Yes, Criticising Russell Brand for Supporting the New Era Estate is Snide, and if He is a Hypocrite, We All Are

You may also like...

12 Responses

  1. #notallrich says:

    This really reads like the #notallmen movement.

    You’re more wealthy and privileged than most folks, don’t let your thin skin make you criticize those less fortunate than you.

    • George Byrne says:

      Thanks for the comment. I am not sure what you mean exactly, though. What do you mean about criticising those less fortunate than me? I didn’t intend to do that at all. Could you explain what you mean by it sounding like the #notallmen movement? I will do my best to respond.

      • John says:

        The #YesAllWomen movement was created to voice the concerns of women who were victimized by men in their lives.

        The #NotAllMen movement was an attempt to derail the dialogue by saying “You’re wrong because not all men victimize women.”

        You mimicking the exact same conversation, except instead of women, you have poverty. Its incredibly problematic, to say the least.

        • George Byrne says:

          I don’t think it is the same thing, although I still haven’t had time to have a proper look into what the #YesAllWomen movement or the #NotallMen response. Does the #YesAllWomen criticise all men who identify as feminists, saying that they can’t try to stand in solidarity with women because they are men? If so, that seems problematic to me, too. So, I would like to ask you again what you would have Russell Brand (and everyone else) do? Should individuals who have more money than the global average give what they have to other people?

          • John says:

            “Does the #YesAllWomen criticise all men who identify as feminists, saying that they can’t try to stand in solidarity with women because they are men? If so, that seems problematic to me, too.”

            They believed any supporter who would bring up “hey I’m not like that” to be tone policing. Which is what you seem to be doing right now.

            A lot of liberal people and activists do believe in the redistribution of wealth, if that’s what you’re asking.

  2. mike says:

    living in a mansion isn’t the same as taking a public carrier to a climate change meeting. when true humanitarians make a vow to help the poor they commit themselves to it. don’t recall seeing m. theresa or ghandi retreating to their mansions after a half hour photoshoot in the slums like brand does.

    • George Byrne says:

      Yes, you are right, it isn’t exactly the same thing. My point was that the criticism is illogical in both instances and in this case it was being used to make Brand look bad, which in turn discredits the cause he is involved in. In a perfect world, yes, ‘true humanitarians’ would make a total commitment to the people they work with, but that is a lot to ask of anyone. Nobody is perfect (not even Mother Teresa, many of her activities have been criticised both during her life and posthumously).
      Are you saying that if a person is not willing to give up their own wealth they should not be allowed to use their position to try to help people who have less wealth? If Russell Brand did do that, he would lose his ability to do what he is currently doing. If all wealthy people who are unsatisfied with the world gave up their money, they would also give up a significant part of their influence. The result would be that the only rich people left would be the ones who thought that a severely inequitable society was just fine. Thus, all of the money (power) would be concentrated in a small group of people who have no interest in equality or social justice. What do you think he should do?

      • Robert says:

        Exactly. The focus is shifting from “redistributing wealth” to “changing the system”.

        If wealth and privileges flow in-equally, you can take a bucket and redistribute occasionally. It might be a better idea to work on a fair system where everybody can participate.

        You do not have to give up all you own to work on a fair system. And the current system is hurting the planet.

  3. Roger says:

    great piece George. Attacking Brand’s wealth is an obvious attempt at distraction, and is so blatant and flimsy that I’m sure people will see through it. Interesting that the Sun ran with that on their front page on the same day that George Osborne announced a further, massive shrinking of the State back to 1930s levels.

    • George Byrne says:

      Exactly. His response on his Trews episode was really good too. I it he pointed out that the attacks on him are an attempt to distract from the real issue, which is systemic, not personal. It is worth a watch. The Sun has no interest in addressing these issues (such as teh shrinking of the State etc), only selling papers.

  4. R. Mutt, Jr says:

    “anyone who is rich either cannot or should not use their position of power” – you admit right there that from your perception money = power, therefore you are assuming Brand is powerful? He’s a charlatan with a book to sell! He is compliant and spineless and just another sleb stirring it up for the Star Suckers.

    • George Byrne says:

      I don’t ‘admit’ anything here. I say quite clearly that I think money translates to power. Yes, Brand has a book to sell, the profits from which will apparently go to “creating social enterprises that are not for profit” and that “represent an alternative to some of the systems that we currently labour under”. I am not sure how true this is, and no doubt Brand will make some money from it. But I ask you the same question as I asked Mike. What would you have him do? Do you think he should give up all of his money to people who have less? Do you think everyone should do this and, if you do, does that extend to all of Britain giving all of its money to Sierra Leone, for example? Or do you think it should be limited to Russell Brand giving all of his money to less wealthy people in Britain?

      Also, I don’t really know why you linked to that sleazy article from 5 years ago… in The Sun, obviously. What did you hope to achieve by doing that?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *