Russel Brand

I hate to say it, and yes I know I was arguing the opposite yesterday, but I think Dáibhí's right on this, if he has any evidence to back his claims up, that is.

I came to the conclusion by imagining an analogy with the Slave Trade. Let's imagine it's the early 1800's and Brand is campaigning against the slave trade.

Would it make him a hypocrite if he wore the cheap cotton garments and smoked cigars? Only if he were claiming to be a saint or some kind of moral exemplar (which Brand isn't). That's why Dáibhí has been very careful to say that it's not Brand's wealth he has a problem with.

On the other hand if we found out he was involved in an enterprise involving shipping slaves from Africa to Boston...

I think that's the point Dáibhí's trying to make.

Having said that, I repeat that we should not allow ourselves to be tricked into fighting among ourselves. If Brand wants to use his profile to help this campaign, then great.

 

Evidence? It's very simple to run a company check on Mayfair Film Partnership and see that Brand is director, if that's what you're looking for? There will be links to financials there as well.

The thing I'm stressing here is that the tactics being used by the company aren't dodgy or wrong, not at all. It's all perfectly legal and above-board.

I only point it out as the idea of railing against financial inequality, yet taking advantage of a system that allows the wealthy to avoid paying tax is a bit hypocritical in my opinion.

He also pays over $100,000 in rent for his home in London, which isn't a big deal of course. He's a wealthy guy, and as such can afford it. No issue there.

He pays that rent to a company based in The Virgin Islands called KKY PTY Ltd, which pays virtually no tax.

Voicing his anger at tax-dodging companies all the while helping to line their pockets with his money every year (most likely because he was able to get his apartment a fair bit cheaper than he would have had he used an actual tax-paying company) is also hypocritical in my opinion.

I may come across as negative and suspicious, but I don't think that Brand is doing any of his campaigning for selfless reasons.

He's not an idiot, he knows he'll get a level of publicity from it.

I hear his new book is doing quite well...

 

Ignoring the fact that his ideas from his new book are nonsense I quite like him. He speaks honestly and with his mind and isn't afraid to question things which I like. There's nothing more I hate than idiots who refuse to question things/ideas and just accept what they're told. Though that's probably for somewhere else.

I do think his book is mainly mindless, unstructured drivel and has just come up with this "revolution" and "overthrow the government" idea (not that anyone has ever thought of this before.....) probably knowing rightly that something like that will never happen barring some weird situation were the government * up so badly or angers so many people that everyone just wants rid.

Also the cynic in me thinks that he's really enjoy this new found publicity he's getting though his ideas are genuine I believe.

 

He doesn't drink.

 

Dodgy and wrong are not antonyms of legal and above board. To continue my analogy, the slave trade was legal and above board.

 

Whether Brand is a hypocrite or he has ulterior motives is, I think, kind of irrelevant. What he's doing is giving him publicity which is perhaps what he truly desires but it's also promoting good causes which is a positive thing regardless of whether he himself is a hypocrite or not.

 

"when I was poor and complained about inequality, people said I was bitter. Now I'm rich and complain about inequality, they say I'm a hypocrite. I'm beginning to think they just don't want inequality on the agenda because it's a real problem that needs to be addressed"

Oor Brand.

Don't know how legit that is but still.

 

Okay, so? What's your take on it? Some believe he's being targeted by the nasty right-wing press for being a left-wing ideologist, and some believe he's a bit of a bullshit artist who may be drawing attention to a good cause, but is ultimately benefiting from the system he is being critical of and basically living by the old "do as I say, not as I do" motto.

What kind of evidence is deemed acceptable here? Do we need copies of his rental agreement? Virgin Islands business papers?

What are we questioning? That he isn't a director of the company in question? That the tax breaks weren't offered to investors? That his landlord isn't based in a tax haven? Has Brand himself claimed that any of these details are false?

In the end, it comes down to opinions. Nothing more. If someone believes that Brand isn't being hypocritical by bashing wealth inequality, tax evasion and investment bankers only to use a company based in a tax haven to rent his expensive London home, sit as a director of a company that is offering lucrative tax breaks to wealthy investors and see shares of that company sold to executives from at least one of the biggest investment banking companies in the UK then fair enough.

I personally see him as a hypocrite. Others can disagree.

 

Well it's hard to tell when you see *insert image of a celeb and attach quote here* type things.

I'm glad it's legit then.

 

He asks questions, but offers no solutions... it's the easiest thing to do!

 

Sounds like............... Daibhi.

 

Is it ?

 

Yeah, but no * is buying my book of ramblings, are they? :smiley-laughing002:

 

We get enough of your * ramblings on here for free:icon_mrgreen:

 

The Sun has really got it in for him.

 

That's a fair point! :icon_mrgreen: