Did something particular happen today to make you angry? Of course I can think of a lot of reasons to be angry, just confused about whether I’ve missed a new one of note.
Why are people so enamored with Brand? His advocation of not voting is dangerous. Revolution without voting means VIOLENCE. I defy anyone to bring up an instance in history anywhere in the world where boycotting an election did not lead to further disenfranchisement, leading to (further) violence, creating a self-perpetuating downward spiral of economic instability and more violence. Regardless of what the “Brands” of the world say, YOUR VOTE COUNTS. I know this because billions of dollars are spent on campaigns. It is an imperfect system. It needs constant attention. But if you want a glimpse of the alternative, go to Syria.
Brand has a LOT of good points. I agree with many of them. It is why I subscribe to this blog. But here in the US (and the UK), we have a system in place in which we can still effect the very changes Brand rails against. We can still fix the problems in the system. We need to get out and vote. Right now, the single most effective action a US citizen can do to end the current polarization in Congress is to GO VOTE IN A PRIMARY! Get a moderate into the main election. Write your congressmen. Pay attention and show up.
The words “anarchy” and “revolution” are not usually kind to the old or they very young or women or minorities. Your vote means something.
Waiting for something worthy of your vote is still not voting. How is change to come about unless you vote for it? That is meant as a serious question. If you are not advocating for violence (I don’t believe anyone here is), how is change to come about without voting?
As far as I can see, all revolutions that went on to achieve systemic change had radicals in them. They rarely get all that they want, but the people get so much more than they would have if they weren’t there. Case in point; The New Deal where the anarchists, socialists and communists were waiting in the wings
he’s saying overthrow the current system and then perhaps vote; although there will likely be violence, except that he eschews violence. brand is an interesting thinker; however, i am bit surprised so many people have jumped on this ill-defined and contradictory call to arms. in the words of the (soon to be) immortal robert webb “please go read some fucking orwell.”
mathbabe 
I’m with you on that one MB. It’s time we join the revolution ;-). Someone put this video up on the Occupy forum the other day too.
LikeLike
“Instead of some moment of lachrymose sentimentality trotted out on the TV for people to pour over emotional porn . . . . ”
This is friggin’ brilliant!
LikeLike
I love Russell Brand especially when he gets all political. But the next revolution will not be lead by the men in the world but rather the women.
LikeLike
Did something particular happen today to make you angry? Of course I can think of a lot of reasons to be angry, just confused about whether I’ve missed a new one of note.
LikeLike
I watched “inequality for all” last night, and this was much better! 🙂
LikeLike
Why are people so enamored with Brand? His advocation of not voting is dangerous. Revolution without voting means VIOLENCE. I defy anyone to bring up an instance in history anywhere in the world where boycotting an election did not lead to further disenfranchisement, leading to (further) violence, creating a self-perpetuating downward spiral of economic instability and more violence. Regardless of what the “Brands” of the world say, YOUR VOTE COUNTS. I know this because billions of dollars are spent on campaigns. It is an imperfect system. It needs constant attention. But if you want a glimpse of the alternative, go to Syria.
Brand has a LOT of good points. I agree with many of them. It is why I subscribe to this blog. But here in the US (and the UK), we have a system in place in which we can still effect the very changes Brand rails against. We can still fix the problems in the system. We need to get out and vote. Right now, the single most effective action a US citizen can do to end the current polarization in Congress is to GO VOTE IN A PRIMARY! Get a moderate into the main election. Write your congressmen. Pay attention and show up.
The words “anarchy” and “revolution” are not usually kind to the old or they very young or women or minorities. Your vote means something.
LikeLike
Don’t agree. He’s not saying “never vote,” he’s saying “vote when there’s something worthy of your vote.”
LikeLike
Waiting for something worthy of your vote is still not voting. How is change to come about unless you vote for it? That is meant as a serious question. If you are not advocating for violence (I don’t believe anyone here is), how is change to come about without voting?
LikeLike
As far as I can see, all revolutions that went on to achieve systemic change had radicals in them. They rarely get all that they want, but the people get so much more than they would have if they weren’t there. Case in point; The New Deal where the anarchists, socialists and communists were waiting in the wings
LikeLike
he’s saying overthrow the current system and then perhaps vote; although there will likely be violence, except that he eschews violence. brand is an interesting thinker; however, i am bit surprised so many people have jumped on this ill-defined and contradictory call to arms. in the words of the (soon to be) immortal robert webb “please go read some fucking orwell.”
LikeLike