Russell Brand

[Walter Sobchak]

Harsh on sten.

[shaun.lawson]

Yeah, Shaun, socialists should go and live in a fucking cave to avoid being labelled hypocrites by internet blowhards and the Daily Mail

No, not in a cave.

It's like this basically. If he's anti-capitalist, then rolling around in things he's achieved in a capitalist system looks ridiculous. What do so many young lefties do? Move to the right as they get older, buy a house, and end up standing for many of the things they used to oppose. Their higher cost of living means that all of a sudden, they don't favour higher taxes on the rich or middle class; so no party can be elected which wants to implement this. And the system continues: round and round it goes.

And if he's not anti-capitalist - what the heck is he? What is he for?

[Del-icious]

Nope. Shaun would vote for his party. For him? Never. The least inspiring leader of the opposition I have ever seen: so much so that just before he became Labour leader, I ripped him to shreds on national radio. And given I'm Stan Boardman's bitch, God only knows what that makes Miliband.




Exactamente.

PS. Why does Morph have Sten Guns' avatar? It's confusing.

Don't try and turn this on me fake shaun.

Shaun doesn't use words like exactamente.

[shaun.lawson]

Don't try and turn this on me fake shaun.

Shaun doesn't use words like exactamente.

He does now.

[Picards Forehead]

just before he became Labour leader, I ripped him to shreds on national radio.

don't believe this for a second

[Cam]

OK then.

1. The independence campaign was the first such campaign in history which, had it succeeded, wanted to immediately give Scotland's newly won sovereignty back lock, stock and barrel via a currency union - then complained when those it demanded that union with said "actually, sorry - you can keep it". And it had the brass neck to call those representing 58m, as opposed to those representing the "sovereign will" of 5m, "liars". Is that right or wrong?

2. Those behind the independence campaign cried "vote YES, to save the NHS!" - while hiding huge, inevitable cuts, and signing up to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. Is that right or wrong?

3. YES supporters simultaneously hail themselves for choosing something other than the three traditional parties - while calling those in England who do the same, "racist". Is this right or wrong?

4. YES supporters wail about the possibility of English voters taking the UK out of the EU (even though polls say this won't happen). In other words, while complaining bitterly about Westminster's unrepresentative grip over Scotland, they're desperate for Brussels (which is very, very pro-TTIP) to have an even more unrepresentative grip over the UK. Is this right or wrong?

5. The YES campaign presented itself as something which could result in a progressive, centre-left Scottish government. Name me one single left of centre policy in the White Paper.

You're doing it again, Lawson.

1. I couldn't give a fuck whether they were called liars or not. Politicians are accused by other politicians, activists and the general public of lying and obscuring the truth all the time. Whether they were right or wrong, why is it so wrong in this case? Or is it just an opportunity to get all misty-eyed?

I believe a currency union was to be a (foolish) temporary measure anyway. All I know is I didn't want a currency union.

2. You're prescribing cuts to the health budget to a prospective iScotland and assuming Scotland would accede to the EU and be willing signatories to TTIP; and that's not even considering that TTIP isn't fully agreed yet.

But in your imagined world I suppose it's wrong.

3. Yeah, they called those who vote Green "racists". Your question is more to do with whether UKIP is a racist party or not.

But generally what the party says is not fully representative of the specific individual. At least for me, there is no single political party that could represent me; only I represent me.

So probably wrong - which means your sweeping statements and generalisations of all Yes supporters/voters are wrong.

4. Polls! It is a possibility. Even your polls show the gap on this question is much closer than the independence one was for a long time. You lay it out as some binary choice here, where the reality is that the views that it is wrong for Scotland, even though (possibly) voting to stay in the EU, to be brought out of the EU due to English/Welsh/Northern Irish votes and that the EU needs needs needs reform are not mutually exclusive.

5. The White Paper would not have been binding on future governments of an independent Scotland. Judging a hypothetical iScotland twenty, thirty, fifty years into the future on one tome is foolish.

Probably the childcare policy; but I don't care for it. I only read a wee section of the White Paper. I didn't need an SNP wishlist to validate my reasoning for voting Yes.

---

don't believe this for a second

fucking hell. links plz.

[Johannes de Silentio]

And if he's not anti-capitalist - what the heck is he? What is he [b]for?[/b]

He's for egalitarianism and socialism.

[Big Physical Acey]

so much so that just before he became Labour leader, I ripped him to shreds on national radio.

u wot m8

Cannot for the life of me follow the logic of "only the poor can bemoan inequality". Dressing owner-occupier status in London up as "wallowing" in some sort of capitalist debauchery is just silly.

[Zizou]

On the side of the Sun Lawson, congrats.

Brands response?

Russell Brand ‏@rustyrockets 4m4 minutes ago
Hey @TheSunNewspaper, @rupertmurdoch I'm gonna sue you and give the money to #NewEraEstate and JFT96

[shaun.lawson]

On the side of the Sun Lawson, congrats.

Brands response?

Russell Brand ‏@rustyrockets  4m4 minutes ago
Hey @TheSunNewspaper, @rupertmurdoch I'm gonna sue you and give the money to #NewEraEstate and JFT96

That's a great response from him tbh.

But assisting in tax avoidance (if he is, that is)? Hmm...

[Zizou]

haha pathetic indeed man (you).

---

Also, the main man himself has something to say on the TTIP you were desperately trying to shame yes voters with earlier in the thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rh0Inepm...e=youtu.be

---

I actually wonder how strong Brand is mentally to cope with all this.

He is being attacked Daily from every area of the establishment. Must take its toll.

[CritchSmile]

It's actually quite sad to watch Russell Brand recently. He thought naively that he was especially equipped to take on the world by disarming them with wit and craft.

Recently, you can see he is mentally being run down as he is attacked from all angles of the establishment. The machine has recognised his voice as a credible threat now and they are grinding him down with relative ease. No suprise that The Sun have ran with a front page hypocrite headline regardless of the context that he DOESN'T own a flat in London. Quite pathetic.



EDIT: AP, I typed this before I read your edit to your post, interesting to see that we both recognise that an individual is being targeted by the powers that be. As the man is an ex drug addict, this could end very badly.

[Mikey]

I don't really understand folk having a dig at him for these things.

We all have problems with certain aspects from a fiscal standpoint and giving our money to certain companies but it is the corrupt system that is to blame for this rather than us as individuals. Sometimes there is a lack of real alternatives and Russell Brand is actively campaigning for this to be the case. He's still got to live within the existing parameters in the meantime though.

It seems that people never actually dispute the points he makes in his videos and attack him with these ridiculous strawman arguments which says a lot about the messages and content of those videos.

[Steven Toast]

It's actually quite sad to watch Russell Brand recently. He thought naively that he was especially equipped to take on the world by disarming them with wit and craft.

Recently, you can see he is mentally being run down as he is attacked from all angles of the establishment. The machine has recognised his voice as a credible threat now and they are grinding him down with relative ease. No suprise that The Sun have ran with a front page hypocrite headline regardless of the context that he DOESN'T own a flat in London. Quite pathetic.



EDIT: AP, I typed this before I read your edit to your post, interesting to see that we both recognise that an individual is being targeted by the powers that be. As the man is an ex drug addict, this could end very badly.

If it does, there will be blood on Lawson's hands.

[Charlie Kelly]

Good to see not much has changed since Lawson has been away!

Used to not like Brand at all, but he's fighting the good fight. The more high profile people doing that the better IMO. It's a shame the cynics amongst us don't feel the same way.

[Chrambo]

Using JTF96 now, fuck sake!

[Dexter]

Brand is set to become this century's David Icke.

[I.J]

I don't really understand folk having a dig at him for these things.

It's because it's within their interests to promote hegemony at all levels, m8.

[Walter Sobchak]

https://www.change.org/p/new-era-should-...-of-an-era?

[Ray Winstone]

Lawson have you got a dvd/recording that you can produce proving you 'ripped him to shreds' on national radio please?