russell brands revolution

[Pete]

what do you guys think of this :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLYcn3PuTTk

[Wuxia007]

I agree with the interviewer. They’re vague ideas. It sounds nice, but what does it all mean? Russell is saying nothing new that every other political party and leader around the world hasn’t already argued for since the beginning of 20th century. Democrats have made similar arguments. So have Republicans, Communists, dictators, theocracies, etc. All have very different results.
I generally tend to dislike the concept of revolution. It’s an emotionally charged concept and usually does more harm than good. Most times, revolutions just make way for even worse governments.

[sihing]

I agree with the interviewer. They’re vague ideas. It sounds nice, but what does it all mean? Russell is saying nothing new that every other political party and leader around the world hasn’t already argued for since the beginning of 20th century. Democrats have made similar arguments. So have Republicans, Communists, dictators, theocracies, etc. All have very different results.
I generally tend to dislike the concept of revolution. It’s an emotionally charged concept and usually does more harm than good. Most times, revolutions just make way for even worse governments.


IMO what Russell is saying is very different from any politician that I have heard of. Politicians are into democracy, capitalism, and politics, what Russell is talking about is against all of this. It's vague, because he's limited by time in the interview. The ideas he presents are not new, but they are ignored. It sounds like he is into the Venus Project, and Jacque Fresco, here..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KphWsnhZ4Ag.

Revolution is good when it is needed, right now it is needed IMO. Society is going down the drain sorry to say..

J

[Faux Newbie]

I can't help but think that his brand of revolution is style over substance and his criticism of media is "listen to me, my hair is perfect."

Many of the things he says I can agree with, but his approach seems to me to be a different version of the Dennis Leary thing from the nineties(and the multitude who have copied him since), which then was "everyone's dumb but me, let me prove it with simplistic argument based on common sense that fails to sum things up", whereas Brand uses somewhat more involved argument that falls short of deep scholarship.

The only revolution that might change the conditions he wants changed are technological, not social. As long as the modern economy is dependent on finite resources whose finite nature gives them high value, the greatest power will be gained by pursuit and control of those at all costs. If technology solves that problem, the entire paradigm changes one way. If it doesn't, then we'll eventually be in wooden ships and talking about how great we are.

Just my opinions.

[sihing]

Best not to try to figure out Russell on a personal level, his motivations are his alone. But lets just say this, the present system has made him rich and famous, everything everyone wants he has within this present system, and he's dissing IT! That says something.

Both Socially and Economically we have to change. Today we live in the most comfortable and convenient society that has ever been created, and ppl are still not happy, they are comfortable and seek pleasure, which is temporary happiness. Technological advancement has made this happen, but ppl are still looking for outside stimuli to make them happy, be it food, drugs, sex, smartphones, or whatever, they know not of their inner happiness but only techno pleasure and outside awareness within their pursuit of happiness.. Just my opinion as well:)

James

[Faux Newbie]

Best not to try to figure out Russell on a personal level, his motivations are his alone. But lets just say this, the present system has made him rich and famous, everything everyone wants he has within this present system, and he's dissing IT! That says something.

Both Socially and Economically we have to change. Today we live in the most comfortable and convenient society that has ever been created, and ppl are still not happy, they are comfortable and seek pleasure, which is temporary happiness. Technological advancement has made this happen, but ppl are still looking for outside stimuli to make them happy, be it food, drugs, sex, smartphones, or whatever, they know not of their inner happiness but only techno pleasure and outside awareness within their pursuit of happiness.. Just my opinion as well:)

James

Agree on all points.

[Syn7]

More choice creates more stress after a certain point. Principle of diminishing returns applies here. We're just raising a high percentage of entitled pussies these days.

[TaichiMantis]

Best not to try to figure out Russell on a personal level, his motivations are his alone. But lets just say this, the present system has made him rich and famous, everything everyone wants he has within this present system, and he's dissing IT! That says something.

Both Socially and Economically we have to change. Today we live in the most comfortable and convenient society that has ever been created, and ppl are still not happy, they are comfortable and seek pleasure, which is temporary happiness. Technological advancement has made this happen, but ppl are still looking for outside stimuli to make them happy, be it food, drugs, sex, smartphones, or whatever, they know not of their inner happiness but only techno pleasure and outside awareness within their pursuit of happiness.. Just my opinion as well:)

James

...you mean we have lost our spiritual connection to God, the earth, our fellow man and ourselves :D

[sihing]

...you mean we have lost our spiritual connection to God, the earth, our fellow man and ourselves :D

Yes and No. We have definitely lost our Spiritual connection, now what does that mean, what does Spiritual mean? Nothing to do with God of the bible or any other gods, or entities outside of yourself. The way I've been introduced to it is this, Spirituality is a dimension beyond the physical.

All of us are pieces of Creation and Creators, but most of us are living just the creation part, not realizing the creator part that is in all of us. What created this universe is within us, it doesn't mean we are selves created the universe, but the same source of creation is within us, and that is what we need to get back intouch with. Once your there, you feel the oneness of it all, from that basic foundation you function within the society, with ego, but in awareness of it all..

James

[RenDaHai]

Why always destruction.... Tear down the establishment, revolution, Chaos.

Though this is a mechanism for change, surely it is not the best.

Let me make my case as simply as possible;

There are good things and there are bad things. We want more good than bad. There are two ways to achieve this, either destroy what is bad or create more of what is good.

For some reason people always go straight to destruction. Destroy what is bad. But destruction begets more bad things. Why tear down a broken system only to replace it with another which may be even more broken?

NO one ever seems to see the other mechanism. That is instead of destroying what is bad, if we instead promote the good and create more of it, then what is bad will fade into insignificance next to it. Gradually, safely. Instead of looking for whats wrong in society, look for what is right, what is working well, and do more things like it.

Now is not the time for revolution, its the time for co-operation.

[Syn7]

Revolution can take many forms. One could call the civil rights movement a revolution. The groundwork took a long time, but once it started to move, it went down pretty fast.

I think a lot of people equate revolution with violent resistance, but it isn't always so. Egypt had a revolution through protest, albeit there was some violence, but that wasn't the main focus. One could argue the whole gay thing was a revolution. One could argue the marijuana thing going on now is a revolution. Public opinion is swinging hard as the old reefer madness crowd is dying off fast.

A revolution of thought can be good or bad, it's up to the people involved to decide, that's what makes it so powerful, appealing and scary. You should try to use conventional mechanisms in order to affect change, but sometimes that isn't a productive route.

For example... in the US there are many groups coming together in order to get a constitutional amendment to decisions like Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti. Should that not succeed, then other measures are called for. It's pretty clear where popular opinion stands on those issues. If the majority can't have their way within the framework, then they'll move outside that framework, and rightfully so.

[Syn7]

Why always destruction.... Tear down the establishment, revolution, Chaos.

Though this is a mechanism for change, surely it is not the best.

Let me make my case as simply as possible;

There are good things and there are bad things. We want more good than bad. There are two ways to achieve this, either destroy what is bad or create more of what is good.

For some reason people always go straight to destruction. Destroy what is bad. But destruction begets more bad things. Why tear down a broken system only to replace it with another which may be even more broken?

NO one ever seems to see the other mechanism. That is instead of destroying what is bad, if we instead promote the good and create more of it, then what is bad will fade into insignificance next to it. Gradually, safely. Instead of looking for whats wrong in society, look for what is right, what is working well, and do more things like it.

Now is not the time for revolution, its the time for co-operation.


Depends where you are. Sometimes the bad prevents the good. That's when you step outside.

[sihing]

I don't think this is about destruction, never heard any mention of that. It's about change. Revolution is just a word, some may interpret it differently, but it's about change to a more productive and synergetic way for our society to be.


In the end, it's comes down to each of us, as individuals, and doing what is right for us. Some love this system, they are the rich, powerful, secure, and have all the things that they think they want. Have heard a ton of ppl in the know say that these types are not so happy as well, but at the least they are very comfortable, the problem is that these types are the minority, while the majority suffers just as much mentally with no comfort. The middle class is becoming the lower class economically, so the gap is getting larger, the minority is hording it, they still want more b/c to them MORE IS BETTER.

Great sacrifices have been made in every area of life because of this type of lifestyle, I've read that if everyone on earth lived like the avg. American, we would need 3 earths to support it. So that says it, we are too much into consuming and not enough into gathering what is already within us, our true Happiness and Well Being is within us, and even though this is getting more exposure, the addiction to the outside stimuli and the "in pursuit of happiness" mentality that is prevalent today, the messaged is being muted..

I'm not sure if a major shift is possible consciously now, don't know, all I can do is make myself as conscious as possible, bring about a natural happiness within myself and then from that stand point, function in the society and the world...the more naturally happy ppl there are in this world, the better it would be, great change would happen, not sure if that is possible either the way things are going..:(

James

[sihing]

I've wondered lately, why do rich and famous ppl use drugs and alcohol? They have everything the society teaches us we need to have, so why have the need for something outside of themselves to enhance their mood?


Why do athletes, when they achieve their goal of winning the gold medal, the world series, the superbowl, the Stanley cup, World Cup, Masters, etc... why do they need drugs, alcohol, women, status, fast cars to make themselves feel good, when they have achieved their dream, their goal is to win, they win, then they use things outside of themselves to enhance their moods, why?

J

[bawang]

Why do athletes, when they achieve their goal of winning the gold medal, the world series, the superbowl, the Stanley cup, World Cup, Masters, etc... why do they need drugs, alcohol, women, status, fast cars to make themselves feel good,


because that was their goal

[RenDaHai]

I've wondered lately, why do rich and famous ppl use drugs and alcohol? They have everything the society teaches us we need to have, so why have the need for something outside of themselves to enhance their mood?




Thats a very interesting observation.....

[bawang]

Thats a very interesting observation.....

that's not a very interesting observation. its a retarded observation.

[Kellen Bassette]

More choice creates more stress after a certain point. Principle of diminishing returns applies here. We're just raising a high percentage of entitled pussies these days.

This is true.

[Kellen Bassette]

For some reason people always go straight to destruction. Destroy what is bad. But destruction begets more bad things. Why tear down a broken system only to replace it with another which may be even more broken?


Sometimes you have to cut off an arm to save the body.

Change must come from within. The system will not allow for internal change.

[Syn7]

I think a constitutional amendment is possible. There are already a handful of states who have made the proposal. Their is a ton of grassroots support from the tea party, libertarians and progressives. It's one of the only things all three agree on long enough to stomach each other to get it done. Very possible. After that what really needs to be done is to reinstate and create some of the regulations surrounding derivatives and such. But until that amendment happens there is way too much money involved to get that done. It's a problem on the left and the right. Hillary Clinton is very likely to be the next POTUS, and she just got paid 200 grand, TWICE, from goldman sachs for a "speech". Not a campaign donation, she's a private. That was straight up hers. You think there are no expectations there? They bring in a room of big spenders, show off their connection to what may very well be the next president and voila, you get biz as usual. Granted I would hope the US elects a Hillary over a Cruz, but still... not a good look. What would be sweet is if Warren got the job. Why not a junior senator who's been nothing but tough on crooks?

And last but not least, hopefully a reversal of the tides down south will affect Canada in a more positive way. Can't wait to get Harper out of office. I'm not a big fan of the Liberals, but better them than the neo cons.

I don't think you guys are anywhere near the amputation stage, but it could very well go that route.

[David Jamieson]

Any idiot can sit and point and say "the system is broken"

Russell Brand is one of those idiots.

He offers no solutions and goes on about what we are already aware of.
Well done waste of time I'd say.
lol :p

[sihing]

Any idiot can sit and point and say "the system is broken"

Russell Brand is one of those idiots.

He offers no solutions and goes on about what we are already aware of.
Well done waste of time I'd say.
lol :p

The difference is when you say it, when you proclaim the problems that "everyone" already knows about, no one listens.

When Russell says it, a million people will watch it, and maybe out of that million a few will have heard something that they were unaware of, and from that a curiosity may arise to learn more, and from that mass change may happen.

It wasn't about solutions, it was about Awareness of the situation, just b/c you know of it, doesn't mean all know it...he may appeal it to an audience different from yourself.

James

[David Jamieson]

The difference is when you say it, when you proclaim the problems that "everyone" already knows about, no one listens.

When Russell says it, a million people will watch it, and maybe out of that million a few will have heard something that they were unaware of, and from that a curiosity may arise to learn more, and from that mass change may happen.

It wasn't about solutions, it was about Awareness of the situation, just b/c you know of it, doesn't mean all know it...he may appeal it to an audience different from yourself.

James

Oh, he definitely appeals to an audience different than me.
I'm not one for sitting through statements of the obvious and vague notions.
Light a fire though I guess. :)

[sihing]

Oh, he definitely appeals to an audience different than me.
I'm not one for sitting through statements of the obvious and vague notions.
Light a fire though I guess. :)

Yes lighting fires is a good way to put it. Whether or not ppl like him or disagree with him and what he is saying or doing, it is still exposure to the issues...

Remember, there is no "bad" publicity. There's just Publicity.

James

[David Jamieson]

Yes lighting fires is a good way to put it. Whether or not ppl like him or disagree with him and what he is saying or doing, it is still exposure to the issues...

Remember, there is no "bad" publicity. There's just Publicity.

James

well...unless you're Rob Ford, then it's "Just Bad publicity" and no regular publicity at all.

Crack Mayor though...lol

[Syn7]

Russel Brand is in his "I'm clean and righteous" phase. When people sober up, they tend to get like this in one way or another. I applaud him for making positive change in his own life and I sympathize with his desire for change. That being said, I agree with David, this stuff he says is pretty well known. But I also agree that many do not know and if it takes a comedian to make people think, a salute, whatever helps you get to the right conclusion. As for what that is, I already spoke my mind on that in previous posts and other threads.

[Pete]

well **** completely forgot i posted this here:rolleyes:


Russell is saying nothing new that every other political party and leader around the world hasn’t already argued for since the beginning of 20th century.

i've never heard a politician that wanted to get rid of the government completely... are you sure?


Sometimes you have to cut off an arm to save the body.

Change must come from within. The system will not allow for internal change.

^ this


Any idiot can sit and point and say "the system is broken"

Russell Brand is one of those idiots.

He offers no solutions and goes on about what we are already aware of.
Well done waste of time I'd say.
lol :p

he wants to raise awareness about it, calling him an idiot is harsh when you didn't listen to what he said :p


i'm here just to draw attention to a few ideas, i'm saying there are people with alternative ideas who are far more qualified than i am, and more importantly more qualified than the people currently doing that job something something

ok the quote is not word for word but im lazy :o the interview made me think about the issue more and it seemed to spark some debates so it's all good

i won't be voting again (although i can't remember if i did before anyway :p)

[Lucas]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY