Russell Brand urges viewers to vote Labour!

[Hibbyradge]

Brand goes against his "don't vote" ethos and backs Labour.

He also nods to the SNP towards the end of the video and supports the Green MP in Brighton.

Pretty much exactly what I want.

SNP in Scotland and Labour as the biggest party.

I wonder if Cameron still thinks it's a joke...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwGBTcIHN0U

[Stranraer]

Deary me, I wouldn't listen a word this man says. He couldn't even have a sensible debate on drug policy with Peter Hitchens on Newsnight.

[Kato]

Brand goes against his "don't vote" ethos and backs Labour.


Was that really an "ethos" - I thought it was more a snap-shot of that moment when he thought that no party at that time was worth voting for?

[hibsbollah]

Deary me, I wouldn't listen a word this man says. He couldn't even have a sensible debate on drug policy with Peter Hitchens on Newsnight.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/04/russell-brand-endorsed-labour-tories-should-be-worried

I like almost everything Brand says. Yes, he deviates and changes his views from time to time but thats a natural thing for most non politicians. His drug 'policy' is spot on imho, based on care and empathy for the addict. I liked this article.

[marinello59]

That's it then. Brand comes out for Labour. It's all over now. Anybody know who the Krankies are backing in Scotland?

[johnbc70]

Brands the only joke here.

[JeMeSouviens]

That's it then. Brand comes out for Labour.

... and Delia! Don't forget Delia. :cb

[marinello59]

... and Delia! Don't forget Delia. :cb

They've come a long way since Cool Brittania. :greengrin

[DaveF]

I'd imagine the vast majority of Brand's 'followers' will probably sleep right through the GE anyway.

[steakbake]

Deary me, I wouldn't listen a word this man says. He couldn't even have a sensible debate on drug policy with Peter Hitchens on Newsnight.

Peter Hitchens might come across as more articulate and erudite, but he hardly holds a sensible position on drugs himself. You almost certainly cannot reconcile the two positions.

[Hibbyradge]

Deary me, I wouldn't listen a word this man says. He couldn't even have a sensible debate on drug policy with Peter Hitchens on Newsnight.

Why did you say "deary me" if you didn't listen to what he said? :confused:

[Hibbyradge]

That's it then. Brand comes out for Labour. It's all over now. Anybody know who the Krankies are backing in Scotland?

I think this is more significant "news" than an over-privileged woman having another over privileged baby. :wink:

Like him or not, Brand has some influence with the young people who subscribe to the Trews.

[Hibbyradge]

I'd imagine the vast majority of Brand's 'followers' will probably sleep right through the GE anyway.

How condescending! I hope your favourite politicians don't have that attitude towards young people.

Oh and another thing, Dave; you're showing your age. :na na:

[CropleyWasGod]

I think this is more significant "news" than an over-privileged woman having another over privileged baby. :wink:

Like him or not, Brand has some influence with the young people who subscribe to the Trews.

That's my take on it.

He's not speaking to me. He's speaking to my kids. If he can get them to engage with the process, which TBH the politicians of my generation aren't doing, then he's doing a bloody good job IMO.

[Stranraer]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/04/russell-brand-endorsed-labour-tories-should-be-worried

I like almost everything Brand says. Yes, he deviates and changes his views from time to time but thats a natural thing for most non politicians. His drug 'policy' is spot on imho, based on care and empathy for the addict. I liked this article.

Drug takers aren't victims and it shouldn't be considered an "illness". People take drugs because they enjoy it. I've been in hospitals where most of the patients are in for rehabilitation and when they get out they go right back to using (the majority do).

If we enforced the law properly people would realise that taking drugs is actually a crime. Having broken the law they should be punished, not treated in hospitals where genuinely sick patients are denied care.

It wouldn't mean putting more people in jail if we had a proper drugs law, it may deter them from taking them in the first place but people take drugs knowing they can get off with it.

[steakbake]

Drug takers aren't victims and it shouldn't be considered an "illness". People take drugs because they enjoy it. I've been in hospitals where most of the patients are in for rehabilitation and when they get out they go right back to using (the majority do).

If we enforced the law properly people would realise that taking drugs is actually a crime. Having broken the law they should be punished, not treated in hospitals where genuinely sick patients are denied care.

It wouldn't mean putting more people in jail if we had a proper drugs law, it may deter them from taking them in the first place but people take drugs knowing they can get off with it.

Jails are full of people who have addictions.

Very few people once they actually can peer out of the hole their in, want to remain addicted. Most folk want out.

The programmes the NHS use do so to process people. It's not focussed on outcomes. It's based on how many people you can stick a plaster on and say "X have attended treatment".

You can't 'punish' people or arrest them out of what is essentially a psychological and physiological dependency. That simply does not work because it goes back to my first point: the jails are packed with addicts.

Source: a previous job.

