Anyone see Paxman interviewing Russell Brand?

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 25 Oct 2013, 12:38

Brand comes across as quite an astute social commentator.

His op-ed in The New Statesman can be found here

Russell Brand wrote:Capitalism is not real; it is an idea. America is not real; it is an idea that someone had ages ago. Britain, Christianity, Islam, karate, Wednesdays are all just ideas that we choose to believe in and very nice ideas they are, too, when they serve a purpose. These concepts, though, cannot be served to the detriment of actual reality.

The reality is we have a spherical ecosystem, suspended in, as far as we know, infinite space upon which there are billions of carbon-based life forms, of which we presume ourselves to be the most important, and a limited amount of resources.

The only systems we can afford to employ are those that rationally serve the planet first, then all humanity. Not out of some woolly, bullshit tree-hugging piffle but because we live on it, currently without alternatives. This is why I believe we need a unifying and in - clusive spiritual ideology: atheism and materialism atomise us and anchor us to one frequency of consciousness and inhibit necessary co-operation.

Fleshes out the points he was making in that interview.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 25 Oct 2013, 12:41

TBH, apart from hearing the names somewhere before, I honestly hadn't a clue who either of those guys are.

Anyway, I did notice Naomi Klein's name on the New Statesman cover. Much rather listen to/watch her.

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 25 Oct 2013, 12:56

Atman wrote:Paxo should try another tactic than appalling argumentation.

This appears to be the default setting for BBC interviewers and it's getting worse.
There was the case of Ms Montague on the R4 today programme whose fact free, nonsensical climate change denial drivel that was comprehensively destroyed by Dr James Hansen
Then there was the case of Kirsty Wark, who was left feebly floundering around at the hands of Glenn Greenwald.(Just don't mention the NSA's illicit surveillance programme, eh, Kirsty?)
Now this - Paxo well and truly bamboozled. Actually, in comparison to the previous two, this is fairly mild fare..

nexus · Post by **nexus** » 25 Oct 2013, 13:01

emordnilap wrote:TBH, apart from hearing the names somewhere before, I honestly hadn't a clue who either of those guys are.

Anyway, I did notice Naomi Klein's name on the New Statesman cover. Much rather listen to/watch her.

They aren't mutually exclusive you know- Klein wrote two seminal books and Brand is eloquent, honest and accessible. We need them both.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 25 Oct 2013, 14:52

nexus wrote:
emordnilap wrote:TBH, apart from hearing the names somewhere before, I honestly hadn't a clue who either of those guys are.

Anyway, I did notice Naomi Klein's name on the New Statesman cover. Much rather listen to/watch her.
They aren't mutually exclusive you know- Klein wrote two seminal books and Brand is eloquent, honest and accessible. We need them both.

Right, just watched it and I see what you mean. Brand for PM.

Is Paxman always an irritating shit or is that merely devil's advocate?

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 25 Oct 2013, 17:53

Brand mentions the 1%.

Here's a short, visual introduction to what it means.

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 25 Oct 2013, 18:31

emordnilap wrote:Is Paxman always an irritating shit ...?

We-e-ell y-e-e-e-sss (that's enough Paxo-speak _ed), but to be fair he has been known to devil's-advocate/demolish people who talk genuine crap as well.

madibe · Post by **madibe** » 25 Oct 2013, 20:27

This was an excellent interview and Brand did a good job; articulate and enpassioned. Likewiswe Paxman was the perfect foil.

Really - if you are not wanting to watch the whole thing (you should) then the last 2 mins is pretty awesome. In fact, if you watch the last two minutes you will be persuaded to rewind and watch the full thing

As for Brand standing as a representative for voters...no.. as he says, until the system changes it would be a complete waste of time.

But, as a commentator, it would perhaps have been beneficial if he had some answers rather than just critique - however, he did explain that he did not see it as his 'job' to provide solutions... just that solutions would be found by the right people. Nice.

nexus · Post by **nexus** » 25 Oct 2013, 21:43

Good to see you back posting

Have you missed us?

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 25 Oct 2013, 23:04

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... revolution

Wow.

If only a few more well known people would join in, we might just be on to something. The man has decided to do what he can to provoke a spiritual-political revolution. A bit like David Icke, but without the reptilians.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 26 Oct 2013, 00:18

I just read that and it made me cry. F--k me, there seems so much in this bloody world to reduce me to tears these days.

The man can write.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 26 Oct 2013, 03:52

I just wish that people would remember that Capitalism died many years ago and has been replaced by Corporatism; a system run entirely for the benefit of large corporations. If we have Capitalism there would be no more, or at least a much smaller, Ford, GM, Lloyds, HBOS and many more.

By not referring to corporatism we are letting the corporations off the hook enabling them to reap the benefits while taxpayers shoulder the burden.

Remember - CORPORATISM

Sorry to shout

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 26 Oct 2013, 07:03

He lives in the U.S. and rich people don't pay shit in taxes here-- they think they do, but they don't. Unless he's using his money to act on his words, he hasn't done anything worth applauding. Doesn't vote, doesn't really know anything about politics, and is completely full of himself-- and he's not even funny! Why is anyone asking this rich guy's opinion on how to fix the world?

Seems a fair point.

nexus · Post by **nexus** » 26 Oct 2013, 07:19

kenneal - lagger wrote:I just wish that people would remember that Capitalism died many years ago and has been replaced by Corporatism; a system run entirely for the benefit of large corporations. If we have Capitalism there would be no more, or at least a much smaller, Ford, GM, Lloyds, HBOS and many more.

By not referring to corporatism we are letting the corporations off the hook enabling them to reap the benefits while taxpayers shoulder the burden.

Remember - CORPORATISM

Sorry to shout

Fair point Ken.

nexus · Post by **nexus** » 26 Oct 2013, 08:02

Personally I vote green, but I can see the benefit of the following idea- having 'None of the Above' candidates standing for election so people who reject the big 3 have a choice (because spoiled ballots don't get recorded).

There is a petition here: http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/r ... l-election asking Russell Brand to be the public face of the none of the above campaign.