Russell Brand, is he a messiah or a bolshevik?

[PaleoPhil]

ST and Jessica, I don't mean to seem insulting or dismissive of you folks (just of Brand--I consider public messiahs fair game ) and it’s not that I think that any discussion of politics and philosophy is unimportant, I just don't want to spend much more time or mental energy on Brand and his call for global revolution to produce an alleged socialist utopia. I am dismissive of BOTH the messenger AND the gist of the message.

I'm not saying that every word he ever uttered was wrong or any ridiculous extreme like that, nor do I seek to trivialize the existence of major problems in the world. I also don't know anyone who doesn't think there are massive problems in the world. I didn't learn anything from him that I didn't already know or hadn't heard countless times. I just agree with Stefan that the gist of Brand's solution is wrong, though Brand was so vague about it, much like the politicians he decries (and which enables some people to see in his message whatever they want to see), that it's difficult to even discuss his proposal in much depth anyway. The devil is in the details.

Another actor/comedian, Roseanne Barr, made a call for a similar revolution last year (except hers also included voting LOL) and I'm not sorry that I ignored her. For me, Brand rises to just the level of warranting some cathartic comment because I find him irritating and the media and his fans push him and his utopian dreams and attempts to shock or grab attention more than Barr, so that he's hard to avoid.

For some reason, I originally expected Brand to eventually say something funny or insightful, perhaps due to all the hype built up around him. So I unfortunately did give him a listen from time to time, but was mostly disappointed, including with his recent Paxman interview and article. You of course don't have to like that or agree with me.

Last I checked there was no law saying that everyone has to take Russell Brand or his notions seriously. According to Tyler, there are quite a lot of people who do not, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's true. Most people have already forgotten about Barr's call for revolution and I suspect that a year from now that many will have forgotten Brand's call.

If you want me to say something nice about a lefty vegetarian actor/comedian and his philosophy, ask me about Billy Connolly. My favorite thing that I’ve seen Brand write or say was a quote of Connolly. According to Brand, Eddie Izzard said he'd like to become a politician some day, Brand said he'd like to be a "spiritual orator” (which he is apparently currently working on ). Connolly replied: “I’d like to be a nuisance. I want to be a troublemaker, there in the gallery in parliament shouting RUBBISH and PROVE IT.” If Brand were giving his spiritual orations and claiming that his global socialist revolution was going to create a utopia and I happened to be attending, I'd want to be up there in the gallery with Connolly.

[sabertooth]

I hear you Phil, and respect your view.

Though I disagree with you about Rosanne Bar. She did place 5th in the presidential election, so that's proof that at least some people took her seriously.

I operate under the motto " live and learn from fools and from sages" and"Dream on"

 I honestly listen to and try to appreciate what a number of vastly different spiritual orators/ wannabes have to say without placing limited judgement values on the person, then search my own soul for the voice that will help to tell what to make of it. I agree with your criticism of Brand and your criticism of a lot of other things we discuss, as I consider it from"your" point of view.  I still value what he says and like him for my own personal reasons. He is right, if we want our rights we are going to have to take them. Now we can debate till kingdom come about what are the best ways to do so, and get nowhere.

It all boils down to ,"What you gonna do about it". There are ancient ideas about how people who accomplished great things had access to the Logos. It was an individuals voice that was connected to the greater world. Together out the communicative effort of all those who participated, the world would emerge and progress could be made. This great voice of human connectedness to and purpose in the world has been silenced and dominated by the least among us for long enough. It is up to those of us alive today who are able to reconnect to the Gaian mind and resurrect the human spirit, to take action.

It must be obvious I have fallen under the spell of the spiritual orators who march to a different tune altogether, and can no longer view the world in the same way.

Terence Mckenna -What you Gonna do about it?



 

[PaleoPhil]

It all boils down to ,"What you gonna do about it".