[lord bunberry]

Drug takers aren't victims and it shouldn't be considered an "illness". People take drugs because they enjoy it. I've been in hospitals where most of the patients are in for rehabilitation and when they get out they go right back to using (the majority do).

If we enforced the law properly people would realise that taking drugs is actually a crime. Having broken the law they should be punished, not treated in hospitals where genuinely sick patients are denied care.

It wouldn't mean putting more people in jail if we had a proper drugs law, it may deter them from taking them in the first place but people take drugs knowing they can get off with it.
What a load of garbage.

[johnbc70]

Breaking News: Russell Brand to be elected to the Lords as Millibands new drug 'tsar' when he becomes PM.

[CropleyWasGod]

Breaking News: Russell Brand to be elected to the Lords as Millibands new drug 'tsar' when he becomes PM.
We could do a lot worse [emoji6]

[Hibbyradge]

Breaking News: Russell Brand to be elected to the Lords as Millibands new drug 'tsar' when he becomes PM.

I'm hoping not all of that sentence is nonsense!

[Stranraer]

What a load of garbage.

Thanks for that completely useless response. I too have worked with users. If you insist on responding maybe you should offer more than 5 words.

[Kato]

Drug takers aren't victims and it shouldn't be considered an "illness". People take drugs because they enjoy it. I've been in hospitals where most of the patients are in for rehabilitation and when they get out they go right back to using (the majority do).

If we enforced the law properly people would realise that taking drugs is actually a crime. Having broken the law they should be punished, not treated in hospitals where genuinely sick patients are denied care.

It wouldn't mean putting more people in jail if we had a proper drugs law, it may deter them from taking them in the first place but people take drugs knowing they can get off with it.

1959 on the phone asking for it's moral compass back.

[lord bunberry]

Thanks for that completely useless response. I too have worked with users. If you insist on responding maybe you should offer more than 5 words.
I gave my views on this topic on the other thread. I don't really see the point of going over this again. I find your views on this to be completely out of touch with reality. Prohibition has failed.

[Sir David Gray]

I'm comfortable knowing that my position is almost the polar opposite to that of Russell Brand.

I can sleep easily tonight.

[hibsbollah]

Drug takers aren't victims and it shouldn't be considered an "illness". People take drugs because they enjoy it. I've been in hospitals where most of the patients are in for rehabilitation and when they get out they go right back to using (the majority do).

If we enforced the law properly people would realise that taking drugs is actually a crime. Having broken the law they should be punished, not treated in hospitals where genuinely sick patients are denied care.

It wouldn't mean putting more people in jail if we had a proper drugs law, it may deter them from taking them in the first place but people take drugs knowing they can get off with it.

I profoundly disagree with almost all of that, I'm afraid.

[heretoday]

I reckon Brand has damaged his image by getting involved with Miliband more than the other way round.

[Mikey09]

Drug takers aren't victims and it shouldn't be considered an "illness". People take drugs because they enjoy it. I've been in hospitals where most of the patients are in for rehabilitation and when they get out they go right back to using (the majority do).

If we enforced the law properly people would realise that taking drugs is actually a crime. Having broken the law they should be punished, not treated in hospitals where genuinely sick patients are denied care.

It wouldn't mean putting more people in jail if we had a proper drugs law, it may deter them from taking them in the first place but people take drugs knowing they can get off with it.


Ok. I'm gonna try and answer this calmly. Firstly.. Some Drug "Takers" as you call them are very much "victims" of circumstance or have been the victim of abuse etc who use to self medicate. A lot I met were born into this lifestyle and have known nothing else. Secondly... If Addiction isn't an illness what is it?? Third.. People take drugs because they enjoy it?? Some do. Mostly the ones who can use recreationally without becoming addicted. However the ones who become addicts use to feed there habit, not because they enjoy it... Trust me!
Finally... People would realise that taking drugs is actually a crime?? Here's an exclusive for you, they do! However, addiction can be so overpowering you don't give a flying **** about consequences.
Oh... And it's up to our Government to provide care and support to everyone who needs it... These Drug takers fall under your "Genuine sick patient criteria" as well, but thanks for judging them ALL.

[lyonhibs]

Russel Brand is a horrible, self promoting, hypocritical, chronically unfunny, budget gigalo wannabe ******** and the fact that he's finally decided to abandon his "oh so revolutionary" Don't vote, don't pay taxes standpoint this once changes none of that.

I agree with what he's saying, but not with the fact that he's saying it (if that makes any sense)

[Hibbyradge]

I agree with what he's saying, but not with the fact that he's saying it (if that makes any sense)

Nope.

[Andy74]

Russell Brand is harmless enough - but he falls into the same sort of category as Bono for me. Talking about Revolution and fighting the capitalist system from a £2m plus pad in London? Nah, not for me.

