Russell Brand Interviewed about Political Views - 12 views

• 
  #1 Nic Mosher on 28 Oct 13

   

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGxFJ5nL9gg
  
  My question is not what do you think about his socialist beliefs, rather, what do you think the reaction would have been if it was Jeremy Paxman who had socialist beliefs, and Russell Brand was criticizing him? My point is that Brand has very powerful speaking abilities, and his humor creates a positive response no matter what he's saying. Do you agree?

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGxFJ5nL9gg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGxFJ5nL9gg</a> <br /> <br /> My question is not what do you think about his socialist beliefs, rather, what do you think the reaction would have been if it was Jeremy Paxman who had socialist beliefs, and Russell Brand was criticizing him? My point is that Brand has very powerful speaking abilities, and his humor creates a positive response no matter what he's saying. Do you agree?</div>

  ...

  Cancel
• 
  #2 Markita Schulman on 28 Oct 13

   

  I think the amount of press this interview has gotten is really interesting. Nic brings up a good point that Brand's speaking ability and his position as a pop culture icon have probably swayed some more than the actual content of his argument. In general it seems like there's no real reason for Brand to be being asked these questions and that is the source of my mixed feelings about the interview. I agree with his sentiment that we have a flawed system that may not be able to be changed internally, and if "revolution" is the word he wants to use for the necessary change that might be fitting, but I think it is also intentionally sensationalist language that serves to get people riled up and supportive of Brand despite the fact that his argument is lacking much substance. I am rarely if ever comfortable with the argument that we shouldn't bother to vote because the system is broken; it seems like a cowardly cop-out unless some better alternative is offered and it isn't in this case. Regardless, I don't know when we started looking to celebrities for ideology, and it seems backwards to me. If a "revolution" requires more mainstream support than Occupy had, for example, that's fine, but for something as seemingly random as this to be the catalyst of change would be sad in my eyes.

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">I think the amount of press this interview has gotten is really interesting. Nic brings up a good point that Brand's speaking ability and his position as a pop culture icon have probably swayed some more than the actual content of his argument. In general it seems like there's no real reason for Brand to be being asked these questions and that is the source of my mixed feelings about the interview. I agree with his sentiment that we have a flawed system that may not be able to be changed internally, and if "revolution" is the word he wants to use for the necessary change that might be fitting, but I think it is also intentionally sensationalist language that serves to get people riled up and supportive of Brand despite the fact that his argument is lacking much substance. I am rarely if ever comfortable with the argument that we shouldn't bother to vote because the system is broken; it seems like a cowardly cop-out unless some better alternative is offered and it isn't in this case. Regardless, I don't know when we started looking to celebrities for ideology, and it seems backwards to me. If a "revolution" requires more mainstream support than Occupy had, for example, that's fine, but for something as seemingly random as this to be the catalyst of change would be sad in my eyes.</div>

  ...

  Cancel

To Top