Yup, and that was the main thing I found lacking in his interview and article--specifics about what he is gonna do about it and what he wants others to do. He made the excuse in the interview that there wasn't time, but he didn't spell it out much in the article either. Perhaps he knows that he would lose much of the support he has if he spelled it out too much. I've seen it time and again--a politician or revolutionary is vague at first and gets lots of support, with people reading into the hero what they want to see. Then he/she starts filling in the details and the support plummets.

I remember my own pro-life parents supporting Ross Perot for President early on when he was vague. Then he got more specific and came out more strongly pro-choice than either of the other two candidates and they dropped him like a hot potato.

One of the problems that Brand mentioned--bankers' bonuses--is key and I do like to see that get airplay. My state's congressman support doing something on that. Senator Bernie Sanders is particularly outspoken on it. If there's a local march regarding it, I'd join it.

[sabertooth]

Part of his shtick regarding the messiah complex reminds me of the point you just made about the quality of being vuage.

Consider the messianic Icons like Muhammad, Jesus, Gandhi, MLK, Malcolm X...... non of us know them personally or very much about how they intended their actions to change the world, but you cant deny that their ideas and how other people carried them forth and twisted them for whatever purpose they desired, became the historical identity of these men, who in real life were most likely profoundly different than we could imagine.

You don't have to know what you are doing or have a specific plan to be a messiah, this is the message I receive from Brand. He is telling us on a level that most fail to see, a fundamental truth that we all possess the capability of being messiahs. There is no law saying that there can be only one. We are all children of God. But this idea upsets some people who think that you have to do something, or think in a certain way to become divine. To hell with that, I say lets infect the freak-en world with the messiah complex.

Your issue with people being vague regarding detailed plans of action reminds me of Alan watts description on the two types of people. Gooey and prickly. I think you are a prickly kind of guy and I am much more gooey, and this is the root of our different views.

Prickles & Goo: Alan Watts Trey Parker Matt Stone South Park

[PaleoPhil]

As usual, my message came across quite differently than intended. I didn't mean that Brand should be excessively detailed. I meant that actions speak louder than words and vague platitudes and promises are also the currency of false messiahs and crooked politicians (such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, Jim Jones, Charles Manson, etc.).

I am quite familiar with Gandhi and one of the earliest things he did was burn an identity card, and he suffered a beating as a result. He didn't just talk about resistance, he did it. I take doers more seriously than ivory tower pontificators and actor/comedians who use their celebrity to make big talk with little action. Do you see the difference? Paxman was right, Brands' talking about global socialist revolution before having done much about it and the putting of Brands' name in the same category as Muhammad, Jesus, Gandhi, MLK, Malcolm X, etc., trivializes revolution, messiahs, prophets and leadership.

The Billy Connolly example also reminds us not to be fooled by false messiahs/gurus making promises that may be empty BS or have unintended negative consequences if they succeed. Billy is like the trickster or court jester/fool, revealing bad emperors and false messiahs to have no clothes.

Another thing I don't care for in Brand's message, is that a global socialist revolution assumes there's only one right "socialist" way to live in the world, and to hell with anyone who doesn't want it. It's not just coincidence that he doesn't like voting. He's smart enough to know that the majority of people in many nations don't want what he's selling. Not everyone wants a global socialist utopia or a global capitalist utopia or a global libertarian utopia. There's no one right way to live for everyone everywhere in the world.

[sabertooth]

Yes, I see the difference, Though I must keep insisting that there is a fundamental difference of vision that cant be reconciled, so the pissing match will never truly end, and at the end of the day I don't mind if it ever ends.

"The poet and the painter casting shadows on the water --
As the sun plays on the infantry returning from the sea.
The do-er and the thinker: no allowance for the other --
As the failing light illuminates the mercenary's creed".

From Thick as a Brick

Do you at least acknowledge the fact that there are gooey people who like vague platitudes, and enjoy getting enamored with the art of bullshit, and that its alright?

You mention the jester which is a very important role indeed. The jester plays the part of making fun off the king, so that the King doesn't make the folly of taking himself so seriously that he does mean things to oppress his people.

This role is still alive today as much as ever. Jay Leno, John Stuart, Steven Colbert, and many more of the talking head comedians whose job it is to make people laugh at situations and take less seriously issues that should really piss them off. The big time sellouts get laughs by pussyfooting around the real issues, while poking fun and being mostly trivial.

This is the real job of the jester, to pacify the people with jokes and distractions. They portray the rulers as imbeciles, so that people wont get revolutionary mad at them for making bad decisions or falling into corruption.

But the jester is a slave to his role, and when comedians like Brand or Rosanne try to step outside their designated position and take on the throne they are instantly discredited, because they lack any true authority.

Prickly people cant stand it when a person wont stay with their assigned boarders.

[sabertooth]

Not everyone wants a global socialist utopia or a global capitalist utopia or a global libertarian utopia. There's no one right way to live for everyone everywhere in the world.

I will stand with you on that point.

[PaleoPhil]

Thanks for the Watts recording. It says better some of what I've been trying to say. I enjoyed it and other of his talks and I much prefer him to what I've seen from Russell Brand so far.

Thanks also for the feedback about coming across too prickly. It's a nice counterbalance to Tyler's accusations of the opposite--too gooey (romantic noble savagery)  . As long as I'm getting it from both extremes of the gooey and prickly scale, perhaps I'm on the right path to the sort of zen balance of prickles and goo that Watts advocated in that Watts recording.

Replace Timothy Leary's name in this quote with Russell Brand's and you'll get some sense of another aspect of what I've been discussing:

"I was dismayed to see Timothy [Leary] converting himself into a popular store-front messiah with his name in lights, advocating psychedelic experience as a new world-religion." - Alan Watts, In My Own Way: An Autobiography, Vintage Books edition, 1973, p. 331

This is the real job of the jester, to pacify the people with jokes and distractions. They portray the rulers as imbeciles, so that people wont get to mad at them for making bad decisions or falling into corruption.

That's not how I see Connolly, nor the real job of a beneficial jester/trickster. Have you seen any of his performances? It's also not how Brand saw him when he wrote: "Who am I to argue with The Great Trickster Connolly?" By trickster, I don't mean an arch deceiver like modern politicians. I mean the positive sense that Brand meant and as discussed here:

Joseph Campbell--Mythology of the Trickster
Joseph Campbell--Mythology of the Trickster

Alan Watts -- The role of the trickster
Alan Watts -- The role of the trickster
A wise king knows he can learn from this sort of trickster/jester. The problem is few kings are wise.

I will stand with you on that point.

That's nice to see that we agree on this and some other things. Disagreements can also be interesting and instructive.

I wish you good luck on finding your socialist utopia--as long as I'm not forced into it too.

[TylerDurden]

Err, I have no idea why  these people are being viewed by PP and others as potential gurus, whether he likes them or not. I mean, both Brand and Connolly are described as being "British Comedians" in the UK media and many view them as unfunny ones. It is sort of as meaningless as if  an American stated  that he  would not like Robin Williams or Chris Rock as President of the United States!

And, no,  I also think that "too prickly" is a more accurate term than "too gooey". As for the Noble Savage theory, that no doubt comes from watching crappy dud films and TV series  like Dances With Wolves, Little House on the Prairie and Dr Quinn, Medicine Woman  too many times!  I pray for PP's soul whenever I hear new nonsense from him about the  dubious, supposed "excess" health of the Maasai or some other distant tribe. I wonder if PP has ever read "Bleak House" by Charles Dickens. He would find the character of Mrs Jellyby very similiar to his own.

[Brad462]

Yes, I see the difference, Though I must keep insisting that there is a fundamental difference of vision that cant be reconciled, so the pissing match will never truly end, and at the end of the day I don't mind if it ever ends.

"The poet and the painter casting shadows on the water --
As the sun plays on the infantry returning from the sea.
The do-er and the thinker: no allowance for the other --
As the failing light illuminates the mercenary's creed".

From Thick as a Brick

Do you at least acknowledge the fact that there are gooey people who like vague platitudes, and enjoy getting enamored with the art of bullshit, and that its alright?

You mention the jester which is a very important role indeed. The jester plays the part of making fun off the king, so that the King doesn't make the folly of taking himself so seriously that he does mean things to oppress his people.

This role is still alive today as much as ever. Jay Leno, John Stuart, Steven Colbert, and many more of the talking head comedians whose job it is to make people laugh at situations and take less seriously issues that should really piss them off. The big time sellouts get laughs by pussyfooting around the real issues, while poking fun and being mostly trivial.

This is the real job of the jester, to pacify the people with jokes and distractions. They portray the rulers as imbeciles, so that people wont get revolutionary mad at them for making bad decisions or falling into corruption.

  I disagree with you.  Buddha and Christ never preached violence against the status quo no matter how bad the rulers.  You don't fight evil by becoming it.

[TylerDurden]

  I disagree with you.  Buddha and Christ never preached violence against the status quo no matter how bad the rulers.  You don't fight evil by becoming it.

Rubbish. There is that example where Christ attacked the Jewish moneylenders in the temple and threw them out. And one or two other incidents I have forgotten. Oh, and Buddhists have interpreted Buddha's words as to recommend violence:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence

[van]

Then I'm curious,  can you paint a scenario where violent actions could have an optimal or long lasting positive outcome?

[Projectile Vomit]

The American Revolution seems to stand out as an example. My forebears used violence to end English colonial rule.

Although the US and the UK remain allies geopolitically, I don't think anyone would claim that UK government holds any particular sway over the US. In fact, I would argue the opposite is now the case, with the US government quite able to bully the UK into doing all manner of things that don't necessarily serve that country's best interests.

[van]

good point.  But how about in this current age.  Seriously, imagine any force being used against any factor of the US government..   So again,  please describe a scenario that would end up with a positive long term outcome.   I think many are missing the point of what value Brand may bring to the world.  And that simply is to question what really is happening.   If you haven't seen the movie, Zeitgeist: The Movie,, check it out.   Or  Loose Change,,9/11.  And you'll see there's a lot more pertinent things to discuss than whether Russell has an occasional high pitch to his voice or not.

[Projectile Vomit]

Violence is messy. When the US fired the 'shot heard around the world' that started the revolutionary war, blood was shed and lives were lost on both sides of that conflict. In the end the oppressed (USA) turned out to be the victor. That wasn't a foregone conclusion, and historians can surely point out many failed attempts by oppressed peoples to use violence to gain freedom or independence (let's, for the time being, set aside how loaded both of those words are). Nonetheless, sometimes it works.

I've seen the movie Zeitgeist, as well as its two sequels, and have also seen the other films you list. I agree that there are more pertinent things to discuss then whether Russell Brand (or any particular person) has earned a place of honor amongst the rabble rousers. I also agree that there are more pertinent things to do than there are things to discuss. This discussion brings to mind a recent essay by Dmitry Orlov entitled The Sixth Stage of Collapse, an addendum to his recent book The Five Stages of Collapse. It's a great essay, one I recommend folks here read.

[sabertooth]

Err, I have no idea why  these people are being viewed by PP and others as potential gurus, whether he likes them or not. I mean, both Brand and Connolly are described as being "British Comedians" in the UK media and many view them as unfunny ones. It is sort of as meaningless as if  an American stated  that he  would not like Robin Williams or Chris Rock as President of the United States!

Its not that these people should be viewed as gurus, the question is primarily regarding, what constitutes a Messiah? Meaning a saiour, or one with a message capable of leading others to salvation. This is completely subjective and anyone here should feel free to name more pertinent examples of human beings among us who have messianic traits.

We all have personal heroes whom inspire us to be our best and do our best. Many of the greatest human beings I have known lived quietly and modestly, teaching lessons far too down to earth for any heavenly recognition. The problem is when discussing these wise people with others there is no common reference to converse upon, its basically a one sided sentimentalization of one persons opinion. So instead we must pick from those people who are recognizable and use their Iconic traits as fodder for these kinds of discussions.

Many legendary figures ranging from Jesus to the hobo saints I have known in my travels, never had an all encompassing comprehensive plan that was at the core of their actions, many were driven by something much more sublime. Nor did the actions of historical messiahs lead to universally positive outcomes. So speaking from a logical point of view when searching for messianic icons is an absurd waste of time.  Still there is a persistence in these stories of mere men who chose to stand up to the pharisees of the day and wake the people up to the falseness and deception of the world. There is in this world many in great need of a new legend to rise out of rough, and inspire the courage to act in others. Who are the real life Tyler Durdens among us? 

The window burns to light the way back home
A light that warms no matter where they've gone
They're off to find the hero of the day
But what if they should fall by someone's wicked way.



 

[sabertooth]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdoOqLGKj00

[TylerDurden]

Russell Brand is a joke! He is what people derisively call a "champagne socialist", a complete and utter hypocrite.

[sabertooth]

Russell Brand is a joke! He is what people derisively call a "champagne socialist", a complete and utter hypocrite.

Why do people have to be so mean?

In his message he makes it clear that in order to make waves in the media world you have to make scenes and be willing to make a fool of ones self. He could be viewed as a jester, but he is a fool who has allied himself with many of the most progressive and forward thinking people of this day.  As far as for the charges of hypocrisy go, he seems to also make it clear that his hypocrisy doesn't take away from any of the issue he brings forward.

Do people expect him, or anyone else who takes a stand against the established money system to donate all of their money and live on the street. There are already countless saints and sages who have taken this route, and removed themselves from the world of hypocrisy, only to be forgotten and rendered impotent.

Lost in obscurity and oblivion the"Brand" haters loath those with optimistic faith and don't bother with listening to the content of the conversation, instead choosing to project their own negative feelings upon others, without seeing the possibility of what could be attained if only we would learn to quit judging the messenger so harshly.

[TylerDurden]

I have no problem being against the banks and am disgusted at how the UK government bailed them out. However, we need more solid people to represent us, not hypocrites like Russell Brand. He is obviously hoping to get elected at some stage, despite previous pretences,  and we need more honest people, and especially NOT the rich to represent us.

[sabertooth]

I will agree, there is a real need for honesty, and the people of Britannia should be represented by earnest and respectable leaders... Where are these noble souls and what are they waiting for?

Until the day that such people of integrity emerge to usurp the powers that be, people like Russel Brand are useful in informing people about the megalithic absurdity and unfair practices that go on under the current establishment. He may not be fit for leadership, but as a jester he is capable of empowering others by giving a voice to the progressive grass roots movements, while at the same time publicly ridiculing the Establishment.

If the of majority Brits are content to wait around for some knight in shining armor to restore honor to the kingdom and smite the pretenders to the throne, then they are much more of a joke than Russel brand could every be.

[PaleoPhil]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdoOqLGKj00

If I understand correctly, Brand moved beyond mere words and Tweets, leading a protest that took on billionaires, succeeded and addressed the real issue of the housing crisis, yes?

[wodgina]

He is a full blown narcissist (and hypocrite as all narcissists are).

[sabertooth]

He is a full blown narcissist (and hypocrite as all narcissists are).

Thats a subjective moralistic judgment, which may in some respects be true, but nevertheless in my personal view not everyone who is a narcissistic hypocrite  is necessarily bad.

 It often takes a rascal to take on the rascals.

[sabertooth]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ8ZYAvWTxo