[RyeSloan]

Russell Brand is harmless enough - but he falls into the same sort of category as Bono for me. Talking about Revolution and fighting the capitalist system from a £2m plus pad in London? Nah, not for me.

Not sure he is harmless as you suggest but I agree 100% on the rest of your post...all seems rather hypocritical to me.

[snooky]

Brand goes against his "don't vote" ethos and backs Labour......

Aye, the lad's Brand new. :wink:

[Hibbyradge]

Aye, the lad's Brand new. :wink:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=tKdcjJoXeEY&feature=fvwp

[Hibbyradge]

Not sure he is harmless as you suggest but I agree 100% on the rest of your post...all seems rather hypocritical to me.

Really?

Does the fact that he's been successful mean he shouldn't have left wing views?

Is it only the poor that are allowed to believe the system is wrong?

[snooky]

Really?

Does the fact that he's been successful mean he shouldn't have left wing views?

Is it only the poor that are allowed to believe the system is wrong?

:agree: I know someone who hardly has two pennies to rub together but will be voting Tory.

Don't know why, however it's his choice.

[Bristolhibby]

Really?

Does the fact that he's been successful mean he shouldn't have left wing views?

Is it only the poor that are allowed to believe the system is wrong?

This.

If he gave everything away and lived on a sink hole estate in Hackney, are those the only circumstances that he can have left wing views?

The profits from his last book 100% went to drugs charities. Hardly the actions of a rampant capitalist.

Play the ball not the man.

J

[johnbc70]

The profits from his last book 100% went to drugs charities. Hardly the actions of a rampant capitalist.


J
I am sure the £1.35 was very welcomed.

[Hibbyradge]

I am sure the £1.35 was very welcomed.

You're coming across as a very bitter person.

[Bristolhibby]

I am sure the £1.35 was very welcomed.

http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/mar/26/russell-brand-donates-profits-book-hackney-cafe

Aye, hypocrite right enough.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/23/after-new-era-its-harder-than-ever-to-mock-russell-brand-as-a-hypocrite

J

[Hibrandenburg]

I can't put my finger on why because I agree with a lot of what he says but I just can't take to the guy.

[Bristolhibby]

I can't put my finger on why because I agree with a lot of what he says but I just can't take to the guy.

He is a bit Marmite, but as I said, play the ball not the man. He talks a lot of sense and engages with the unengaged.

I happen to find him very funny and I agree with much of his politics. Especially the influence of media, trans national corporations and the inequality in our society.

J

[johnbc70]

http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/mar/26/russell-brand-donates-profits-book-hackney-cafe

Aye, hypocrite right enough.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/23/after-new-era-its-harder-than-ever-to-mock-russell-brand-as-a-hypocrite

J

Wow the Guardian newspaper defending Russell Brand, who would have thought it. Shall I post some links from the Daily Mail to even it up.

[johnbc70]

You're coming across as a very bitter person.

I am not, just cannot take the guy seriously. I like his films though (except Arthur which was rubbish)

[lyonhibs]

Nope.

I'll try again.

I meant, I agree with what he's saying (not the timing thought), but my own personal intense dislike for Russell Brand, his tune-changing, self promoting, self appointed leader of his social media "revolution" as well as the fact that he's made most of his money through being a terrible comedian of the "SHOUT LOUDLY" school of thought and writing about his terrible time as a "sex addict" means I can't give him much credit for saying it.

[Scottie]

I can't put my finger on why because I agree with a lot of what he says but I just can't take to the guy.
Me too H.

Maybe im just too thick to appreciate what I'm missing he has.:confused:

[Bristolhibby]

Wow the Guardian newspaper defending Russell Brand, who would have thought it. Shall I post some links from the Daily Mail to even it up.

I can't help if the mainstream media narritive is in the pocket of their right win non dom owners.

Shall I put an link to a blog?

Thanks for reading the articles anyway.

J

[Hibbyradge]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/russell-brand/russell-brand_b_7223266.html?ir=UK?ncid=newsletter-uk

On his decision to back Labour;

"Ultimately what I feel, is that by not removing the Tories, through an unwillingness to participate in the "masquerade of democracy", I was implicitly expecting the most vulnerable people in society to pay the price on my behalf while I pondered alternatives in luxury."

[(((Fergus)))]

Really?

Does the fact that he's been successful mean he shouldn't have left wing views?

Is it only the poor that are allowed to believe the system is wrong?

As a reasonably rich person he can single-handedly do something to offset the perceived errors of the system, regardless of the sitting government, and leave himself a few thousand a year to live comfortably on. Maybe he already does?

[Bristolhibby]

As a reasonably rich person he can single-handedly do something to offset the perceived errors of the system, regardless of the sitting government, and leave himself a few thousand a year to live comfortably on. Maybe he already does?

See my article re his considerable book sale profits going to a set up community based cafe staffed by recovering addicts.

J