Russell Brand and people defending indefensible

[jonb2]

On 22/09/2023 at 16:24, athom said:

Did you see where the UK government tried to get a Canadian media competitor to the MSM to stop paying brand? 

Anyway the reference to going private I'd think more of him going "off script". Not toeing the line that all the MSM clearly agree on. Bexit bad, orange man bad, covid vax good. No dissent is tolerated on certain issues and Brand is pushing the boundaries further than most and very eloquently. They fear his ability to captivate an audience. Too much potential. He's got to be snuffed out now. And they've already got their counter to anyone who refuses to bow to the media narrative of Brand man bad. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/russell-brand-allegations-conspiracy-donald-trump-b2416534.html

This is the independent today, serious newspaper eh. "GET YOUR LATEST RUSSELL BRAND NEWS!"

And of course if anyone ever called him anything then clearly that's more smoke to blow about to prove there is fire

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/katherine-ryan-russell-brand-roast-battle-b2416641.html

Its pitiful seeing sentient beings being as gullible as the ones on here who lap it up and the OP who seems to have the determination of a paid employee of someone 

Brand is not pushing boundaries. He's just a successful attention whore who is reading from the same magnetic play-book as every other of his ilk. The same old, safe and tested yummy mealworms.

I'd have much more respect for him if he explained how Trump grifts the masses into filling his pocket. Or broke down the benefits of Brexit. Or exposed why Fascism and Authoritarianism are so attractive to knuckle draggers. Or gave us a visual global tour of Putin's hidden assets. Even gave us a history of Murdoch's power-hungry heinous demeanours. Particularly if he exposed the theft of trillions by global elites and psychopathic corporations form us, and how these same people support division with nitro-seeding miniscule matters

You know, if he did the stuff which actually matters, rather than the planned soap-opera episodes of the billionaire sponsored alt-right.

[Staffsknot]

26 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

Yes, that said there are tonnes of articles now along the lines of "Brand did not pat my dog nicely" which is getting a bit tedious. I am sure there are plenty of men in power who are still not getting attacked (imagine Zug having power in the media).

Yup French news ran a story on Rahile Dawut, a Uyghur academic who China has jailed for life for the thought crime of 'splittism' ( she is lead academic on minority Uyghur traditions and folklore apparently) at a secret trial.

He is silent on that yet rails relentlessly about how the state is evil here or elsewhere and about control... then bangs on about China being the best...

Zugs with any power would be an authoritarian nightmare as horrific as anything he rails against as evidenced by many of his posts despising the electorate

Some stories are tenuous links because the core story was done by proper investigative journalism and others are left in its wake scrabbling for something

Edited September 24, 2023 by Staffsknot

[Staffsknot]

11 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

Brand is not pushing boundaries. He's just a successful attention whore who is reading from the same magnetic play-book as every other of his ilk. The same old, safe and tested yummy mealworms.

I'd have much more respect for him if he explained how Trump grifts the masses into filling his pocket. Or broke down the benefits of Brexit. Or exposed why Fascism and Authoritarianism are so attractive to knuckle draggers. Or gave us a visual global tour of Putin's hidden assets. Even gave us a history of Murdoch's power-hungry heinous demeanours. Particularly if he exposed the theft of trillions by global elites and psychopathic corporations form us, and how these same people support division with nitro-seeding miniscule matters

You know, if he did the stuff which actually matters, rather than the planned soap-opera episodes of the billionaire sponsored alt-right.

But such things wouldn't get him the protective followers nor easy money.

He followed the money which is what he wants.

[Drat]

I was a bit surprised by the strong link between conspiracy theorists and supporters of Putin, but I am amazed there is such a strong link between those two and enthusiasts for a patriarchal society.  I have found reading some of the views expressed towards women in here quite depressing

[Bob8]

24 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

Brand is not pushing boundaries. He's just a successful attention whore who is reading from the same magnetic play-book as every other of his ilk. The same old, safe and tested yummy mealworms.

I'd have much more respect for him if he explained how Trump grifts the masses into filling his pocket. Or broke down the benefits of Brexit. Or exposed why Fascism and Authoritarianism are so attractive to knuckle draggers. Or gave us a visual global tour of Putin's hidden assets. Even gave us a history of Murdoch's power-hungry heinous demeanours. Particularly if he exposed the theft of trillions by global elites and psychopathic corporations form us, and how these same people support division with nitro-seeding miniscule matters

You know, if he did the stuff which actually matters, rather than the planned soap-opera episodes of the billionaire sponsored alt-right.

As many on the left were weirdly sympathetic to Brand, I would compare him to Johann Hari. Another BS merchant who publishes nonsense that panders to people wanting to feel special. And no doubt there will be shock when he turns out to be a BS merchant.

[Bob8]

1 minute ago, Drat said:

I was a bit surprised by the strong link between conspiracy theorists and supporters of Putin, but I am amazed there is such a strong link between those two and enthusiasts for a patriarchal society.  I have found reading some of the views expressed towards women in here quite depressing

I was in the pub chatting with my colleague and a couple of 17 year olds. The young girl was outstandingly beautiful, but also 17 and we were having a good chat. And my colleague was leaching over her in a way that left me shocked. But what hit me more was the 17 year old girl seemed completely fine with it, she was clearly used to old men acting that way. My conversation is OK, but that is was enough to stay in that company in those circumstances was eye-opening to me. 

I have just been working on a shutdown for a construction project and towards the end, the young women have formed a group to have coffee breaks with the non-creepy men. That it was a small number (and that I was below average creepiness) is alarming.

Most pop-feminism is BS, but we see from the likes of Zug how much is not.

[jonb2]

5 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

As many on the left were weirdly sympathetic to Brand, I would compare him to Johann Hari. Another BS merchant who publishes nonsense that panders to people wanting to feel special. And no doubt there will be shock when he turns out to be a BS merchant.

The only book I've read of his was this:

Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs: Amazon.co.uk: Hari, Johann: 9781408857830: Books
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Chasing-Scream-First-Last-Drugs/dp/1408857839

Not sure about the others. But I found this excellent and it needed to be written. Certainly not in the same league as Brand's garbage output IMHO.

 

[jonb2]

21 minutes ago, Staffsknot said:

But such things wouldn't get him the protective followers nor easy money.

He followed the money which is what he wants.

Yeah, there is a type who is willing to throat any old regurgitated tripe for dollars. And there's plenty of suckers born every minute who'll lap it up from the pig trough.

[Bob8]

1 minute ago, jonb2 said:

The only book I've read of his was this:

Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs: Amazon.co.uk: Hari, Johann: 9781408857830: Books
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Chasing-Scream-First-Last-Drugs/dp/1408857839

Not sure about the others. But I found this excellent and it needed to be written. Certainly not in the same league as Brand's garbage output IMHO.

 

I will not be reading it. I would imagine if it is good, he got someone else to do the work. 

For the first ten years, he would write columns concerning how his not receiving enough preferential treatment over working class white men was terrible anti-semitism. 

[zugzwang]

4 hours ago, Bob8 said:

I was in the pub chatting with my colleague and a couple of 17 year olds. The young girl was outstandingly beautiful, but also 17 and we were having a good chat. And my colleague was leaching over her in a way that left me shocked. But what hit me more was the 17 year old girl seemed completely fine with it, she was clearly used to old men acting that way. My conversation is OK, but that is was enough to stay in that company in those circumstances was eye-opening to me. 

I have just been working on a shutdown for a construction project and towards the end, the young women have formed a group to have coffee breaks with the non-creepy men. That it was a small number (and that I was below average creepiness) is alarming.

Most pop-feminism is BS, but we see from the likes of Zug how much is not.

 

The awnings flap and the zipper gun points North.

"I can smell them in the wind like a vulture would."

Edited September 24, 2023 by zugzwang

[Bob8]

11 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

The only book I've read of his was this:

Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs: Amazon.co.uk: Hari, Johann: 9781408857830: Books
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Chasing-Scream-First-Last-Drugs/dp/1408857839

Not sure about the others. But I found this excellent and it needed to be written. Certainly not in the same league as Brand's garbage output IMHO.

 

 

8 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

Yeah, there is a type who is willing to throat any old regurgitated tripe for dollars. And there's plenty of suckers born every minute who'll lap it up from the pig trough.

We are going a bit off-topic, but nonsense stories Hari could have written (Brand is a fan of his):

- Catholic Church do not really believe in the afterlife. Sensational evidence out there all about the difference between kiros and kronos. True, but based not actually a secret.

- Pharma industry, terrible manufacturing standards, enabled but big money. The source of the real Covid vaccine risks. Again, news to anyone not familiar with the industry, well known if you are in it. Entire manufacturing industry less sophisticated than the biscuit industry despite higher regulation acting as a barrier to entry.

- Schizophrenia, often a way of diagnosing those with complaints about authority and dismissing them as paranoid. Surprisingly common diagnosis of rape victims who think the police should investigate. Brought on my traumatic events typically, rather than an inherent disease.

Big stories and that could be made to seem like new mind shifting stories if presented as such. But actually widely known to people vaguely familiar with the field. 

[Bob8]

1 hour ago, jonb2 said:

The only book I've read of his was this:

Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs: Amazon.co.uk: Hari, Johann: 9781408857830: Books
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Chasing-Scream-First-Last-Drugs/dp/1408857839

Not sure about the others. But I found this excellent and it needed to be written. Certainly not in the same league as Brand's garbage output IMHO.

 

Sorry to go on!

I read stellar reviews, from everyone but those with expertise.

https://unherd.com/2022/01/johann-haris-stolen-ideas/#:~:text=The neuroscientist Dean Burnett wrote,some truly bizarre (and bizarrely

This makes it rather like those Dr John videos on Coronavirus. Intelligent and smart sounding unless you have any background knowledge.

[miguel]

I don't get this notion of Brand being 'banned' from Youtube, a lot of folk seem to be implying that he's not allowed to post videos. I understood it to mean that his videos have been demonetized.  Tens of countless thousands of folk put out videos that don't earn a single dime, many do so on a very regular basis. Surely Brand is wealthy enough to do as they. What's the problem? 

[athom]

4 hours ago, Bob8 said:

there are tonnes of articles now along the lines of "Brand did not pat my dog nicely" which is getting a bit tedious.

Tedious for you? Very telling feigning ignorance of what all these non-stories actually indicate. I'm sure you understand the reason for them. The increasingly desperate and flimsy dog piling to try and add any weight they can. Hard to claim you are unbiased and also claim you can't see anything reprehensible going on by the media.

[athom]

8 hours ago, Staffsknot said:

Its funny how he claims censorship by big media and tech on media and tech platforms.... 

Anyway Rumble now is losing advertisers hand over fist, again not trial by media or censorship  and one of the reasons YT demonetised him.

Seems whatabouttery, wait for trial, conspiracy theories and 'its not rape' / alleged victim blaming type takes are the only play Brand's on brand fans have.

Strange thing to be cheering on. You like tech corporations exercising extra-judicial sway over peoples livelihoods and reputation? Nasty piece of work you clearly are. Wait for trial is unreasonable? Something wrong with due process? And you accuse people of talking wibble? You're just a nasty crusty old man. I imagine this 

 

 

[athom]

4 hours ago, jonb2 said:

Brand is not pushing boundaries. He's just a successful attention whore who is reading from the same magnetic play-book as every other of his ilk. The same old, safe and tested yummy mealworms.

I'd have much more respect for him if he explained how Trump grifts the masses into filling his pocket. Or broke down the benefits of Brexit. Or exposed why Fascism and Authoritarianism are so attractive to knuckle draggers. Or gave us a visual global tour of Putin's hidden assets. Even gave us a history of Murdoch's power-hungry heinous demeanours. Particularly if he exposed the theft of trillions by global elites and psychopathic corporations form us, and how these same people support division with nitro-seeding miniscule matters

You know, if he did the stuff which actually matters, rather than the planned soap-opera episodes of the billionaire sponsored alt-right.

He's probably covered most of the things you mention. Saying you think he's alt right gives away that you've not been following him, that an opinion you have been given and you just accepted it without any due diligence. Sure you can find an example of a few videos that coincide with typical alt-right though, of course. But even if he does not toe your party line thats not the point. 

