rigorousintuition.ca

My first reaction to the emailed sections of that article was, wow, he can really write. I'll make time to watch the vid and read more later. Thank you Mac and BelligerentS.

I must admit, when I first saw Russell Brand, I thought of him as nothing more than a fuck twit. Now this interview with Paxman has me seeing him in a new light. I wonder how 'staged' this is. Maybe the elite want a revolution, so they can weed out all the radicals, mow 'em down in a hellish round of gunfire and bombs.

.

Handsome B. Wonderful » Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:39 pm wrote: I wonder how 'staged' this is.

I have been wondering the same over the last couple days, given the increasing exposure the vid is getting (plus they've -- paxman and brand -- done a similar bit before; there was likely at least a partial understanding of the direction this interview would take...)

But surely that's just my cynicism talking out loud.

Ffs, it is not staged. That's not 'cynical', that's just daft.

Unless you're both making the decidedly trivial point that literally everything that appears in a mass medium inevitably becomes part of the Spectacle, including any war, riot, boxing match or natural disaster. Not everything is or can be rigged, otherwise the word 'rigged' is meaningless.

Handsome B. Wonderful wrote: Maybe the elite want a revolution, so they can weed out all the radicals, mow 'em down in a hellish round of gunfire and bombs.

Don't be preposterous. Be wonderful.

MacCruiskeen » Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:45 pm wrote:Ffs, it is not staged. That's not 'cynical', that's just daft.

Unless you're both making the decidedly trivial point that literally everything that appears in a mass medium inevitably becomes part of the Spectacle, including any war, riot, boxing match or natural disaster. Not everything is or can be rigged, otherwise the word 'rigged' is meaningless.

Handsome B. Wonderful wrote: Maybe the elite want a revolution, so they can weed out all the radicals, mow 'em down in a hellish round of gunfire and bombs.

Don't be preposterous. Be wonderful.

oh, come now, MacCruiskeen -- surely there's more than just a modicum of difference between a natural disaster [or even a war or riot, for that matter] and a produced television program, no?

I mean, the interview is indeed quite staged, in as far as all TV programs need to be, in order to be broadcast. But of course, Mr. Wonderful and I [or at least I -- I can't purport to speak for Mr. Wonderful] were merely ruminating out loud about the potential of the interview being in some form or another scripted. Not the words spoken, necessarily [clearly Brand was in full improv/free-flowing/free association mode], but perhaps the overall theme.

Is it far more likely that it wasn't 'staged'? Sure. From my point of view, Brand does indeed seem genuine in his voiced opinions -- my gut tells me he's saying what he means.

Perhaps the passage of time will provide a bit more insight [and subsequent hindsight...]

Look, this too was staged if you insist, this too was a prepared appearance, this too was shown on TV, this too was part of the Spectacle (how could it not be?), this too was registered and broadcast by the Machine:

Mario Savio wrote:"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part; you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all."

But it certainly wasn't scripted by The Man goddammit, any more than Brand's equally magical & memorable moment was, any more than Jimmy Johnstone's genius was, or Muhammad Ali's, or MLK's, or Gore Vidal's TV studio interview with William Buckley, or Bernadette Devlin's slapping Maudling in the British Parliament for his murderous lies, or Galloway's appearance before the House, or.... --

Where are you guys going with all this?

.
Good question -- where are we going with this?

I merely chose to type into a forum message board a passing thought (now indexed and available for keyword searching) for digestion by any virtual passerby (which, after all, is an avatar for a breathing human -- bots notwithstanding) with the means to absorb the typed words on the screen, at which point they may opt to ignore, ingest, and/or otherwise disregard the sentiment expressed.

I'm not, for example, mounting a campaign of any sort.

Just expressing a fleeting thought. Rest assured, such thoughts rarely manifest themselves into reality, so the overwhelming probability is that it will [in short order] be relegated to the dustbin.

It is [outside of this context] the ultimate existential query however. It remains unanswered by even the brightest current and/or former members of the human race: Where are we going with this?

Where indeed..

No worries, Mr. Savant and Mr. Wonderful (and everyone).

Anyway, I know where I'm going, that's for sure. I'm going out now. There's a party on.

Goodnight.

I too was just thinking out loud. Definitely need a change/revolution in this world. I don't doubt Brand's genuineness or his altruism, I think he truly believes in what he says in the interview.

Handsome B. Wonderful wrote:I too was just thinking out loud. Definitely need a change/revolution in this world. I don't doubt Brand's genuineness or his altruism, I think he truly believes in what he says in the interview.

Good, Mr. Wonderful (I love saying that), we're all on the same wavelength. Sorry if I was being a bit of a prat or a motormouth. I've spent too much time on (in) this Machine today & yesterday, that's why I really have to go out now.

I too was just thinking out loud.

Me too. It's all any of us are doing. But we can be sure none of it is good for nothing.

Perelandra, good to see you here, this board needs its women back. smiths, i liked what you wrote and wanted to respond to it but it won't be tonight. Gute Nacht.

Handsome B. Wonderful » Sat Oct 26, 2013 5:16 pm wrote:. Definitely need a change/revolution in this world.

I think we can all agree on that point.

MacCruiskeen: I've spent too much time on (in) this Machine today & yesterday, that's why I really have to go out now.

Always a good call. I'll be doing the same -- brisk air and festivities await..

Mr. Brand just went from 2.1 to 8.6 on the ten point scale of my estimation.

Point to one perfect and effective revolutionary proponent, please?

I loved it when he brought it back to the personal experience of the interviewer to illustrate both the need to care and how detached many become from the real experience of people whom are studiously avoided. You could see Brand struck a nerve and the guy misting up, realizing what a selfish fatuous tool he is.

Some gold articulate quotes. ("That's tacit complicity, isn't it?!?")

I expect clay feet and duplicity going in, but as a gal with two suppressors and a penchant for completely destroying my social enemies, I can get behind the guy even if it is just for a right pegging.

I endorse just about any call for an overturning of the status quo.

A viable modern platform:

Direct democracy. (No representatives)
Sixteen year olds and up get the vote. (Twelve would be my inclination but there is my willingness to compromise and be flexible, see!)
No externalities (You foul the common you clean it and make restitution to us all.)
New Civil, Criminal, and Constitutional law documents, each not to exceed ten pages.
The forth branch of government randomly selected from the populace: Oversight (Who may be excluded from no place or data.)

Most of the Buckminster Fuller program as elucidated in Critical Path is reasonable.

Bon Chance!

Power hungry psychos will always end up with the political power.
A list of selfless politicians.. I'll start,
Hồ Chí Minh

the revolution starts here and with similar initiatives, imo...

It's well worth reading the top comments, ranked by popularity, on Lustig's nasty little HuffPo screed.

Ordinary people ("non-intellectuals") are much much smarter and much much better writers than such salaried hacks. If anyone needs more proof, see also this paltry pettifogging piffle in Salon.

The whole rotten structure is crumbling fast, and they know it.

MacCruiskeen » Sun Oct 27, 2013 7:13 pm wrote:
The whole rotten structure is crumbling fast, and they know it.

It's about time...