Russell Brand begins his financial education

READER: PLEASE CLICK THE REACTION BELOW - THANKS!

All original material is copyright of its author. Fair use permitted. Contact via comment. Unless indicated otherwise, all internet links accessed at time of writing. Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy. The blog author may have, or intend to change, a personal position in any stock or other kind of investment mentioned.

Russell Brand's Silly Ideas: Affordable Housing

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/new-era-estate-victory-residents-with-russell-brands-help-stop-takeover-of-their-estate-9937074.html

http://www.citylab.com/housing/2014/12/paris-wants-to-keep-central-neighborhoods-from-becoming-ghettos-for-the-rich/383936/

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/social-cleansing-londons-council-estates-4076556

... Remember Shirley Porter and the Homes For Votes scandal? Now criticise Russell Brand, again... What a silly old Hector he is!

(source)

READER: PLEASE CLICK THE REACTION BELOW - THANKS!

All original material is copyright of its author. Fair use permitted. Contact via comment. Unless indicated otherwise, all internet links accessed at time of writing. Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy. The blog author may have, or intend to change, a personal position in any stock or other kind of investment mentioned.

Defending the bully-d*ckhead Russell Brand

A clever piece by "Squander Two", apparently going viral, about a confrontation with the poseur and unfocused protorevolutionary Russell Brand (htp: Anna Raccoon). And yet...

I've commented:

Brand is a blast from the past - about 1968 - 72-ish. And doubtless quite easy to rile, just like the American reporter who questioned Lennon in the 1969 bed-in and got a snarly Liverpudlian response.
 
On the other hand, your piece I find has a whiff of the disingenuous; artful stuff, all those references to food. Hungry bankers at Christmas... Skilfully done, some good points, and of course RB is not really much good at argumentation, which is why he uses so many words. Expect you'd beat him in a debate. Maybe that's why the BBC gives him airtime, to strike a faux balance between protest and the Establishment and weaken the former's credibility. That and his priapic reputation.

Shame so few people talk about the way the banking industry, encouraged by politicians, has messed up the economy with excessive debt and resource misallocation since at least the 70s, but that's a subject RB isn't up to analysing in his Michael Moore-ish way.

By the way, I'm given to understand it's noradrenaline, not adrenaline, that powers the fight or flight reaction. Either way, I don't blame you a bit for curdling at his invasion of your personal space.

If only there was a less vain and more penetrating advocate than the slightly addled Brand. The PPI and FX rows are tiny thunderrumbles compared to the gathering Force 5 financial hurricane caused by decades of monetary warming. Or maybe I'm wrong and it'll all turn out for the best in the end. Let's leave it to the experts as the economy "recovers", hey?


READER: PLEASE CLICK THE REACTION BELOW - THANKS!

All original material is copyright of its author. Fair use permitted. Contact via comment. Unless indicated otherwise, all internet links accessed at time of writing. Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy. The blog author may have, or intend to change, a personal position in any stock or other kind of investment mentioned.

Making sense of Russell Brand's revolution

Last year, Russell Brand wrote an article for the New Statesman calling for his kind of revolution. As he told the Parliamentary Select Committee on drugs and addiction, he is verbose, so I have attempted to précis, paraphrase (and  re-order logically) his 4,759 words down to 372. I think I have been fair; I have certainly tried to be.

My summary is below; please click this link for the full essay:

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/10/russell-brand-on-revolution
___________________________________________________

I am bored by politics, disillusioned with politicians, and have never voted. Most Members of Parliament are contemptible. They are all the same, irrespective of party affiliation. It is better to reject the political system altogether than to validate it by voting.

Most people do not care about representative politics. Their apathy is a consequence of the system’s irrelevance to their needs, yet it suits our rulers.

Big business has corrupted our political agencies. Businesses and banks exploit and overcharge us. Meanwhile, the benefits previously won for ordinary people by socialism are being removed. Young people cannot amass wealth. The rich exploit them as consumers and punish them for protesting, but escape justice for their own economically harmful greed.

A modicum of material comfort is essential. However, more does not greatly increase happiness and threatens to destroy the world. Our overconsumption and waste cause want and squalor elsewhere.

Old religions, nationalism and other social constructs are not equipped to deal with the current ecological crisis, which threatens our survival. Nor are politicians, with their outdated thinking abetted by professional media advisers.

Conservatism is born of the natural instincts of desire (fostered by materialistic culture) and fear (spread by the media), both cultivated and managed by government, which seeks to set us against each other. We should not, as they wish, resent immigration (which is implied by the free movement of international capital), nor condemn rioters. However, atheistic Marxism is also a form of social atomisation, and divides us into opposing groups.

We need a complete revolution of consciousness and of the social, political and economic system. The solution is primarily spiritual, that is, we should care for each other and the environment. The new spirituality is ecological and inclusive.

Peaceful demonstrations are ineffective. Riots are a direct form of political action - and fun (socialists are too serious). We should revolt against the cause of our problems, which is those who now hold power.

We should revolt in any way we wish, whether as rioters, religious fundamentalists or simply mischief-makers, provided we include all and neither judge nor harm anyone.

History is accelerating; the brief opportunity for the Spiritual Revolution must be seized now. This will engage the young and refresh socialism.


READER: PLEASE CLICK THE REACTION BELOW - THANKS!

All original material is copyright of its author. Fair use permitted. Contact via comment. Unless indicated otherwise, all internet links accessed at time of writing. Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy. The blog author may have, or intend to change, a personal position in any stock or other kind of investment mentioned.