Russell Brand Hypocrite? - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Russell Brand Hypocrite?

£0.00 @
Video here of Brand getting very defensive over a simple question, demonstrating no matter how literate you may be or how much you perpetuate power for the people type campaigns, unless your willing t…
haritori Avatar
2y, 3m agoPosted 2 years, 3 months ago
Video here of Brand getting very defensive over a simple question, demonstrating no matter how literate you may be or how much you perpetuate power for the people type campaigns, unless your willing to put your money where your mouth is, you will always been seen as a schoolboy ranter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmlZWYvXMUo
haritori Avatar
2y, 3m agoPosted 2 years, 3 months ago
Options

Top Comments

(3)
14 Likes
What's wrong with what he's doing? At least he's portraying his views and not sat in his big home. What the hell does his rent have to do with it? Yeah Russell Brand is rich but so what, he could easily just do what most other rich people do and not care but he's making an effort.
12 Likes
At least he is fighting a cause, I don't think it matters what his Worth is

That's like questioning Princess Diana a multi millionaire and her landmine protests..
9 Likes
People just hate him but read his book revolution and at least he is questioning the government's even in his YouTube videos, he exposes government lies, agenda and corruption that is ignored in the mainstream. And credit to him as the mass population believe everything they hear or see from the mainstream news

All Comments

(104) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
2 Likes #2
Haha alright lets do one! You know where them pair are going bonk bonk
12 Likes #3
At least he is fighting a cause, I don't think it matters what his Worth is

That's like questioning Princess Diana a multi millionaire and her landmine protests..
4 Likes #4
The guy thinks he represents the people more than Paul Golding does. Flowery words don't work on me. He's not even funny.
3 Likes #5
Fair play for lending his voice to what seems to be a growing problem in london
banned 1 Like #6
Ive tried searching for a I read from an MP about Brand it was something like, Russell Brand is not a clever man he just pretends to be to the stupid people by using words longer than 6 letters :D
9 Likes #7
People just hate him but read his book revolution and at least he is questioning the government's even in his YouTube videos, he exposes government lies, agenda and corruption that is ignored in the mainstream. And credit to him as the mass population believe everything they hear or see from the mainstream news
14 Likes #8
What's wrong with what he's doing? At least he's portraying his views and not sat in his big home. What the hell does his rent have to do with it? Yeah Russell Brand is rich but so what, he could easily just do what most other rich people do and not care but he's making an effort.
1 Like #9
Well i found it amusing, not often he is lost for words, its all an act with him, funny his film career dried up pretty damn fast and he is back over here ranting on..
1 Like #10
I think he is very intelliggent.
2 Likes #11
These journalists giving him a negative image are retarded, they'll take any desperate measure to discredit him and totally go off topic just amplifying their stupidity 
3 Likes #12
I hate the guy, his presence makes any cause a instant mockery, he's a loud mouthed hypocrite, just a silly egotist who thinks he's the only person to discover google, all he does is shout at fools, telling them things he's read online that have been well known about for years, blind leading the blind I guess.
#13
Error440
I hate the guy, his presence makes any cause a instant mockery, he's a loud mouthed hypocrite, just a silly egotist who thinks he's the only person to discover google, all he does is shout at fools, telling them things he's read online that have been well known about for years, blind leading the blind I guess.
Still he's bringing light to issues which affect normal people and i think he's changed from years ago doesn't seem to behave like that anymore.
2 Likes #14
kman0013
These journalists giving him a negative image are retarded, they'll take any desperate measure to discredit him and totally go off topic just amplifying their stupidity 
he has to learn not to rise like that if he wants to court the media (not saying he does btw} he seems very edgy and agitated, he does himself no favours waving his fingers
in the reporters face like that, looked close to attacking him lol..

Tho tbf he is entertaining when he rants, just has to know when to stop and walk away
before he snaps. Which I predict he will one day lol..
2 Likes #15
I personally think he's a 'philosopher' and 'political activist' for the the rather stupid. Still, least he is attempting to help and raises some valid points, just his solutions are often poor. Telling people not to vote cos they're no party is worth it. Well why would they cater their policies towards the young and disenfranchised when they know you're not going to vote. Why waste you time trying to impossible votes.

But the reporter is also a huge moron. Basically saying you can't fight for or justify a cause if you're not directly affected by it. Does that mean I have to have cancer before I can campaign against better treatment for it? Mong.
1 Like #16
CookinBat
kman0013
These journalists giving him a negative image are retarded, they'll take any desperate measure to discredit him and totally go off topic just amplifying their stupidity 
he has to learn not to rise like that if he wants to court the media (not saying he does btw} he seems very edgy and agitated, he does himself no favours waving his fingers
in the reporters face like that, looked close to attacking him lol..

Tho tbf he is entertaining when he rants, just has to know when to stop and walk away
before he snaps. Which I predict he will one day lol..
Yh he gets really passionate but it stills shows the media agenda to detract from important issues were people could get kicked to the curb.
2 Likes #17
CookinBat
kman0013
These journalists giving him a negative image are retarded, they'll take any desperate measure to discredit him and totally go off topic just amplifying their stupidity 
he has to learn not to rise like that if he wants to court the media (not saying he does btw} he seems very edgy and agitated, he does himself no favours waving his fingers
in the reporters face like that, looked close to attacking him lol..

Tho tbf he is entertaining when he rants, just has to know when to stop and walk away
before he snaps. Which I predict he will one day lol..

LOL I agree. He kept touching him as well, he can't keep his hands off anyone can he?

He talks about issues that I think are important. But he doesn't actually do anything about them, or the people affected any favours, it's a popularity contest to him. He waffles on and makes everyone else interested in the same stuff look stupid by proxy.
2 Likes #18
SixFeet
I personally think he's a 'philosopher' and 'political activist' for the the rather stupid. Still, least he is attempting to help and raises some valid points, just his solutions are often poor. Telling people not to vote cos they're no party is worth it. Well why would they cater their policies towards the young and disenfranchised when they know you're not going to vote. Why waste you time trying to impossible votes.

But the reporter is also a huge moron. Basically saying you can't fight for or justify a cause if you're not directly affected by it. Does that mean I have to have cancer before I can campaign against better treatment for it? Mong.

Cancer you have no choice about. Being a rich capitalist living in a luxury flat whilst trying to align himself with the working classes, he can.
2 Likes #19
moneysavingkitten
SixFeet
I personally think he's a 'philosopher' and 'political activist' for the the rather stupid. Still, least he is attempting to help and raises some valid points, just his solutions are often poor. Telling people not to vote cos they're no party is worth it. Well why would they cater their policies towards the young and disenfranchised when they know you're not going to vote. Why waste you time trying to impossible votes.

But the reporter is also a huge moron. Basically saying you can't fight for or justify a cause if you're not directly affected by it. Does that mean I have to have cancer before I can campaign against better treatment for it? Mong.

Cancer you have no choice about. Being a rich capitalist living in a luxury flat whilst trying to align himself with the working classes, he can.

So he has to donate all his money and become poor to campaign for the poor? He is from a working class background and has been known to take homeless people for lunch and help them regularly.

Having wealth and fighting for better standard of living for the poor isn't hypocritical.
2 Likes #20
SixFeet
moneysavingkitten
SixFeet
I personally think he's a 'philosopher' and 'political activist' for the the rather stupid. Still, least he is attempting to help and raises some valid points, just his solutions are often poor. Telling people not to vote cos they're no party is worth it. Well why would they cater their policies towards the young and disenfranchised when they know you're not going to vote. Why waste you time trying to impossible votes.
But the reporter is also a huge moron. Basically saying you can't fight for or justify a cause if you're not directly affected by it. Does that mean I have to have cancer before I can campaign against better treatment for it? Mong.
Cancer you have no choice about. Being a rich capitalist living in a luxury flat whilst trying to align himself with the working classes, he can.
So he has to donate all his money and become poor to campaign for the poor? He is from a working class background and has been known to take homeless people for lunch and help them regularly.
Having wealth and fighting for better standard of living for the poor isn't hypocritical.

NO not at all,

But its a bit rich (no pun) when he is trying to support the working classes being forced out of London by the super rich when he himself lives in Hoxton, he says he rents like that makes a difference.

He could have a nice big fancy house anywhere else and rent or buy a small semi in the suburbs of london, but no he lives in east london and he knows the reporter was right hence why he got so defensive and ?angry?

Edited By: haritori on Dec 02, 2014 21:53
#21
kman0013
CookinBat
kman0013
These journalists giving him a negative image are retarded, they'll take any desperate measure to discredit him and totally go off topic just amplifying their stupidity 
he has to learn not to rise like that if he wants to court the media (not saying he does btw} he seems very edgy and agitated, he does himself no favours waving his fingers
in the reporters face like that, looked close to attacking him lol..

Tho tbf he is entertaining when he rants, just has to know when to stop and walk away
before he snaps. Which I predict he will one day lol..
Yh he gets really passionate but it stills shows the media agenda to detract from important issues were people could get kicked to the curb.
think you may be young and idealistic, not knocking you we've all been there.

he really needs to feel old and jaded like the rest of us, cos noone gives a fig these days sadly..
#22
CookinBat
kman0013
CookinBat
kman0013
These journalists giving him a negative image are retarded, they'll take any desperate measure to discredit him and totally go off topic just amplifying their stupidity 
he has to learn not to rise like that if he wants to court the media (not saying he does btw} he seems very edgy and agitated, he does himself no favours waving his fingers
in the reporters face like that, looked close to attacking him lol..

Tho tbf he is entertaining when he rants, just has to know when to stop and walk away
before he snaps. Which I predict he will one day lol..
Yh he gets really passionate but it stills shows the media agenda to detract from important issues were people could get kicked to the curb.
think you may be young and idealistic, not knocking you we've all been there.

he really needs to feel old and jaded like the rest of us, cos noone gives a fig these days sadly..
That's the point people should care.
2 Likes #23
Also i think it was a genuine question.

So russell you are supporting these people who cannot afford anymore to live in london and are being forced out so london can become a superhub for the rich....out of interest and because it is completely relevant, why are you continuing to live in london and live in these expensive properties when your campaigning against it?
4 Likes #24
haritori
SixFeet
moneysavingkitten
SixFeet
I personally think he's a 'philosopher' and 'political activist' for the the rather stupid. Still, least he is attempting to help and raises some valid points, just his solutions are often poor. Telling people not to vote cos they're no party is worth it. Well why would they cater their policies towards the young and disenfranchised when they know you're not going to vote. Why waste you time trying to impossible votes.
But the reporter is also a huge moron. Basically saying you can't fight for or justify a cause if you're not directly affected by it. Does that mean I have to have cancer before I can campaign against better treatment for it? Mong.
Cancer you have no choice about. Being a rich capitalist living in a luxury flat whilst trying to align himself with the working classes, he can.
So he has to donate all his money and become poor to campaign for the poor? He is from a working class background and has been known to take homeless people for lunch and help them regularly.
Having wealth and fighting for better standard of living for the poor isn't hypocritical.

NO not at all,

But its a bit rich (no pun) when he is trying to support the working classes being forced out of London by the super rich when he himself lives in Hoxton, he says he rents like that makes a difference.

He could have a nice big fancy house anywhere else and rent or buy a small semi in the suburbs of london, but no he lives in east london and he knows the reporter was right hence why he got so defensive and ?angry?

That's the reality of living in London though. He is a TV personality and film star. Most of his work is in London or abroad so needs to be near Heathrow.

People need to live near where they work and that includes the working class that serve the wealthy their stupidly overpriced coffees and lattes so parameters need to be put in place to offer some affordable housing for those people.

The question isn't being asked to be relevant, it's being asked to try and smear and divert from the actual problem. He's campaigning for it because he's from the same poor background and remembers where he came from. Why does having empathy for the people that are blighted by a problem he once faced make him a hypocrite?

haritori
So russell you are supporting these people who cannot afford anymore to live in london and are being forced out so london can become a superhub for the rich....out of interest and because it is completely relevant, why are you continuing to live in london and live in these expensive properties when your campaigning against it?

So clearly you do think you need to be poor and destitute to campaign for the poor and destitute.
1 Like #25
SixFeet
haritori
SixFeet
moneysavingkitten
SixFeet
I personally think he's a 'philosopher' and 'political activist' for the the rather stupid. Still, least he is attempting to help and raises some valid points, just his solutions are often poor. Telling people not to vote cos they're no party is worth it. Well why would they cater their policies towards the young and disenfranchised when they know you're not going to vote. Why waste you time trying to impossible votes.
But the reporter is also a huge moron. Basically saying you can't fight for or justify a cause if you're not directly affected by it. Does that mean I have to have cancer before I can campaign against better treatment for it? Mong.
Cancer you have no choice about. Being a rich capitalist living in a luxury flat whilst trying to align himself with the working classes, he can.
So he has to donate all his money and become poor to campaign for the poor? He is from a working class background and has been known to take homeless people for lunch and help them regularly.
Having wealth and fighting for better standard of living for the poor isn't hypocritical.
NO not at all,
But its a bit rich (no pun) when he is trying to support the working classes being forced out of London by the super rich when he himself lives in Hoxton, he says he rents like that makes a difference.
He could have a nice big fancy house anywhere else and rent or buy a small semi in the suburbs of london, but no he lives in east london and he knows the reporter was right hence why he got so defensive and ?angry?
That's the reality of living in London though. He is a TV personality and film star. Most of his work is in London or abroad so needs to be near Heathrow.
People need to live near where they work and that includes the working class that serve the wealthy their stupidly overpriced coffees and lattes so parameters need to be put in place to offer some affordable housing for those people.
The question isn't being asked to be relevant, it's being asked to try and smear and divert from the actual problem. He's campaigning for it because he's from the same poor background and remembers where he came from. Why does having empathy for the people that are blighted by a problem he once faced make him a hypocrite?
haritori
So russell you are supporting these people who cannot afford anymore to live in london and are being forced out so london can become a superhub for the rich....out of interest and because it is completely relevant, why are you continuing to live in london and live in these expensive properties when your campaigning against it?
So clearly you do think you need to be poor and destitute to campaign for the poor and destitute.

I said before no you do not, but wouldn't it show support for the cause if he wasn't part of the problem? hence my hypocrite part.
#26
kman0013
CookinBat
kman0013
CookinBat
kman0013
These journalists giving him a negative image are retarded, they'll take any desperate measure to discredit him and totally go off topic just amplifying their stupidity 
he has to learn not to rise like that if he wants to court the media (not saying he does btw} he seems very edgy and agitated, he does himself no favours waving his fingers
in the reporters face like that, looked close to attacking him lol..

Tho tbf he is entertaining when he rants, just has to know when to stop and walk away
before he snaps. Which I predict he will one day lol..
Yh he gets really passionate but it stills shows the media agenda to detract from important issues were people could get kicked to the curb.
think you may be young and idealistic, not knocking you we've all been there.

he really needs to feel old and jaded like the rest of us, cos noone gives a fig these days sadly..
That's the point people should care.
UKIP care :)
#27
Perhaps those advocates of Brand and his 'revolution' could explain what his policies are.

According to a Yougov poll* Brand has made a more negative contribution to political debate than any other celebrity with the exception of Jeremy Clarkson. Brand -33% Clarkson -34%

*British public revolt against Russell Brand
Russell Brand is disliked and, more than other celebrities, seen as having a negative influence on political debate
#28
haritori
SixFeet
haritori
SixFeet
moneysavingkitten
SixFeet
I personally think he's a 'philosopher' and 'political activist' for the the rather stupid. Still, least he is attempting to help and raises some valid points, just his solutions are often poor. Telling people not to vote cos they're no party is worth it. Well why would they cater their policies towards the young and disenfranchised when they know you're not going to vote. Why waste you time trying to impossible votes.
But the reporter is also a huge moron. Basically saying you can't fight for or justify a cause if you're not directly affected by it. Does that mean I have to have cancer before I can campaign against better treatment for it? Mong.
Cancer you have no choice about. Being a rich capitalist living in a luxury flat whilst trying to align himself with the working classes, he can.
So he has to donate all his money and become poor to campaign for the poor? He is from a working class background and has been known to take homeless people for lunch and help them regularly.
Having wealth and fighting for better standard of living for the poor isn't hypocritical.
NO not at all,
But its a bit rich (no pun) when he is trying to support the working classes being forced out of London by the super rich when he himself lives in Hoxton, he says he rents like that makes a difference.
He could have a nice big fancy house anywhere else and rent or buy a small semi in the suburbs of london, but no he lives in east london and he knows the reporter was right hence why he got so defensive and ?angry?
That's the reality of living in London though. He is a TV personality and film star. Most of his work is in London or abroad so needs to be near Heathrow.
People need to live near where they work and that includes the working class that serve the wealthy their stupidly overpriced coffees and lattes so parameters need to be put in place to offer some affordable housing for those people.
The question isn't being asked to be relevant, it's being asked to try and smear and divert from the actual problem. He's campaigning for it because he's from the same poor background and remembers where he came from. Why does having empathy for the people that are blighted by a problem he once faced make him a hypocrite?
haritori
So russell you are supporting these people who cannot afford anymore to live in london and are being forced out so london can become a superhub for the rich....out of interest and because it is completely relevant, why are you continuing to live in london and live in these expensive properties when your campaigning against it?
So clearly you do think you need to be poor and destitute to campaign for the poor and destitute.

