On Voting, Russell Brand Is Full of Doo Doo

[votesparks]

A video interview with Russell Brand by Jeremy Paxman on the BBC last week went viral, after Brand succinctly articulated the frustration of the masses with voting in elections controlled by narrow elite interests.

But Brand was wrong (when it comes to U.S. politics at least) when he says that voting is complicity with the system. Actually, non-participation in politics is a guarantee that your opponents are elected, and get to make law.

[gopiscrap]

1. agreed

[bowens43]

2. I think he is right on the money. There is no choice. All the politicians have the same owners.

[brush]

4. What was that 24 billion gov shutdown about then?

That would never have happened if all politicians have the same owner.

Or there wouldn't be this big fight over the ACA.

[DetlefK]

3. Please note, how he refuses to deliver specifics, what he would do different.

His advice: "Don't vote at all until one day the perfect politician/party comes along."

[Saviolo]

5. I said it before in another Brand thread

But I think it bears repeating:

Just to put it in perspective: I'm Canadian and I do vote. It's different here with more than two parties, and we can actually elect third parties, and there's more than just GOP vs. the Dems.

But take a look at what he's really saying in that clip. The youth feel disenfranchised because they -are- disenfranchised. What would possibly motivate them to vote for rich people who have no real interest in the real problems of poor people or people of their own class. It's true in the USA, too. Elections are bought and sold by corporate dollars funding campaigns, funding candidates, and the poor are nothing more than an occasional photo-op. It's intensely frustrating to young people of poor backgrounds who see poverty, drugs, and violence surrounding their lives and then after the next election, they see the banks make more money, they see the large corporations get more tax breaks and bailouts, and they see -NO CHANGE- in their own lives. I personally think it's foolish not to vote, but I understand 100% the frustration and futility that people feel when they vote, and nothing really changes, ever.

The USA is a great object lesson. Despite having a much more progressive President than you've seen in a long long time, the -OTHER GUYS- that the young and marginalized didn't vote for are controlling the discourse, even though they lost! The -OTHER GUYS- yes, the -LOSING TEAM- shut down the government, for the exact reason that they lost! What lesson does that teach new young voters that want to elect a progressive into a position of power? That no matter how much they vote, even if they win, the other guys have enough money and power to control the discourse if they decide to pitch a hissy fit like a four year old who didn't get his cookie. Something like health care reform, or the repeal of DADT, or the legalization of gay marriage are all amazing accomplishments, but (especially in the case of the first one) the discourse is still framed by the team with more money.

[votesparks]

6. Like I state in the video

the answer is not only to vote, but to run for office, or help someone to; become the media, among other things.

[Saviolo]

11. I agree, and I am a voter

But I think that Brand's criticism is valid, and I think he's being unduly beaten up for his opinion. I think it's important to understand why people may feel disenfranchised in a system where money seems to mean more than votes in so many situations.

[groundloop]

10. Everyone has to remember that President of the USA does not equal King of the USA

Last edited Wed Oct 30, 2013, 01:09 PM - Edit history (1)

Yes, President Obama won the election. Unfortunately the House of Representatives is controlled by the GOPers and the Senate still has the filibuster and the GOPers can effectively block most legislation with that. And the GOPers have been nothing if not damned good at blocking legislation.

[deutsey]

12. I agree

[Miranda4peace]

7. Voting means picking one Bank/corp owned politician over another.

When campaigning they often make wonderful claims, often times reneging on them once they have been elected.

They say one thing like "the war on drugs has been a complete failure" then expand they war on drugs.

While significant portions of the budget are dedicated to harm reduction and abuse prevention programs, many of the “drug war” methods that have proven ineffective over the last 40 years — particularly those used to enforce marijuana prohibition — will likely see funding increases this year. Domestic law enforcement is slated to receive $9.4 billion, a $61.4 million increase from last year. The Department of Defense Domestic Counterdrug support program will get nearly $150 million this year, a $124 million increase. Over $4.5 billion will be spent on federal incarceration of drug users and distributors. In addition, the Obama administration has requested the revival of the Youth Drug Prevention Media Program with a $20 million budget. Studies have shown that this program had the opposite of the intended effect on teens, and Congress allocated no money for the program last year.

"This budget is appalling. The drug czar is trying to resurrect those stupid TV ads, like the one where a teenager gets his fist stuck in his mouth," said Rob Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, D.C. "The budget intentionally undercounts the federal government's expenditures on incarcerating drug offenders, who comprise more than half of the federal prison population. And the budget dangerously proposes a massive escalation in using the military to fight drugs domestically. Congress should just ignore this budget and start from scratch. Specifically, Congress should not provide the Obama administration with any money to go after nonviolent marijuana users, growers, or distributors."
http://www.mpp.org/media/press-releases/obama-administration.html

Or promise to close a prison marred by instances torture and abuse, Gitmo......................but instead do this

On 7 January 2011, President Obama signed the 2011 Defense Authorization Bill, which, in part, placed restrictions on the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners to the mainland or to foreign countries, thus impeding the closure of the facility.[18] U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates said during testimony before the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee on 17 February 2011: "The prospects for closing Guantanamo as best I can tell are very, very low given very broad opposition to doing that here in the Congress."[19] Congress particularly opposed moving prisoners to facilities in the United States for detention or trial.[19] In April 2011, Wikileaks began publishing 779 secret files relating to prisoners in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.[20] As of August 2013, 164 detainees remain at Guantanamo.[21]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp

CloseGitmo.net organizer Andrés Thomas Conteris on day 61 of his fast in solidarity with hunger striking prisoners in Guantánamo and Pelican Bay— will undergo a nasogastric feeding in front of the White House on Friday, September 6 at noon.

Conteris will underscore the brutality of force-feeding, to which dozens of men at Guantanamo have been subjected since a new hunger strike began last February, and which California officials have threatened for hunger striking prisoners in Pelican Bay protesting the use of extended solitary confinement in US prisons. The American Medical Association, the United Nations, and Senators John McCain and Diane Feinstein have all condemned force-feeding.

The tube feeding of Conteris, administered by a medical professional, will be webcast live at http://closegitmo.net .

“Force-feeding is torture,”” says Conteris, a 52-year-old man from California who has lost 50lbs since starting his strike on July 8th,, when Pelican Bay inmates started their fast. ““I wish to make visible what the U.S. government is perpetrating against prisoners in Guantánamo and what the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is threatening for hunger strikers in Pelican Bay. The only way to end the hunger strikes and force-feeding is to shutter the Gitmo prison and respond favorably to the demands of the prisoners in California.””
http://www.popularresistance.org/us-hunger-striker-to-undergo-forced-feeding-at-white-house/

[votesparks]

9. No, voting alone does not change things

Last edited Wed Oct 30, 2013, 12:37 PM - Edit history (1)

Becoming the power infrastructure does. And the only way that will come about, is for regular people (who are in poll after poll, pretty progressive) to infiltrate the party structure of the Democratic Party, or run as Independents EN MASSE, or wait for the country to completely implode and build again from rubble.

The level of apathy towards getting involved in politics beyond just voting guarantees our current result.

[raindaddy]

13. Pull open the curtains

And look beyond the facade. The system is broken and neither party seems interested in doing anything about it.

The biggest transfer of wealth from the middle-class to the ultra-wealth has occurred under both parties.
Trade agreements that have shifted the balance of power from voters to global corporations are equally supported
by both parties. Obama's currently negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership which will be more of the same.

Our elections are funded by Wall Street and major corporations. The financial health of the folks who control the purse strings is guaranteed simply because they've hijacked the system. Oh, the Democrats will still stand up when it comes to social issues. But does anyone really think the 1% really gives a shit about gay marriage, or women's right to choose? When it comes to the distribution of wealth, with a few exceptions both parties are on the same page.

Even if a true populists decides to run against the next moderate Democrat they'll be vilified in the corporate media as a scary Socialist.
So vote or don't vote but until we deal with the theft of our political system the financial gap continue to widen along with the continued destruction of our planet.