h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Russell Brand, a (former) Comedian and now self-styled mouthpiece for the People, is mouthing off again about headline news, and castigating those in power for directing their energies in the wrong direction, and being the cause of deaths, rather than the killer.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/tunisia/11714891/Russell-Brand-describes-one-minutes-silence-for-Tunisia-victims-as-absolute-bull.html

This is not the first time. He appears to be anti anything and everything.

Is he right to be allowed to do this? Is he being allowed free speech on subjects that others, who may be considered radical, are muzzled, or expelled?

Is he able to get away with it because he is a 'Celebrity', albeit a foul-mouthed scruffy character who appears to be more interested in his own self-promotion, or is that a misinterpretation, and has he got his finger on the pulse of the general populace?

Your thoughts please.

MMF

I can't speak for his followers, but I thought he lost a lot of credibility with his recent forays into politics (speaking to Paxman, Millband, etc) It just seemed to highlight how superficial his arguments were.

I'm sure he'd love to be a leader of men, but he needs a more credible ideology first. He's firmly in the David Icke camp as far as I'm concerned.

I thought he'd lost the plot, and should be renamed Fire Brand!



MMF

I think Russell Brand is dangerous
I doubt many people listened to him and didnt register to vote because he said so but I am pretty sure at least a few people did so surely he is somewhat complicit in taking away (by persuasion) their democratic right to vote

although you may argue that someone so easily swayed by a 'comedian' who just likes to use fancy sounding words and talk a lot and do publicity stunts might not be the sort of person you want voting anyway... but the point is that some people listened to this man and then at the last minute he went and sided with a party anyway
Fine be anti-establishment but dont change your mind at the last minute stand up for what you believe in and if you dont believe in it dont go around influencing people who for some unknown reason believe in you

He's quite entitled to express himself as he likes (within reason). However, I don't think that he is an earth-shattering intellectual.

The media, however, seem to be happy to give his half baked opinions rather more publicity than they are worth. Unfortunately, he appeals to a certain demographic - which is why Ed Miliband was sucking up to him, many of whom look up to him and accept his pontifications without thinking things through for themselves.

Essentially, he is a popular '(former) comedian' (was he ever funny?), famous for bonking a lot.

PP.

Surely he is no better or worse than Nigel Farage?Either people are free to express themselves in a non threatening,non hate mongering manner or they are not.If not then where is the democracy we claim to be living in?

I prefer a society where Britain First,the BNP and UKIP are free to state their opinions rather than one where no one gets to express an opinion that doesn't fit another's viewpoint,primarily a despotic,tyrannical government.

The problem with UK politics is that, if you're in England at least, there is nobody saying this stuff. Now there is him and Charlotte Church. (of the two I know which one i prefer)

There is next to nobody that grabs the public interest (Dennis Skinner aside) who is challenging the Tories (red and blue ) neocon narrative. The narrative of "undeserving poor" etc.

I think it's really important to have someone saying these things, and unfortunately he's got a much bigger audience than Skinner or Owen Jones or Mark Steel (the latter are at least as entertaining, language-wise as Brand and a lot more intelligent)

I haven't heard what he said about the silence, but I agree that it's a weird thing. Where was the 2 minutes silence for, say, Lee Rigby? Why do a load of people on holiday merit a 2 minute silence and all the attention that brings? (it is undoubtedly an awful tragedy, no argument with that)

It's been interesting seeing Russell Brand work through his political awakening in public. Most of what he says is what I heard in the 6th form common room. And like Harry Potter and reading - anything that gets young people to sit up and take notice of politics, and who sees that it's not just about mainstream parties, and that you can put your own ideas together if none of the other stuff grabs you

Oh he's spouting off again is he? Probably got another booky-wook to flog.

Opinionated and knowledgeable are very different, and fools are easily persuaded.

Russell Brand is an international movie star who seems to play the same kind of characters onscreen as he's playing here. He's a jerk. If you don't have to listen to him, don't.

the comparison was made upthread. Why is it OK for Nigel Farage to speak in public?

Farage puts himself up for election and has a democratic mandate to speak. He might say a lot of offensive, racist, hypocritical rubbish but so does Diane Abbott.

anyone can speak, that's the point. And if all we here is the same neocon BS, and the mainstream media are repeating it, then Brand as much as anyone else has the right to speak.

He is using his position as an entertainer to manipulate opinion, he has access to a public platform but no political mandate.

Bad comparison with Farage then. Brand is more like a left wing version of Katie Hopkins.

"He is using his position as an entertainer to manipulate opinion, he has access to a public platform but no political mandate. [Bob Stafford]

That's probably true, but so what? Would justice be served in a society where people could only gain access to a public platform if they were seeking office?

"Brand is more like a left wing version of Katie Hopkins."
Even he aint that bad
But I wouldn't be sure of him being a socialist either, he just seems to spout whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear.

Which is exactly what Hopkins does.

Nah I regard her as spouting whatever she can get the Murdoch press to print and pay her for.

she has a platform and is using her position of access to the MsM based on nothing other than being famous to spout a lot of dangerous nonsense.

It is no different to Brand. So I'd ask: is it only ok when the message is one you want to hear?