[athom]

53 minutes ago, miguel said:

I don't get this notion of Brand being 'banned' from Youtube, a lot of folk seem to be implying that he's not allowed to post videos. I understood it to mean that his videos have been demonetized.  Tens of countless thousands of folk put out videos that don't earn a single dime, many do so on a very regular basis. Surely Brand is wealthy enough to do as they. What's the problem? 

Seriously? Tens of countless thousands?? Not earning a single dime, regularly not? hmmm

[jonb2]

9 minutes ago, athom said:

He's probably covered most of the things you mention. Saying you think he's alt right gives away that you've not been following him, that an opinion you have been given and you just accepted it without any due diligence. Sure you can find an example of a few videos that coincide with typical alt-right though, of course. But even if he does not toe your party line thats not the point. 

Show me evidence of his covering the things I've mentioned and my respect for him will increase immeasurably.

[athom]

4 hours ago, Bob8 said:

I was in the pub chatting with my colleague and a couple of 17 year olds. The young girl was outstandingly beautiful, but also 17 and we were having a good chat. And my colleague was leaching over her in a way that left me shocked. But what hit me more was the 17 year old girl seemed completely fine with it, she was clearly used to old men acting that way.

They love it. As you say completely fine with it. The pretty girls get a buzz from the attention, its addictive. And their looks open doors and they waft through life on it. This is not news surely. Did you all grow up in boys schools and then the army? 

[athom]

4 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

Show me evidence of his covering the things I've mentioned and my respect for him will increase immeasurably.

https://www.youtube.com/@RussellBrand/search?query=putin

https://www.youtube.com/@RussellBrand/search?query=Murdoch

https://www.youtube.com/@RussellBrand/search?query=brexit

https://www.youtube.com/@RussellBrand/search?query=trillions

https://www.youtube.com/@RussellBrand/search?query=elites

You get the idea. He covers a lot. People take their opinions from those they trust. The powers that be DO NOT want millions of people taking Brands view on these things. I'm not saying he's unique or utterly original. But he is one of the few voices a British audience could get these views from.  

[zugzwang]

50 minutes ago, miguel said:

I don't get this notion of Brand being 'banned' from Youtube, a lot of folk seem to be implying that he's not allowed to post videos. I understood it to mean that his videos have been demonetized.  Tens of countless thousands of folk put out videos that don't earn a single dime, many do so on a very regular basis. Surely Brand is wealthy enough to do as they. What's the problem? 

What's the problem? Russell Brand is being denied the right to earn a living on the basis of accusations made about him anonymously and published in one of Rupert Murdoch's scabrous hate-sheets! To add insult to injury, 'Dame' Caroline Dinenage*, Tory MP and chair of the UK parliament’s Culture, Media and Sport Committee, has sent letters to other social media providers demanding that they too demonitise Brand's content. Dinenage seems to have forgotten that she is an MP in a liberal democracy. What business is it of an MP whether a private citizen is profiting from posting videos on a social media channel? What’s more, however serious the allegations may be, Brand has not even been interviewed by the police about them, let alone convicted of any crime.

* She cucked off her first husband to marry Tory MP Mark Lancaster, an utter skidmark of a man bizarrely enobled for his part in the illegal Invasion of Afghanistan.

[zugzwang]

It's all a f***ing game to these people. They get their instructions from MI5 and feel emboldened to act as judge, jury and executioner over us.

[Quiet Guy]

9 hours ago, Staffsknot said:

It depends in what capacity she wrote - chairperson or MP or on behalf of the Committee.

If the former two she can write without asking the Committee

So it's OK for a member of the government to go about demonitising social media for people they don't like? I wonder who she will disapprove of next?

[zugzwang]

Off to blow up an Islamic wedding party?

[athom]

12 minutes ago, Quiet Guy said:

So it's OK for a member of the government to go about demonitising social media for people they don't like? I wonder who she will disapprove of next?

Its all in the same vein as their foreign policies of old and of late. "We've decided we don't like your country's politics/stance on climate/acceptance of the vaccine/acceptance of debt servitude/acceptance of our country's corporations to economically colonise you and take your natural resources, so we've decided on a regime change for you." Or some lesser machination via the world bank etc

Which is why I'm deeply suspicious that the people uncritically defending this attack on an opposing voice is working for the people/machine Brand is attacking