By Jordan Tam -- @LucidStream on twitter
Follow @LucidStream
Russell Brand, a man worth millions, has given it all away to take up
arms at the front lines against systemic inequality, political
corruption, and unfettered capitalism. Or at least, that's what you
might expect following Brand's strong tête-à-tête performance against Jeremy Paxman on BBC's Newsnight.
It's
hard to imagine Che -- I mean Brand -- stomping through Cuban jungles
-- I mean through British Moorlands -- for the "99%". Mostly because,
well, he isn't. Brand is currently on a world comedy tour called The Messiah Complex, presumably becoming richer. Part of me has to hope that this his performance wasn't only that and not just a PR stunt.
If
Brand is genuine -- and I believe he is -- I was thoroughly impressed,
not only for his repartee but his cogent distillation of many social
ills that are currently at the fore in Europe and elsewhere. I was taken
by his ideas and his passion. As I watched, I found myself nodding in
agreement and my heart beating faster, I felt a rush of blood to my
head, and I was ready to run into the streets with a pitchfork (because
suddenly I'm a poor starving peasant) to march on the capital. Instead, I
shared the video on Facebook and left to rummage for a cookie in the
cupboard.
Once my heart had come back to a regular rhythm, I was left with some uneasy feelings.
In an astute observation, my friend (@transliminal)
remarked that Brand may himself be serving the function of Prius' and
recycling, or what Brand calls 'a valve'. And I agree with Comrade Brand
that Western life is replete with such valves that assuage our guilty
consciences as we continue to enjoy the luxuries of modernity (of course
not everyone is so fortunate). Not unlike the well-produced but failed Kony 2012
video and campaign (which was more viral and called for an arguably
simpler task), Brand's video is most likely going to spur a flurry of
sharing, but accomplish little more than make us feel better.
Furthermore,
though Paxman's tone in questioning Brand's political authority is
rude, it is a fair point that Brand suffers from an image issue. Though
Brand is effective gaining the audience's attention in the heat of the
moment, the heat quickly dissapates because, in part, he isn't actually
leading anybody anywhere. Revolution requires sacrifice and
involves suffering (Middle East, anyone?), and leading requires setting
an example; one that can't be set on a world tour.
By
the way the YouTube video is spreading, it's clear that many people
agree with Brand's criticisms and pointed arguments -- but to what
extent are they willing to act? Words like equality and justice are easy
to rally around, whereas solid objects like batons and pepperspray are
less so. Therein lies the greatest problem to Brand's otherwise
convincing speech: On the one hand he is directly advocating for the
non-participation in peaceful democratic processes; and I fear in this
he can be successful. And, simultaneously, he is also advocating for
revolution, a step many people are unwilling to take. Thus, rather then
formenting revolt, Brand may inadvetantly be inspiring greater apathy
and disengagement -- a cause that requires no help.
Still, it is possible that at the least, the Brand interview can spark discussion about real solutions to real problems.
I was thinking about this as I lay in bed last night. I am an avid voter. I vote in every election (except in the Langley municipal because I don't live there anymore) but what would really happen if the whole 'voter apathy' thing really went to the extreme? If almost an entire country (save for the few with monetary interests) simply refused to take part in the elections, maybe that would actually spur some kind of movement? I don't know, just a thought.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Brand was intending for this to go viral and start a revolution. If he did, he would have possibly given some small hint at what concrete steps people may take to further his cause.
ReplyDelete