After a year-long "Don't Vote!" campaign, Russell Brand backs Ed Miliband

Ha,ha! I predicted this when Brand came out and started posting his "revolutionary" videos. Of course, he is suddenly all about big government and endorsing it. If he were truly a revolutionary, he would have been hated and not tolerated by the establishement, but since his "revolutionary" ideas require over-bearing and controlling big government control ... they let him ride.

This doesn't surprise me in the least.

a reply to: ketsuko

Ironical he has gone for the guys that gave us the 2008 crash in the UK and who brought in a ton of social engineering crap and gave us the war in Iraq........

How revolutionary indeed.

a reply to: crazyewok

They're all bastards mate. We can't win. All we can do is vote for who we think will screw us over the least. It's a sorry state of affairs.

I just love my country and I hate to see my fellow people hurt by austerity, so I would rather Labour win. And this is me being honest with myself... I was very much one of the 'don't vote' bandwagon jumpers, but I have changed my mind.

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: tothetenthpower


That's all Russell is doing. His rants have certainly woken up a few people to what's going on, but eventually you have to stop complaining and actually start supporting real, effective change, as opposed to fluffy rhetoric.

~Tenth

It was Labour in power when the banks collapsed

I know next to nothing about contemporary U.K. politics and Labour's history in regard to financial sector oversight/complicity but the above statement is very disingenuous. Just b/c they were at the helm during the crash does not therefore automagically fault them. There are many, many more complex factors in the part of your post quoted above, the same applies to the rest of your post.

While there are in reality well intentioned and kind harted people in any party the facts suggest that naivety may be at fault as has been seen, time after time, when the victor either "evolves" his or her position on a campaign promise or entirely renegs.

Here in the U.S., where practically since the founding of the country, the political system has devolved(or evolved - take your pick) into a two party system, where in all reality voters are given a "choice" between the two already chosen for we the people. While in a Parliamentary system, especially Parliamentary Monarchy, there exists institutional and bureaucratic differences, numerous key similarities remain. As in American society, British society has seen the intentional creation of false dichotomies so that the everyday people may be ruled and controlled by a divide and conquer philosophy. This method of control is endemic to the west and an excellent example can be found in British colonial revolts in what is now the United States.

Bacons rebellion, in 1676 Virginia, is just one such example. While it's causes are too complex and lengthy for this post, it is important to point out, that during this early and formative period of pre-modern finance and capitalism, some of the first segregation laws by the British in the North American colonies were introduced. For instance intermarriage between "whites", Irish indentured servants(white too?), African captives and Native Americans were banned! An early example of false dichotomies and the divide and conquer mentality by social and policy means. It is pervasive in our " Western" society today and it is an extremely troubling fact that we are divided and controlled along these lines.

My point is very simple, however its implications are far reaching; it doesn't matter who we vote for, in the U.S. OR THE U.K., the game has been rigged from the beginning and most are playing right into their decisive hands. Politician's do not effect economic change on a large scale, central banks do so however by controlling a nations monetary policy, and simply speaking, the resulting economic bust or boom.

Simply put Brand may feel Ed to be an excellent human being with the best intentions in world. REALITY: Just like "Hope and Change" sounded nice all those years ago this is all very likely false hope and I doubt any change is coming to the Kingdom. While this isn't a Putin thread, and I certainly have my issues with him, I do admire and envy his apparent success at decimating the control of the government held by the oligarchs. Obviously this was replaced by another top down, authoritarian, system but it would be incredible to see leaders in the West defy the bankers.... Last time we saw that in America the President responsible was shot in the head in public.

originally posted by: SensiblyReckless
a reply to: crazyewok

Correct, Labour started it, but it was the Tories who implemented brutal austerity on the nation's poorest and most vulnerable. Crime is gonna keep going up under austerity. A lot of people are forced into crime because they've been left destitute. While at the same time giving massive tax cuts to huge millionaire corporations.

The Tories had no choice but yto implement austerity and despite what some of you are whining about, they are not "destroying" the country, quite the opposite. The economic recovery is second to none and all the big institutions have said the British plan is working.

And crime "going up"? Crimes is at it's lowest level ever! Talk about hyperbole!

As for the OP - Brand is a twat. The most ironic thing though is that after saying "don't vote" for a year, he finally endorses a party and calls on people to vote one week after the deadline to register to vote closed. So, if any of his "followers" took his advice to begin with, it matters not as they can't do bugger all come the 7th May.

a reply to: s3cz0ne

One could make the argument that Labour, despite being in power at the time, were not to blame for the crash, but they had been in power for 10 years by then.

In fact, only months before the crash occurred, Gordon Brown stood in front of the party faithful and declared he and he alone had brought an end to "boom and bust"...

So, if he can claim he (somehow) managed to being an end to the economic cycle, then he can also shoulder the responsibility for what happened in 2007-08. Not to mention he inherited a surplus in 1997 and by 2000 were running a deficit and that he sold huge amounts of the UK's gold reserves when gold was at an historic low!

I agreed with a lot of what he had to say previously but his conviction must be severely lacking if his whole stance can be irrevocably altered by one 10 minute chat.

I very much doubt anyone will make their voting decision on what brand says, but I would say labour have made better use of the media than other parties. Miliband knew going through russel brand would engage with many young people who don't believe in politics. Whether you like brand or not, his message and attitude to the current political system in the UK resonated with a lot of young people, who don't read newspapers or watch the news. They spend their time online on Twitter facebook and YouTube. It was clever campaigning on behalf of Milliband. It was hypocritical of Brand, but politics is not about fairness it's about winning elections. Maybe the Torries can find someone who can engage with young people on a level and media young people are using like brand and stop moaning about it. Maybe Torries don't want to engage with young people, the older vote is more their target

a reply to: SensiblyReckless

What about SNP? There not the Tory's far from it, and there not UKIP or the Greens nether. There also, as far as i know quite willing to share a power base with Labour, its Miliband that's the problem there. He can't quite get his head around shared power with the Scottish National Party, wonder why?

originally posted by: AshOnMyTomatoes

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

I suspect this thread could get ugly. I happen to like Russell Brand quite a lot, but this is certainly a shift in message. I'm torn on this.

Eventually, revolutionaries who won't use violence as a means of change, will always choose to effect change from within the system they rail against.

That's all Russell is doing. His rants have certainly woken up a few people to what's going on, but eventually you have to stop complaining and actually start supporting real, effective change, as opposed to fluffy rhetoric.

~Tenth

I'd prefer to agree with this. Worst case scenario, Brand has been a Labour shill all along, and has been using his manic charisma to charm people to following his view. I don't think this is the case. What a strange way to go about luring people to Labour that would be. Best case scenario, Miliband really IS a figure that could and would affect change, however incremental, from within, and Russell is genuinely convinced of this. That's what I'd like to believe. The most likely scenario, however, is that Russell was taken in by Miliband by meeting him face to face. I suspect Russell likes to think he's a good judge of character; he's declared many people to be "decent" after meeting them in person. Miliband then gets into office and does none of the things he proclaimed on the Trews or elsewhere. That's what I think will happen. I guess I'm cynical.

Edit to add: Actually most likely, UKIP will end up in power, because way too many people are frightened closet racists, in which case gods help the UK.

there is not a chance in hell of UKIP winning...not sure why you think there is.

To the OP and others.

I think that Brand is just after publicity. He's got it too.

Personally, although I think Brand is a twonk, I think that any person who encourages youngsters to get involved and vote is a positive.

I heard some interviews with young people on the radio today, and frankly their apathy and ignorance was worrying.

a reply to: stumason

Utter, utter BS. I like how you conveniently forget about them giving massive tax cuts to corporations. Also conveniently forgetting that the banksters caused the crisis, and the Tory scum made the poor pay for it.

a reply to: andy06shake

An SNP/Labour coalition sounds much better than a Tory government to me mate. I say give them the chance.

a reply to: SensiblyReckless

If only eh? Never happen all the same.

Our political process never mind the notion of a democratic process are broken beyond repair.

Time for something new although i have no idea as to what that would be.

The man is a complete moron with no ideas or integrity, how not voting is meant to change anything is beyond me. Nice of him to change his mind after voting registration deadline has passed.

a reply to: bastion

"Nice of him to change his mind after voting registration deadline has passed."

Think you hit the nail right on the head there, great point!

Brand can show moments of intelligence and understanding about what is happening in the Western World today, unfortunately he always reverts to coming unhinged, as well as taking it way too far. I only like some of his rants personally, he and I are mostly politically the opposite.

Also, While he's being foolish when talking about not voting, in a way he is right though because the entire system is rigged, at least here in America anyways. I view him like the late George Carlin, a Liberal who I respected a lot. However, I respect Carlin a lot more than I do Brand. ~$heopleNation

This is incredible, are you all actually shocked by this? I've been saying for the last two years, even on here, that the guy is a Labour shill. May be it is because of my line of work, but I knew this all along, it was so obvious. The guy never said a thing about the last Labour government that wrecked the British working class, created and bribed a benefit class in order to import cheap labour and increase their voting pool as in England they were on their way out and in Scotland, even over ten years ago, there were fears that Labour were gradually losing support. They then over inflated the public sector with bureaucracy and jobs to suit, the tax increases under them were some of the highest we have seen, they introduced the uni fees, wrecked education, NHS, the police... I mean the list is endless on what they did to this country...and yet Brand said nothing, just like the unions say nothing when Labour are in power wrecking the place.

Wow, I am shocked that so many on here didn't see it and even now, many are coming up with excuses to validate Brands position. Well done to the bloke, he played desperate people, released a book, enhanced his fortune and yet still people will blindly follow him, I take my hat off to him, in my line work its ruthless out here and if I guy can do what he has done and still come off OK then well done him.

You know some of you lot need to work with me, it would actually show you what's happening in this country....even if it makes you as cynical as I am.

originally posted by: stumason

The Tories had no choice but yto implement austerity and despite what some of you are whining about, they are not "destroying" the country, quite the opposite. The economic recovery is second to none and all the big institutions have said the British plan is working.

Oh, really? So have the Tories been trying to outlaw tax avoidance and tax-havens? How about increasing taxes on the rich and taxing non-domicile Russian oligarchs? I guess they had no choice about it, right?

At least Labour are trying to do something about it. www.bbc.com...

Vote Labour. They might be ****s, but they aren't as bad as the Tories.

^ Amen to that ^

I must admit it was really stupid to change his mind after the voting deadline, monumentally stupid, in fact. But it's hard for me to hate on the guy. He talks a lot of sense, he exposes Rupert Murdoch's media empire and how the propaganda works. He has compassion and empathy for the little guy even though he's a millionaire and it would be massively beneficial to him if the Tories got back in power.

He's a voice of reason in a world full of hatred and corruption.

Kudos, Mr. Brand. You're a legend.