Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumOn Voting, Russell Brand Is Full of Doo Doo
A video interview with Russell Brand by Jeremy Paxman on the BBC last week went viral, after Brand succinctly articulated the frustration of the masses with voting in elections controlled by narrow elite interests.
But Brand was wrong (when it comes to U.S. politics at least) when he says that voting is complicity with the system. Actually, non-participation in politics is a guarantee that your opponents are elected, and get to make law.
gopiscrap
(23,761 posts)bowens43
(16,064 posts)brush
(53,787 posts)That would never have happened if all politicians have the same owner.
Or there wouldn't be this big fight over the ACA.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)His advice: "Don't vote at all until one day the perfect politician/party comes along."
Saviolo
(3,282 posts)But I think it bears repeating:
Just to put it in perspective: I'm Canadian and I do vote. It's different here with more than two parties, and we can actually elect third parties, and there's more than just GOP vs. the Dems.
But take a look at what he's really saying in that clip. The youth feel disenfranchised because they -are- disenfranchised. What would possibly motivate them to vote for rich people who have no real interest in the real problems of poor people or people of their own class. It's true in the USA, too. Elections are bought and sold by corporate dollars funding campaigns, funding candidates, and the poor are nothing more than an occasional photo-op. It's intensely frustrating to young people of poor backgrounds who see poverty, drugs, and violence surrounding their lives and then after the next election, they see the banks make more money, they see the large corporations get more tax breaks and bailouts, and they see -NO CHANGE- in their own lives. I personally think it's foolish not to vote, but I understand 100% the frustration and futility that people feel when they vote, and nothing really changes, ever.
The USA is a great object lesson. Despite having a much more progressive President than you've seen in a long long time, the -OTHER GUYS- that the young and marginalized didn't vote for are controlling the discourse, even though they lost! The -OTHER GUYS- yes, the -LOSING TEAM- shut down the government, for the exact reason that they lost! What lesson does that teach new young voters that want to elect a progressive into a position of power? That no matter how much they vote, even if they win, the other guys have enough money and power to control the discourse if they decide to pitch a hissy fit like a four year old who didn't get his cookie. Something like health care reform, or the repeal of DADT, or the legalization of gay marriage are all amazing accomplishments, but (especially in the case of the first one) the discourse is still framed by the team with more money.
votesparks
(1,288 posts)the answer is not only to vote, but to run for office, or help someone to; become the media, among other things.
Saviolo
(3,282 posts)But I think that Brand's criticism is valid, and I think he's being unduly beaten up for his opinion. I think it's important to understand why people may feel disenfranchised in a system where money seems to mean more than votes in so many situations.
groundloop
(11,519 posts)Last edited Wed Oct 30, 2013, 01:09 PM - Edit history (1)
Yes, President Obama won the election. Unfortunately the House of Representatives is controlled by the GOPers and the Senate still has the filibuster and the GOPers can effectively block most legislation with that. And the GOPers have been nothing if not damned good at blocking legislation.
Miranda4peace
(225 posts)When campaigning they often make wonderful claims, often times reneging on them once they have been elected.
They say one thing like "the war on drugs has been a complete failure" then expand they war on drugs.
"This budget is appalling. The drug czar is trying to resurrect those stupid TV ads, like the one where a teenager gets his fist stuck in his mouth," said Rob Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, D.C. "The budget intentionally undercounts the federal government's expenditures on incarcerating drug offenders, who comprise more than half of the federal prison population. And the budget dangerously proposes a massive escalation in using the military to fight drugs domestically. Congress should just ignore this budget and start from scratch. Specifically, Congress should not provide the Obama administration with any money to go after nonviolent marijuana users, growers, or distributors."
http://www.mpp.org/media/press-releases/obama-administration.html
Or promise to close a prison marred by instances torture and abuse, Gitmo......................but instead do this
CloseGitmo.net organizer Andrés Thomas Conteris on day 61 of his fast in solidarity with hunger striking prisoners in Guantánamo and Pelican Bay will undergo a nasogastric feeding in front of the White House on Friday, September 6 at noon.
Conteris will underscore the brutality of force-feeding, to which dozens of men at Guantanamo have been subjected since a new hunger strike began last February, and which California officials have threatened for hunger striking prisoners in Pelican Bay protesting the use of extended solitary confinement in US prisons. The American Medical Association, the United Nations, and Senators John McCain and Diane Feinstein have all condemned force-feeding.
The tube feeding of Conteris, administered by a medical professional, will be webcast live at http://closegitmo.net .
Force-feeding is torture, says Conteris, a 52-year-old man from California who has lost 50lbs since starting his strike on July 8th,, when Pelican Bay inmates started their fast. I wish to make visible what the U.S. government is perpetrating against prisoners in Guantánamo and what the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is threatening for hunger strikers in Pelican Bay. The only way to end the hunger strikes and force-feeding is to shutter the Gitmo prison and respond favorably to the demands of the prisoners in California.
http://www.popularresistance.org/us-hunger-striker-to-undergo-forced-feeding-at-white-house/
Response to votesparks (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
votesparks
(1,288 posts)Last edited Wed Oct 30, 2013, 12:37 PM - Edit history (1)
Becoming the power infrastructure does. And the only way that will come about, is for regular people (who are in poll after poll, pretty progressive) to infiltrate the party structure of the Democratic Party, or run as Independents EN MASSE, or wait for the country to completely implode and build again from rubble.
The level of apathy towards getting involved in politics beyond just voting guarantees our current result.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)And look beyond the facade. The system is broken and neither party seems interested in doing anything about it.
The biggest transfer of wealth from the middle-class to the ultra-wealth has occurred under both parties.
Trade agreements that have shifted the balance of power from voters to global corporations are equally supported
by both parties. Obama's currently negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership which will be more of the same.
Our elections are funded by Wall Street and major corporations. The financial health of the folks who control the purse strings is guaranteed simply because they've hijacked the system. Oh, the Democrats will still stand up when it comes to social issues. But does anyone really think the 1% really gives a shit about gay marriage, or women's right to choose? When it comes to the distribution of wealth, with a few exceptions both parties are on the same page.
Even if a true populists decides to run against the next moderate Democrat they'll be vilified in the corporate media as a scary Socialist.
So vote or don't vote but until we deal with the theft of our political system the financial gap continue to widen along with the continued destruction of our planet.