Russell Brand should be ashamed
Actor and comedian Russell Brand. Photo: Brian Solis, Creative Commons, some rights reserved
The British actor and comedian Russell Brand is blowing up these days on liberal websites and in viral Facebook memes for giving his impassioned argument against voting.
In an interview for BBC’s Newsnight, Brand defended his role as a guest editor of the magazine the New Statesmen, despite the fact that he doesn’t participate in his nation’s long-running democratic traditions.
“Yeah, no, I don’t vote,” he said. “I don’t get my authority from this pre-existing paradigm that his quite narrow and only serves a few people.”
In the conversation, Brand comes off so smug, privileged and blitheringly ignorant that the interview would be of little interest, except for the fact that not voting is such a fetish among liberals.
For years — decades, really — guys like Brand have argued that good old fashioned ballot boxes just aren’t revolutionary enough.
What’s needed are quick answers to the world’s problems, shortcuts that don’t bother with things like rule of law and due process and compromise.
Asked what his alternative system might be for making decisions and allocating political power, Brand giggles and says, “I haven’t invented it yet.” Exactly.
It’s perfectly fine to toss around bromides, as Brand does here, about how we “shouldn’t destroy the planet, shouldn’t create massive economic disparity, shouldn’t ignore the needs of the people.”
A five year old, or your average pop-singer, can generally identify issues like these that need attention and action. It’s the next bit where Brand gets himself into trouble.
“It’s not that I’m voting out of apathy. I’m not voting out of absolute indifference, and weariness and exhaustion from the lies, treachery and deceit of the political class that has been going on for generations now.”
Brand suggested that voting represents “complicity” with that system. To borrow a word from his idiom, bollocks.
To be sure, every functioning democracy on the planet has shortcomings. There are desperate needs for reform and for progress on issues.
Anyone who doesn’t think we’ve made progress of that kind hasn’t read history. American and British democracy in 2013 is infinitely more fair and open and participatory than it was even a few decades ago.
Those history books will also tell you that it is the search for ideal, perfect solutions — not the hopeful muddle of participatory democracy — that gets us into trouble every time.
Here’s a confession.
I would far, far, far prefer the most cynical backroom political operative working within the American or British electoral system and making decisions about our world’s future — rather than a guy like Brand who feels like answers and solutions are easy.
And I would place far more faith in the civic and political instincts of the American average voter — the person who has, over a period of years, participated repeatedly in the decision-making process of our society — than in smug sideline critics like Brand.
In the interview, Brand calls for creation of a socialist egalitarian utopia, without the first idea of how it should be brought into existence, or how it should be governed.
If there’s a danger to this nonsense, it’s not that any of it will come to pass. Our democracy is safe from nutters on the left, just as it is safe from the nutters on the right.
The real danger is that Brand’s version of coolness — a posture of privileged superiority to the complex, frustrating business of governing — will be infectious to more and more people, especially the young.
If Brand’s blather convinces one citizen of one democracy to abandon their civic responsibilities, then he should be deeply ashamed.
Forget about the fact I have never seen this guy in a movie because even if I had, why would I care about his politics or his lack of politics.
I just don’t get why anyone cares about anything anyone in the “arts” thinks or says about anything.
very good post, brian.
ahah, well the first guys to get tossed in a “socialist egalitarian system” would be wealthy parasites like Brand who add nothing to the true goods based economy. Maybe this is why Katy Perry broke up with him?
But seriously the guy is a product of the very things he claims to despise, wealthy, hedonistic and selfish, a true one percent member.
Yes, it’s easy from a position like Brand’s to say you can’t be bothered. I could see a principled stand against participation in a system you thought corrupt, if you were working to create an alternative. But to enjoy the privileges that system has created and at the same time spit on it for its corruption is pathetic. But Pete is right, too. Who cares what Russell Brand says, or what Mel Gibson says, or what Madonna says, or any of the rest of the ignoramuses shielded by their money and their toadies?
I will have six elected offices on my ballot next week. If not for the county judgeship, none of them would be contested.
This guy’s job is to be disconnected from reality. His job is to pretend. There are some anti-establishment people with real ideas. Give them some ink.
I’m a lifelong liberal, and for me voting is something that I do every year, without fail. Because I am a liberal, most of my friends are politically liberal, too – and they seem to be of the same persuasion, that voting is important. So I’m trying to figure out why you would say “the fact that not voting is such a fetish among liberals”. Do you have any data that not voting is more common among liberals than conservatives?
