chrisp65 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 zing! I've got Tony in the lead at the moment. The lefties aren't really working as a tight unit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I'm a lefty but want to shoot Brand, unsure where that puts me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 (edited) zing! I've got Tony in the lead at the moment. The lefties aren't really working as a tight unit. no " you've won the internet " gif I am disappoint Edited November 5, 2014 by tonyh29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I'm a lefty but want to shoot Brand, unsure where that puts me. In the sensible camp? I don't think he's doing the left many favours. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 You'd have to be a total plonker to believe that there's a solution to the fact that "life ain't fair". Maybe you'd have to be incredible dumb to not make consideration and think beyond just thinking 'life aint fair' so live with it and to hence not ask the the question of as to why 'life ain't fair'. Throughout history lots of solutions have been found to make life less unfair, to deal with unjust and immoral situations and change things to make them fairer. Right now we have politicians who are steadily making much of life even more unfair, seemingly by the day, surely it is only right to raise concerns about such issues, but I'm interested as an obvious expert on the subject of the fairness of life please tell me what is the natural level of unfairness that life should entail? Most people are inherently selfish, and this random concept of 'fairness' depends very much on your viewpoint. So the standard viewpoint tends not be "it isn't fair that bankers who caused the crash get big bonuses while benefits are being taken away", which probably, it might not be, but yet not many people question teachers going on strike for better pensions; strikes that tend to hit the same working families whose taxes are paying their pensions in the first place. It's all self-interest at the end of the day. But... I think this post has given me an aneurysm. And not in a good way As as for Tony's 'insult'. Good one....? I thought I'd missed a private joke when I read it first, but that's just some very poor internet banter. I like that the people defending Brand have gotten tired of posting in this thread and it's left to the ad hominem brigade to take over and post whatever inane shite the newspapers with an anti-Brand agenda publish. The Brand bashing that you're being exposed to is proof that the man is ruffling feathers and ever so slightly worrying the elite class, although they remain certain they can destroy his revolution with hardly any effort at all, as they control the media that you lot believe to be the authority on right and wrong. 'Rise like Lions after slumber In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew Which in sleep had fallen on you - Ye are many - they are few If I was going to take as equally a dismissive and patronising tone, I would suggest that Brand's supporters have heard him use words like 'paradigm', 'orthodoxy' and 'hegemony' and thought to themselves "ooh, that's a right long word that, he must be saying something extremely worthwhile." Once you strip away all his professional comedian mannerisms, you're not left with much more than "that's not fair" and "don't vote". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 You'd have to be a total plonker to believe that there's a solution to the fact that "life ain't fair". Maybe you'd have to be incredible dumb to not make consideration and think beyond just thinking 'life aint fair' so live with it and to hence not ask the the question of as to why 'life ain't fair'. Throughout history lots of solutions have been found to make life less unfair, to deal with unjust and immoral situations and change things to make them fairer. Right now we have politicians who are steadily making much of life even more unfair, seemingly by the day, surely it is only right to raise concerns about such issues, but I'm interested as an obvious expert on the subject of the fairness of life please tell me what is the natural level of unfairness that life should entail? Most people are inherently selfish, and this random concept of 'fairness' depends very much on your viewpoint. So the standard viewpoint tends not be "it isn't fair that bankers who caused the crash get big bonuses while benefits are being taken away", which probably, it might not be, but yet not many people question teachers going on strike for better pensions; strikes that tend to hit the same working families whose taxes are paying their pensions in the first place. It's all self-interest at the end of the day Whilst I agree self preservation leads to selfishness, as a social species we have made enough progressions to overcome this, and there is plenty of historical evidence to suggest that people can be incredible altruistic when they are not put in a high pressure dog eat dog society, which neo liberalism has been gradually imposing on the rest of us for 30 plus years. It is fact though that 2-3% of the population are psychopaths, and unfortunately psychopaths are most driven and adept at rising to positions of prominence and power (I don't necessarily mean politicians either) in any social situation, and then inflict the worst that their psychopathic tendencies can conjure up on the rest of us. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 anyway carry on .. I just thought I'd add nothing to the conversation So no variance from the normal then? In answer, Only as dumb as someone who, on reflection, tempered their insult and in doing so failed to change incredible to incredibly. But don't let me get in the way of your trivialisation of the question. I guess from reading many replies on this topic reflection is in very short supply for a great many posters. Edit: I've tended to find from my time on here that insults just lead to other insults and the message gets lost somewhere on the way ... hence my trivialisation of the matter in a light hearted way ... I guess you had 2 options , a) laugh it off with a D'oh and blame it on spell checker or my personal favourite excuse the phone keyboard / small screen / being an apple product ... or B.) going for another insult P.S the correct answer was A) Quite correct, but (A) would have been a lie, and when possible i like not to act in the manner of your average politician, so claiming (A) would feel a betrayal of that principle. But using dumb in reply to an insult of plonker could hardly be construed as escalation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 5, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 5, 2014 C'mon girls put the knicker elastic away and get this back on topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Russell Brand is a cock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Russell Brand is a cock. I endorse this statement. He's a self publicist and a cock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 yes he is but he raises some good points like his latest video (ep183 on youtube) like the 4 billion spent on advertising the recent elections could hav been utilsed elsewhere if they actually did care. the part where she says "im not barack obama" and brand responds "no your not your a mysterious attractive markswoman" i have to say that did make me laugh i am so s=ahsamed of myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Brand's clearly an irritating clearing in the woods but this subject wouldn't be getting this amount/type of coverage if it was Chomsky lecturing on Adam Smith. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villarule123 Posted November 6, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted November 6, 2014 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 (edited) Brand's clearly an irritating clearing in the woods but this subject wouldn't be getting this amount/type of coverage if it was Chomsky lecturing on Adam Smith. Which is quite depressing in itself. We value celebrities over intellectuals. I suppose, in a sense, we deserve Russell Brand. Edited November 6, 2014 by CarewsEyebrowDesigner 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 The guardian wont let me c&p on my phone, if a mod could do that for this article.Stewart lee on Russell Brand 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 The guardian wont let me c&p on my phone, if a mod could do that for this article.Stewart lee on Russell Brand You're running the risk of giving opportunity for people to tell us how much they hate Stewart Lee now... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 Brand's clearly an irritating clearing in the woods but this subject wouldn't be getting this amount/type of coverage if it was Chomsky lecturing on Adam Smith. Which is quite depressing in itself. We value celebrities over intellectuals. I suppose, in a sense, we deserve Russell Brand. It's a celebocracy. Airhead, half baked ideas from a self aggrandising word removed like Brand get more attention. It's sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted November 7, 2014 Author Share Posted November 7, 2014 i see farage has compared himself to brand in his latest article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 i see farage has compared himself to brand in his latest article Well they are both words removed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted November 7, 2014 Author Share Posted November 7, 2014 Brands book has made him a lot of money seems to be a big hypocrite after everything he preaches... He critises bankers but guess who is sponsoring a film project he is involved with? Is it A) bankers bankers C) bankers D) all of the above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts