Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    No exact amount, but Brand wouldn't be so big without corporations backing him. In fact he's scapegoating an institution to avoid taking responsibility for his own part in promoting wealth inequality
    Yes he has become hugely successful and famous and made loads of money from corporations etc etc but the point remains, what can he now do until you personally won't ignore his views because of his supposed hypocrisy? He's already stated he's done with Hollywood and will invest his future earnings from his book and such into community projects. You're dismissing him for life based on his career without giving any critique of what he's actually saying on this matter.

    Remember Brand was banned from British TV for a while with Jonathan Ross, got back in the USA then came back 'a new man', this is probably an attempt to 'rebrand' his image geddit
    I don't remember him being 'banned', i just recall him going to America to work in movies. As for this being a 'rebranding' excercise lol this is probably the worst way to reinvent yourself, PR wise. If he still only cynically cared about money and fame he'd have stayed in the US and continued to milk the cow.

    I do think he's probably somewhere on the road to recovery from the alcoholism, drugs and that though
    Well he's been clean for 11 years.

    Thing is you're missing the point by turning the argument against what he's doing into something personal. If you think that Westbrook Partners should go ahead with the buy out and destroy a community of working class people, then say so and give reasons for why he shouldn't join the resident's protest. I'd only accept the charge of hypocrisy if he was say, on the board of Westbrook, or personally gained from companies doing this sort of thing. It's elementary to dismiss what he's done here simply because he is a millionaire.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Even champagne socialists must work within a capitalist system. It's like saying pro-Western agitators in Soviet Russia should have given up their job at the factory and not joined the queue for bread.

    At least champagne socialists preach the right message rather than licking the boots of capitalism just because they happen to have worked out how to make a few bob out of it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tomclarky)
    Yes he has become hugely successful and famous and made loads of money from corporations etc etc but the point remains, what can he now do until you personally won't ignore his views because of his supposed hypocrisy? He's already stated he's done with Hollywood and will invest his future earnings from his book and such into community projects. You're dismissing him for life based on his career without giving any critique of what he's actually saying on this matter.



    I don't remember him being 'banned', i just recall him going to America to work in movies. As for this being a 'rebranding' excercise lol this is probably the worst way to reinvent yourself, PR wise. If he still only cynically cared about money and fame he'd have stayed in the US and continued to milk the cow.



    Well he's been clean for 11 years.

    Thing is you're missing the point by turning the argument against what he's doing into something personal. If you think that Westbrook Partners should go ahead with the buy out and destroy a community of working class people, then say so and give reasons for why he shouldn't join the resident's protest. I'd only accept the charge of hypocrisy if he was say, on the board of Westbrook, or personally gained from companies doing this sort of thing. It's elementary to dismiss what he's done here simply because he is a millionaire.
    why do you feel so strongly about this? He's a controversial character, he likes being where the drama is. His intentions are noble for sure, but I find he's a rather ironic character to do so, and he's making out he's some massive professor on the subject now when it is like the equivalent of me reading Das Kapital and pretending to know how to overthrow the capitalist state.

    'Hypocrite' is a strong word come to think of it, still I don't feel he's being 100% honest and there's a bit of PR going on too. :/
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    why do you feel so strongly about this? He's a controversial character, he likes being where the drama is. His intentions are noble for sure, but I find he's a rather ironic character to do so, and he's making out he's some massive professor on the subject now when it is like the equivalent of me reading Das Kapital and pretending to know how to overthrow the capitalist state.

    'Hypocrite' is a strong word come to think of it, still I don't feel he's being 100% honest and there's a bit of PR going on too. :/
    Really? He's openly admitted multiple times that he isn't an expert on conventional polictics and economics. He says his intention is to try to amplify the voices of ordianary people fighting for a good cause and to give more of a voice to the people that are the professors of the big global issues who have radical, alternative ideas of how we can run things.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tomclarky)
    Really? He's openly admitted multiple times that he isn't an expert on conventional polictics and economics. He says his intention is to try to amplify the voices of ordianary people fighting for a good cause and to give more of a voice to the people that are the professors of the big global issues who have radical, alternative ideas of how we can run things.
    Fair enough, well he should go to a uni and pull out a professor to talk with him
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    I hate the government because it made me disabled.
    How? Are you old enough to have been conscripted or something?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Socktor)
    How? Are you old enough to have been conscripted or something?
    I was neglected by the NHS when I was born and forcing to go to school when I was getting bullied. So that is how the government made me disabled.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    so basically people think we cant trust labour we cant trust the tories we ant trust ukip we cant trust the greens we cant trust the lib dems so we cant trust any of them?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    I was neglected by the NHS when I was born and forcing to go to school when I was getting bullied. So that is how the government made me disabled.
    I heard about that legislation, I was shocked that it was passed...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    I heard about that legislation, I was shocked that it was passed...
    I don't have a clue what you are talking about.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    I don't have a clue what you are talking about.
    The Acts of Parliament the Government passed to give you disabilities.

    I hope its repelled one day.

    Good luck.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Uhh how can that be true when UKIP is one of the most right wing parties in the UK?
    The political lean of a party is irrelevant, there is nothing to say a right-wing party cannot represent the majority. There is a common misconception the working class all want socialism or all want greater equality through utilitarianism. As we saw with Thatcher large parts of the working class voted for Thatcherism; they actually liked her policies. Left and right wing politics does not link in with social class. There are trends between certain policies but the trends are not broad enough to allow grouping of one half of the political spectrum and a class. Left and right wing in themselves don't make complete sense. The terms originated during the French Revolution but have reached a point where they are now meaningless. The polling reveals the working classes are turning to UKIP and their policies.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    For fairness, here's Russell's reply.

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ruitker)
    The polling reveals the working classes are turning to UKIP and their policies.
    Have their policies been announced yet?

    I know the flat tax has gone and the personal allowance/higher rate threshold proposals but is their a Further/Higher Eduation policy yet?
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    This is a classic, ridiculous argument that the right wing absolutely loves. Living a comfortable life and accepting that there are serious social problems in the world that have to be solved are not mutually exclusive. In Russell Brand's case, he earns a massive amount of money. I don't know how much of it he gives to good causes but regardless, that doesn't mean that he can't keep some for himself. It's like having a go at Bill Gates for owning an expensive property despite the fact that he gives away billions.

    Another similar argument that people use against environmentalists is "You complain so much about the world's oil addictions, yet you still use cars". Same argument, just as stupid. If you live in a society addicted to oil, it is literally impossible to go about your work without using it. It doesn't mean they're hypocritical, it's a simple fact that because nobody is seriously interested in transferring to renewables, going totally oil-free is impossible. You can still campaign to introduce more sustainable forms of energy.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Puddles the Monkey)
    I really wish Russell Brand would drop it; he doesn't have a clue.
    Do you feel the same about TSR users whose opinions you don't like? :eek:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    Capitalism is a Marxist word, stop using capitalism. Start using free trade.
    Pft free trade makes it sound better than it is. Allow free trade and you end up with a country ruled by big corporations.
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    (Original post by n00)
    Do you feel the same about TSR users whose opinions you don't like? :eek:
    No, not at all. And, most TSR users aren't on national TV encouraging young people not to vote

    Although you're right, I probably should have put more thought into that post.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BobbieShamrock)
    Pft free trade makes it sound better than it is. Allow free trade and you end up with a country ruled by big corporations.
    As opposed to the country being ruled by one government.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    As opposed to the country being ruled by one government.
    Obviously an unbiased government is better than one that's been bribed and coerced into allowing god knows what by the likes of Nestle and Monsanto.

    Not that a totally unbiased government is ever going to be possible, but the less biased the better and 'free trade' (ie capitalism) won't get anywhere near it.
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.