Reading this I am glad the guy doesn’t vote. It is just his stupid opinion anyway. He sounds too clueless to be ashamed of anything. I say don’t even talk about him. He can’t even touch Dudley Moore’s Arthur. Back in the hole with this guy.
“the burden of proof needs to be on the people with power” – a very salient point.
put the shoe on the other foot: can we be complacent with our roles in society simply by going to the ballot box? Does voting for Barack Obama intrinsically give you more authority to tut-tut others over issues like poverty and climate change than those who don’t vote? Why? It isn’t like there’s any mainstream politician taking that issue seriously.
I certainly don’t agree with all he says, and he isn’t talking about starting some new service organization, but he does make a valid point: voting doesn’t automatically provide you with a veneer of respectability that automatically gives your points of view higher ranking than those who don’t.
He also talks about not voting as a choice for “none of the above”. If that option was available for me, I’d be tempted to take it.
With both major parties being dominated by corporate interests/cash and smaller parties blacklisted by the media (and by some voters, especially liberals), I’m dubious about how much my vote really matters. But I will vote every election without fail until I can come up with a better alternative.
Russell Brand? Russell friggin’ Brand!?!
You’re going to hold him up as a voice of liberal thought? And now for something completely different…Monty Python (excerpt from the Holy Grail):
ARTHUR: Well, I am King!
DENNIS: Oh, King, eh, very nice. And how d’you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers! By ‘anging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society. If there’s ever going to be any progress with the–
WOMAN: Dennis, there’s some lovely filth down here. Oh! How d’you do?
ARTHUR: How do you do, good lady? I am Arthur, King of the Britons. Who’s castle is that?
WOMAN: King of the who?
ARTHUR: The Britons.
WOMAN: Who are the Britons?
ARTHUR: Well, we all are. We are all Britons, and I am your king.
WOMAN: I didn’t know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.
DENNIS: You’re fooling yourself. We’re living in a dictatorship: a self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes–
WOMAN: Oh, there you go bringing class into it again.
DENNIS: That’s what it’s all about. If only people would hear of–
ARTHUR: Please! Please, good people. I am in haste. Who lives in that castle?
WOMAN: No one lives there.
ARTHUR: Then who is your lord?
WOMAN: We don’t have a lord.
ARTHUR: What?
DENNIS: I told you. We’re an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week,…
“….the interview would be of little interest, except for the fact that not voting is such a fetish among liberals.”
What kind of statement is that, Brian M.? I might expect that from Glenn Beck, but not you. Evidence, please.
I would think that President Obama got a few Liberal votes in his two electoral victories. Bernie Sanders must draw a few votes from Liberals.
Criticizing Russell Brand is fine – I too find him smug and really boring, and I find his opinions not worth serious discussion. But if you want to foster serious and polite discussion, avoid the baseless, evidence-free slurs against Liberals. Or Conservatives, Progressives, Libertarians, what have you.
To resurrect a phrase from my college days, “If you aren’t part of the solution, you are part of the problem”. Indeed he should be ashamed for complaining without any idea or suggestion of how to make things better. Being smug and self-satisfied solves nothing.
why do celebrities get to have opinions that we hear about?
Whatever Russell Brand may be as a performer, in the real world, especially politically, he’s a nonentity. It’s his shtick, nothing more.
The issue I have with Brand that to carry out his vague plan to re-distribute wealth to everyone to insure economic equality would require a monopoly of force by an elite minority—I mean he seriously doesn’t think people will just voluntary give up their wealth by feeling guilty or being shamed into it, does he?
Thus he would unwittingly follow the same path of all dictator who used force to make a better world.
Now wait a minute here, you liberals can have Russel Brand if we have to be stuck with Ted Nugent.
But to Brian’s point, no as normal adults we of course discount what this guy says for those of us who even know who he is. Why do I know who he is? I have teenagers in my home; they know who he is and in our celebrity culture he does have influence. I do think Katy Perry votes.
His picture reminds me a little of Charles Manson.
Ron,
Does he have a plan to redistribute wealth? I don’t see that in Brian’s post and am unwilling to spend time investigating further. But if that’s how he feels, he certainly can begin. He’s got wealth, lots of people don’t, and he can redistribute to his heart’s content.
It always makes me uncomfortable when people bash artists or actors for expressing political opinions. (Especially when the people doing the bashing are the same people who think highly of Ronald Reagan. Ya know, the actor!)
It is demeaning to suggest that because you make a living doing something, that you should just shut up and not have or express political opinions…
Anyway, look, most people would admit that democracies are not perfect. And some of the very basic issues he raised, and that Brian mocked as being issues a 5 year old can identify (which on some level proves Brand’s point, doesn’t it? If a 5 year old can identify them, then why the hell are they still issues!) are exactly the kind of issues that our modern democracies do not appear to be very good at addressing: “shouldn’t destroy the planet, shouldn’t create massive economic disparity, shouldn’t ignore the needs of the people.”
It is perfectly reasonable – as that destruction continues, as that disparity increases – to suggest that maybe there is a better way of doing things. And you don’t need to have the solution to point out the flaw… that is a logical fallacy.
I personally believe that representative democracy (especially parliamentary democracy) is the best system conceived to date – and I will proudly participate in it until someone comes up with something better. But if one truly felt that dramatic, fundamental change was needed in our political systems… as Brand clearly does… then you have to ask yourself, is the best way to produce that change by participating in the system, or by rejecting it outright and not participating. If I am understanding him, his conclusion is the latter.
I understand why some of you would disagree with his conclusion, but I don’t understand how worked it seems to be getting you.
Good point Mervel. Nobody should have to be stuck with Ted Nugent, unless it is for the impending zombie apocalypse.
Sarah Palin, though…hard distancing yourself from her. Hey wait a minute! I see a pattern developing here.
Come the zombie apocalypse I’m switching sides and joining the Republicans!
Russell Brand doesn’t even take himself seriously. Why does anyone else?
“Does he have a plan to redistribute wealth? I don’t see that in Brian’s post and am unwilling to spend time investigating further. ”
Yes, he advocated as such in his video. hes does make a few goo points, and I have empathy for some of his anger, but his recommendations are way too vague and unrealistic.
“Come the zombie apocalypse I’m switching sides and joining the Republicans!”
You’re going to be hard pressed to find any with brains…
I’d take the mindless blathering of Russel Brand over then mindless blathering of cable news talking heads any day. At least Russel is funny when making inane statements. On cable news, the intellect level is about the same and is painfully unfunny to boot.
he’s british. “we” don’t have him, thankfully
Most of you are missing the point… the current system of voting DOES NOT WORK. The rich are destroying the planet and those elected to control and/or stop it is complicit. It’s gotten to the point that politicians are promulgating the ruination of the world.
He works hard and uses what he EARNS to get his ideas out just like the 6 corporations that own ALL of the major media in the u.s.
Come to think of it, I don’t know any actor whose opinion of current events I’ve valued. Funny how they think the spotlight is transferable!
As KHL said, Really Brian? Russell Brand? Needed some hits, I guess, so finding a celebrity always works.
Anyways, for anyone who actually cares about the guy, Brand’s best political work is his ad-libbed takedown of MSNBC, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADJhErmJuoQ
And if anyone’s interested in an actual interesting debate among progressives, and where they’ve gone wrong, there’s one here: http://www.ianwelsh.net/a-brief-note-on-why-the-progressive-blog-movement-failed/
Kathy comments “Funny how they think the spotlight is transferable!”.
But it is transferable Kathy. We live in a “star” culture. Look at how many celebrities, not just entertainers but also sports figures, etc., get attention for things outside their field. Well known actors and musicians take up painting or photography and instant high profiles exhibits of their work while much better artists struggle to get noticed. Likewise they get interviewed about their political views without regard to how well through out they are while really thoughtful people with well reasoned views are ignored. A prime example is the slavish following by many of the economic policies of Ayn Rand, a novelist who never studied economics and never ran a business over those of Nobel prize winning economist Paul Krugman and Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the IMF.
People are attracted to “personalities” and the more famous you are, the easier it is to get broad attention even outside your field of real accomplishment.
In the MSNBC segment OA refers to, Brand basically takes over his appearance on the program and turns it into a comedy act. Mildly entertaining, but hardly a “takedown” on MSNBC. He could have have done the same thing on “Hannity”, at least until he would have been thrown on the floor and stomped to death.
