Russell Brand and another WTF OP/ED

[Doubting Thomas]

I vote, but living in a red state I feel like it doesn't matter at all. Yes, I have a say, but it's drowned out by the masses of idiots who think that right-wing conservatism is the only way.

[downbeatplumb]

Every vote counts in that that vote is taken into consideration when policies are made.

If you don't vote at all then you may as well not think anything.

You have to vote for the right lizard or the wrong lizard will get in.

“It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see..."
"You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
"No," said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said Ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"
"What?"
"I said," said Ford, with an increasing air of urgency creeping into his voice, "have you got any gin?"
"I'll look. Tell me about the lizards."
Ford shrugged again.
"Some people say that the lizards are the best thing that ever happenned to them," he said. "They're completely wrong of course, completely and utterly wrong, but someone's got to say it."
"But that's terrible," said Arthur.
"Listen, bud," said Ford, "if I had one Altairian dollar for every time I heard one bit of the Universe look at another bit of the Universe and say 'That's terrible' I wouldn't be sitting here like a lemon looking for a gin.”
― Douglas Adams, So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish

[Napoléon]

Holly crap, I am used to dealing with delusions from theists, but I really hate it when atheists do it.

He's not an atheist.

But doesn't vote himself, says he won't vote because it does not work.

Okay, first misrepresentation.

He doesn't actually say he doesn't vote because voting as a system doesn't work. Rather he doesn't vote in the current political climate because the amount of change that is realistically likely to happen by giving a vote is relatively small. Furthermore he does not vote not out of apathy rather of being fed up with the fact fuck all really changes when he does vote.

My reasoning for why I don't vote are much the same.

My question to this moron is, what would you replace it with?

Did you watch the whole video?

And what does he think would happen to his own personal wealth if voting were scrapped? I'll tell him what would happen. It would create a power vacuum, and that vacuum would be filled with someone with even more money than him, enough to create a monopoly on political power, like Gaddaffi, or the anarchy warlord country of Somalia. Removing voting would not guarantee the end of disparity, it would simply shift power.

Slippery slope based on nothing but a guess.

Secular systems of government are no different that dictatorships, they are both run by humans and thus subject to abuse of power, because humans have always been capable of cruelty and compassion. Voting happens in Iran too but I doubt Russell would like living there nor could he make a living making fun of religion like he does.

What on earth are you talking about? He's not even a fuckin' atheist!

Libya thought Gaddaffi overthrowing the prior democracy would cure their social ills, and all it did was allow him to become a dictator, BECAUSE OF HIS WEALTH.

You are completely misrepresenting what Russell is saying or simply flat out misunderstanding it.

Please give me one sentence where he said he's all for despotism. In fact one of his points is that we should have a massive redistribution of wealth, which if it were to happen, would make your scenario far less likely.

The problem isn't voting, the problem is humans. At least in the west, people have MORE of an opportunity than a dictatorship, to have a voice.

No one is disputing that, Brand didn't dispute that. Maybe you should listen to what it is he's actually saying about the current system instead of assuming what you obviously want him to say?

I'd say to Russell Brand, vote and or run for office, but don't bitch, and do not speak for me.

Why can't he bitch? He's living in this world just the same as you are. Are you saying he shouldn't have freedom of speech? Are you saying he shouldn't be allowed to voice discontent at the current status of our political systems?

And how is he speaking for you? Where did he once say he was speaking for everyone?

If you've got a problem with anything he's said then fair enough, actually argue him on those points. But frankly I'm wondering if you've even watched the whole video, or just blacked out at certain periods and put your own subtitles in.

[Optimistic Mysanthrope]

In my not-even-remotely-humble-opinion, if you cast your vote based a reason such as one of these:

• You have to vote for someone, might as well be them
  
• Best of a bad bunch
  
• To get the other lot out of office
  

Then if anyone has forfeited the right to bitch about the political status quo, it's you. It certainly is not those that point blank refuse to elect a person/party they do not want in power.

It's all well and good saying that if you don't like it, become a candidate yourself. But you still have to work within the very system that's flawed to begin with, and which will oppose such a change.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the system needs to be torn down and rebuilt from scratch. I certainly have no delusions of some bullshit utopian ideal. What I'm saying is that the current implementation of the political party system is failing the very people it is supposed to serve.

Change will come about through the demands of the populace. They need to speak out with their voices, not votes. Casting a vote for one party won't change the policies of the others.

Even if you manage to get suitable candidates elected, they'll be considered part of the lunatic fringe by the main parliamentary body. That's why most people don't stand as candidates, it just doesn't doesn't have a reasonable probability of doing anything productive. What you need to do is the get the current political parties to wake the fuck up and start listening to their constituencies rather than corporations. As long as political parties are receiving "donations" from those corporations, and as long as the primary media outlets are owned by them, substantial change is going to be a long time coming.

So in short, I don't vote and bollocks to anyone that says I should

[Brian37]

I vote, but living in a red state I feel like it doesn't matter at all. Yes, I have a say, but it's drowned out by the masses of idiots who think that right-wing conservatism is the only way.

That is such short term thinking. America started out with slavery and with women with no right to vote. There is no more slavery, (minus the uber rich push to further indentured slavery through low pay and dept.") And women have the right to vote.

If you think you cant make change, you are wrong. I have been active online as an atheist since 01 every day. I can tell you our voice has grown leaps and bounds since.

So if you live in a fundy state, I can tell you even their local papers will print your opinions. I lived in fundy town Lynchburg Va, home of Jerry Fartwell. I got several of my opinions printed in the 10 years I lived there, and even gays and dissenting Christians outside his sect constantly had a voice in that local paper.

---

In my not-even-remotely-humble-opinion, if you cast your vote based a reason such as one of these:

• You have to vote for someone, might as well be them
  
• Best of a bad bunch
  
• To get the other lot out of office
  

Then if anyone has forfeited the right to bitch about the political status quo, it's you. It certainly is not those that point blank refuse to elect a person/party they do not want in power.

It's all well and good saying that if you don't like it, become a candidate yourself. But you still have to work within the very system that's flawed to begin with, and which will oppose such a change.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the system needs to be torn down and rebuilt from scratch. I certainly have no delusions of some bullshit utopian ideal. What I'm saying is that the current implementation of the political party system is failing the very people it is supposed to serve.

Change will come about through the demands of the populace. They need to speak out with their voices, not votes. Casting a vote for one party won't change the policies of the others.

Even if you manage to get suitable candidates elected, they'll be considered part of the lunatic fringe by the main parliamentary body. That's why most people don't stand as candidates, it just doesn't doesn't have a reasonable probability of doing anything productive. What you need to do is the get the current political parties to wake the fuck up and start listening to their constituencies rather than corporations. As long as political parties are receiving "donations" from those corporations, and as long as the primary media outlets are owned by them, substantial change is going to be a long time coming.

So in short, I don't vote and bollocks to anyone that says I should

Then you are an idiot. If you are of the ilk that there is not enough pluralism in politics, then get off your fucking ass and start your own party. Otherwise to me you are pissing in the wind.

---

Let me add, it isn't the tool (setup of the system) it is the MONOPOLY,

[Psykhronic]

People have to work within their limitations. It's not a simple matter to start a party, and if your problem is political parties in of themselves (as in, there shouldnt be parties) then that would be just fucking hypocritical and stupid.

[Pretzel Logic]

I'd like to point out that Russel Brand isn't actually an atheist. Turns out we don't have to take credit for his idiocy ( not that we would have to, as you seem to think we would ).

he claims to be some sort of spiritual shaman but In the end I really don't give a fuck.

[Optimistic Mysanthrope]

Then you are an idiot. If you are of the ilk that there is not enough pluralism in politics, then get off your fucking ass and start your own party. Otherwise to me you are pissing in the wind.

---

Let me add, it isn't the tool (setup of the system) it is the MONOPOLY,

And there was me thinking my post had addressed that very point.

[downbeatplumb]

Robert Webbs answer to Russell Brand.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/201...sell-brand

I read your thing on revolution in these pages with great interest and some concern. My first reaction was to re-join the Labour Party. The Jiffy bag containing the plastic membership card and the Tristram Hunt action figure is, I am assured, in the post. I just wanted to tell you why I did that because I thought you might want to hear from someone who a) really likes your work, b) takes you seriously as a thoughtful person and c) thinks you’re wilfully talking through your arse about something very important.

The last Labour government didn’t do enough and bitterly disappointed many voters. But, at the risk of losing your attention, on the whole they helped. Opening Sure Start centres, introducing and raising the minimum wage, making museums free, guaranteeing nursery places, blah blah blah: nobody is going to write a folk song about this stuff and I’m aware of the basic absurdity of what I’m trying to achieve here, like getting Liberace to give a shit about the Working Tax Credit, but these policies among many others changed the real lives of millions of real people for the better.

This is exactly what the present coalition is in the business of tearing to pieces. They are not interested in helping unlucky people – they want to scapegoat and punish them. You specifically object to George Osborne’s challenge to the EU’s proposed cap on bankers’ bonuses. Labour simply wouldn’t be doing that right now. They are not all the same. 'They’re all the same' is what reactionaries love to hear. It leaves the status quo serenely untroubled, it cedes the floor to the easy answers of Ukip and the Daily Mail. No, if you want to be a nuisance to the people whom you most detest in public life, vote. And vote Labour.

[Brian37]

People have to work within their limitations. It's not a simple matter to start a party, and if your problem is political parties in of themselves (as in, there shouldnt be parties) then that would be just fucking hypocritical and stupid.

No shit, if change was impossible because those with money have power above you , nothing in human history would have changed.

As long as you do what you can, and the more like minded people do the same, "small" adds up.