different wearing a different set of boots. And until people can acknowledge this SIMPLE platitude then we all don't truly or willing care about each other * that said. Livestock and social gains (population) are the mathematical modes of progress in this life. Fortune is on the few. Unless we willingly adjust and rectify some sort of die hard responsibility there WILL be another profligate AND SUBSTANTIAL militarized force to back up technical progress. THAT is WHY the arts and SONG/MUSIC are so valuable to society. Transitions have happened. Communications are almost DIRECT and INSTANT. It's welcome to have a perspective of a conflicting nature. THAT is the point of ANY democratic society. (*the reason FOR) IT'S NOT just for the said structure's survival. Thought. ... THOUGHT must flourish and changes must be made. The HUMAN population has grown IMMENSELY in the last 40 years. Anyone feeling that that shouldn't be taken into account is completely unreasonable. For people to disdain and ridicule someone like Russell brand fOr talking about human issues, they've got to either be oblivious to reality OR fanatical about an assumed cause. Let the guy speak. It's more than people AREN'T READING. Let it be. |
| Donna13 01.11.2014 07:53 |
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). |
| Holly2003 01.11.2014 12:04 |
Wibble, wibble, I'm a teapot.
matt z wrote: He's popular and yet he's willingly giving himself to the crack shit and humorless cavalcade of "certainty" brought on by years of self inflated values*(never willingly upheld) I admire the guy for his willingness to put a face and a mirror on conflicts. Everything can be really readily and easily analyzed by a skeptic society. And any of his claims can be attributed to "bleeding heart" banality but the truth is there is NO public persona that can espouse compassion and reality to people. IF .... HE as a piece of the machinations can give Boca/voice to a contrary opinion of things that isn't comforting then I welcome him being "confrontational" It's all different wearing a different set of boots. And until people can acknowledge this SIMPLE platitude then we all don't truly or willing care about each other * that said. Livestock and social gains (population) are the mathematical modes of progress in this life. Fortune is on the few. Unless we willingly adjust and rectify some sort of die hard responsibility there WILL be another profligate AND SUBSTANTIAL militarized force to back up technical progress. THAT is WHY the arts and SONG/MUSIC are so valuable to society. Transitions have happened. Communications are almost DIRECT and INSTANT. It's welcome to have a perspective of a conflicting nature. THAT is the point of ANY democratic society. (*the reason FOR) IT'S NOT just for the said structure's survival. Thought. ... THOUGHT must flourish and changes must be made. The HUMAN population has grown IMMENSELY in the last 40 years. Anyone feeling that that shouldn't be taken into account is completely unreasonable. For people to disdain and ridicule someone like Russell brand fOr talking about human issues, they've got to either be oblivious to reality OR fanatical about an assumed cause. Let the guy speak. It's more than people AREN'T READING. Let it be. |
| brENsKi 01.11.2014 18:00 |
the only enduring thought I get in relation to RB these days it.... "Katy Perry = soiled" |
| thomasquinn 32989 02.11.2014 04:53 |
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. |
| The Real Wizard 02.11.2014 11:04 |
Day dop wrote: 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).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. 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.+1 |
| The Real Wizard 02.11.2014 12:06 |
Day dop wrote: linkExcellent article overall, although they have a pretty incomplete view of Libya. The reason why the country was turned upside-down is *because* the US invaded. Before then, Libya was the most civilized country in Africa. They had free housing, free education, free health care, gas was 14 cents a gallon, newlyweds were given money to contribute to buying a home, parents were given a monetary gift with the birth of a child, women were prominent in politics, there was low infant mortality, there was a high level of literacy - all with no national debt. But - they had no central bank, and oil had just been found. The US showed up a few months later. Essential reading here, about the direct democracy system that existed in Libya for over 40 years: link And we wonder why western media didn't report any of this.. |
| Holly2003 02.11.2014 13:33 |
David Icke believes alien reptilians control the Earth. He's wrong of course. They're not reptilian at all. That would be crazy. They are acquatic mammals. |
| Doga 02.11.2014 20:00 |
The Real Wizard wrote: And we wonder why western media didn't report any of this..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? |
| YourValentine 03.11.2014 02:55 |
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. |
| john bodega 03.11.2014 03:06 |
"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. |
| Day dop 03.11.2014 04:50 |
The Real Wizard wrote:This > linkDay dop wrote: 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).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.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.+1 |
| Day dop 03.11.2014 05:36 |
YourValentine wrote: 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.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. |
| Day dop 03.11.2014 05:37 |
Double post - deleted. |
| thomasquinn 32989 03.11.2014 05:58 |
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. |
| Day dop 03.11.2014 06:13 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote: 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.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? link What about all this? "Compilation of Scientific Literature that Directly Cites to and Support's NIST's WTC 7 report's methodologies and conclusions" link Or this? link Or that? link 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. |
| Day dop 03.11.2014 06:30 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote: 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.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. |
| Day dop 03.11.2014 07:07 |
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). link |
| Donna13 03.11.2014 07:59 |
There is a spot in London called Speaker's Corner: link |
| Day dop 03.11.2014 08:01 |
Donna13 wrote: 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).Exactly. |
| Donna13 06.11.2014 18:40 |
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. |
| YourValentine 07.11.2014 01:29 |
Donna13 wrote: 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.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 ;-) |
| Donna13 07.11.2014 07:19 |
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. |
| Day dop 07.11.2014 12:04 |
I'm glad I'm not the only one who can see it here. Although, in general a lot of people seem to have wised up to his game or can see him for what he is. That's something. A lot of his fans (much like Jones or Ickes fans) tend to go with the fallacy that if you don't buy into Brand's act, you're blind to the government, or automatically believe all the government says. Because, obviously, if you don't hold attitude X, that automatically means you hold attitude Y. Of course! |
| Donna13 08.11.2014 11:21 |
Yes. Also, I always find it ironic that certain people don't want to trust anyone with first hand knowledge (such as someone who is on the front lines of any profession), yet these same people somehow find it easy to trust someone else who uses manipulative tricks such as saying, "This is what *they* don't want you to know." Or, "Don't trust anyone else but me, because I will tell you the truth." "I will explain the real truth to you since I know you don't want to be fooled any longer by x, y, or z." |