I agree with people who have a problem with Brian’s description of people who share Brand’s opinions of voting as “liberals”, at least without supporting evidence. I don’t know what you call them, other than disengaged. Thinking about it, since liberals are usually known for a belief in democratic government as an agent of positive change, they would seem to be mutually exclusive of whomever Brand is talking about.
I wonder if Brand has any thoughts about the fact that in the 2000 election George W. Bush was elected by 537 votes in Florida, giving him the electoral college victory in our less-than-perfect system. If 268 voters had instead voted for Gore (never mind the 3 pages worth of other hinkey Florida vote factors) it would have changed the outcome, and a bunch of history, and for the better. Bunch of Russel Brand-think alike stay-at-home voters must have had a good laugh about it.
I would really love to know who disliked” KHL’s citation of the “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” scene, and why. Also, if KHL transcribed it, or typed it from memory.
“Come to think of it, I don’t know any actor whose opinion of current events I’ve valued.”
Eva Peron
Ronald Reagan
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Al Franken
Ben Stein
Clint Eastwood
Fred Thompson
Jesse Ventura
Sonny Bono
Just a small list of actors who went on to become politicians. In there are conservatives, liberals, and libertarians… so I’m guessing you agreed with the values of at least one of them.
“You’re going to be hard pressed to find any with brains…”
Should I laugh or are you serious?
Yes Paul, it was a joke. It is only the Tea Party faction of the GOP who would seem likely to cause starvation in brain-eating zombies. (Still a joke. Mostly.)
Also from the Holy Grail:
“Sir Bedevere: What makes you think she’s a witch?
Peasant 3: Well, she turned me into a newt!
Sir Bedevere: A newt?
Peasant 3: [meekly after a long pause] … I got better.”
Gonna have to respectfully disagree with you there, Newt, on the MSNBC thing. Brand hilariously pointed out how shallow, stupid and pointless the MSNBC’s hosts jobs are. He did that job better than they did.
newt, you got me, I totally stole the scripts from a random website without giving credit – fair use?
I have my own name for the single thumbs down: the Mark of Brett. Or Crabtree, whatever. I picture Brett lurking, Matrix-like in the bowels of the internets ready to strike with a well placed dislike, laughing maniacally “take that, ha ha ha!”
OA – point taken.
Knuck- I don’t really care if you stole the script without attribution, I mean, it’s MPHG is like the Bible or Shakespeare by now. Just wondering if you had purposefully, or accidentally memorized it, like half my generation did with “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” .
Not to get all political, but I think that kind of negativety in the lone”don’t like” vote is representitive of a negative world view that has always been there but has become more and more ascendant in the recent past. It’s kind of like what you often (BUT FAR FROM ALWAYS!) see in older people, the kind who see negatives in everything because nothing, (excepting their grandchildren) is any damn good any more to them. I suspect this kind of thinking has infected the whole country. We can’t do anything new because nothing will work, and if we do try it will only make things worse. Maybe it has to do with the aging of the babyboomers. Sigh.
Somebody once said “A European asks ‘Why should I?’, but an American asks ‘Why shouldn’t I?'” Seems like we gotten more and more like the peasants in that movie . Not to mention the rejection of science and objective evidence in favor of gossip and superstition.
Or maybe he just didn’t like your failure of attribution
I think there is something to that. People have unrealistic expectations of what the political process can ever provide them. The best president in the world who agrees with everything you believe and has great power, can’t make you happy. The expectations about what President Obama would do were so beyond reality that I think many people became discouraged. Its not all the fault of the voters though we have been sold this vision that if we just get the right people elected things will get a LOT better and we can turn the country around! Maybe not, maybe the best the best people can do is make marginal changes.
A few more sayings common to Americans:
You’re not the boss of me.
You think you’re so smart…
Make me! or You can’t make me. And the response, I don’t make monkeys I sell them.
Your statement, “rather than a guy like Brand who feels like answers and solutions are easy” – I don’t think he feels that way at all, I’m sure he realises that the answers are complex, complicated, and not easy. You all seem to be missing the point, the system as it is benefits, and always has, overall, those with the money and influence. That is what has to change.
His points, as simplistic as they are, are valid.
Start listening to the message and ignore the messenger.
Maybe “You’re not the boss of me” should replace “e pluribus unum” (“one out of many”) as the National motto.
It’s old news. Back in the sixties (and probably earlier) we had all kind of smug, liberal nitwits with all the answers and none of the solutions.