Brand V Paxman...

The boy done good…


At first I was like meh, but by the end I think he demonstrably articulated the frustrations of the generations that are being sat on by the status quo. He hit on what many in the current establishment don’t appreciate, the interconnectedness of the sidelined discontented could/will undermine established power. The internet is the greatest social media revolution since the printing press.

Who said “don’t vote, you’ll only encourage the bastards!”

With manditary voting here in australia the status quo is rigidly enforced. Totalitarian democracy has crushed apathy and in doing so leaves no room for introspective. The election cycle is relentless, if they’re not changing governments they’re changing government leaders.

Flamboyant, ignorant, evasive, populist moaning.

And then eventually some detail about what he proposes.

“A socialist egalitarian system based on the massive distribution of wealth, heavy taxation of corporations and massive responsibilities for energy companies and any companies that are exploiting the environment. I think the very concept of profit should be greatly reduced…because wherever there is profit there is deficit.”

I think it would be difficult to achieve all of that without a global revolution, which isn’t going to happen. Conveniently getting him off the hook for the actual consequences, leaving him to sit on the sidelines carping about the status quo.

Absolutely! It seems like he wants to tear down the current system and build a new, even bigger one. The anti profit angle is very sad. I said it here before, Bill Gates has done more for mankind in his pursuit of profit than he has done through his charity work.

Brand probably wants to tax “bad” profits like oil, but leave “good” profits like Microsoft untaxed. Who decides which is which? What happens when oil companies stop operations due to reduced profitability? What happens to the “good” companies who need to buy oil which has now increased in price?

The guy has his heart in the right place and he is right about a lot but his solution is way off.

Saying it again doesn’t make it true!
I’m not necessarily against profit, but picking MS as an example of a beneficial corp isn’t a good place to start.

simples, MS is bad.
oil is ok

Not going to listen to Brand, but one thing worth emphasising when discussing any alternative systems is:

Can it happen given normal average citizens, good and bad; without quashing individual freedom and responsibility?
Many utopian systems require either perfect citizens and rulers or must tend toward totalariasm to implement.

Besides, by definition how are you going to impose a new system without voting for it?
Should a small cohort impose a new regime not matter how good, against the wishes of an electorate, albeit a lazy one?

Isn’t he a bit old now to be believing in socialism?

I was getting worried that the younger generation had become lost in Facebook, the Internet and Kim Kardashian.
While I love Paxman (will we ever see his like on Irish TV before I die), Brand won this debate in my view.
While not always coherent, parts of his rant and down right inspiring.

He may not have communicated a vision but he certainly channeled the desire for change.

Rabble rousing is easy. See Jack O’Connor.

Obama x 1000.

Getting lost in Kim Kardashian, eh?
There are worse ways to misspend your youth I’ll wager.

Very entertaining. Not sure what I thought. While Brand is definitely clever, I was tickled by the Independent’s description of his little diatribe as “the ultimate expression of Slackerism, a political theory with roots in teenage angst, mild rebelliousness, and a pie-in-the-sky leftism that wants to pull down the walls of politics then sit around smoking pot in the ruins.”

No hope for the UK until they let the medieval nonsense go and oust the monarchal slackers.

Please expand on this.

Before or after photoshop?

I have to say honestly I did not get socialism from his interview. I really don’t think that you need to be a socialist to believe in the redistributive benefits of taxation and broad disenfranchisement from the political process. He picked on the energy sector which may be relevant to the uk with the benefits and costs of the North Sea and I believe he was mistaken. I think that the broader issue of corporate taxation is one of the big issues to be dealt with, and will be (to Ireland’s detriment).

Christ, if I thought there was anything the 'Pin could agree on it would be the anachronistic carbuncle of a monarchy in modern society.