I said before no you do not, but wouldn't it show support for the cause if he wasn't part of the problem? hence my hypocrite part.

So he can be wealthy and live in a nice place just hundreds miles away from his job? Seems plausible.

You're being ridiculous. He's part of the problem because he lives near his job and the market has dictated the prices in London are extremely expensive? That's the reality of life. Pretty sure he didn't negotiate the price up on his rent. Or should he live in Hull and commute 5 hours a day?
3 Likes #29
He has a book to sell.
Everything else is bs.
4 Likes #30
He should just stick to doing horoscopes :p
#31
SixFeet
haritori
SixFeet
haritori
SixFeet
moneysavingkitten
SixFeet
I personally think he's a 'philosopher' and 'political activist' for the the rather stupid. Still, least he is attempting to help and raises some valid points, just his solutions are often poor. Telling people not to vote cos they're no party is worth it. Well why would they cater their policies towards the young and disenfranchised when they know you're not going to vote. Why waste you time trying to impossible votes.
But the reporter is also a huge moron. Basically saying you can't fight for or justify a cause if you're not directly affected by it. Does that mean I have to have cancer before I can campaign against better treatment for it? Mong.
Cancer you have no choice about. Being a rich capitalist living in a luxury flat whilst trying to align himself with the working classes, he can.
So he has to donate all his money and become poor to campaign for the poor? He is from a working class background and has been known to take homeless people for lunch and help them regularly.
Having wealth and fighting for better standard of living for the poor isn't hypocritical.
NO not at all,
But its a bit rich (no pun) when he is trying to support the working classes being forced out of London by the super rich when he himself lives in Hoxton, he says he rents like that makes a difference.
He could have a nice big fancy house anywhere else and rent or buy a small semi in the suburbs of london, but no he lives in east london and he knows the reporter was right hence why he got so defensive and ?angry?
That's the reality of living in London though. He is a TV personality and film star. Most of his work is in London or abroad so needs to be near Heathrow.
People need to live near where they work and that includes the working class that serve the wealthy their stupidly overpriced coffees and lattes so parameters need to be put in place to offer some affordable housing for those people.
The question isn't being asked to be relevant, it's being asked to try and smear and divert from the actual problem. He's campaigning for it because he's from the same poor background and remembers where he came from. Why does having empathy for the people that are blighted by a problem he once faced make him a hypocrite?
haritori
So russell you are supporting these people who cannot afford anymore to live in london and are being forced out so london can become a superhub for the rich....out of interest and because it is completely relevant, why are you continuing to live in london and live in these expensive properties when your campaigning against it?
So clearly you do think you need to be poor and destitute to campaign for the poor and destitute.
I said before no you do not, but wouldn't it show support for the cause if he wasn't part of the problem? hence my hypocrite part.
So he can be wealthy and live in a nice place just hundreds miles away from his job? Seems plausible.
You're being ridiculous. He's part of the problem because he lives near his job and the market has dictated the prices in London are extremely expensive? That's the reality of life. Pretty sure he didn't negotiate the price up on his rent. Or should he live in Hull and commute 5 hours a day?

Yes he should because his lifestyle conflicts with the campaign, am I supposed to say oh well he is trying to do good so we will let him off. the fact he lives in a multi million pound home rented or owned conflicts withthe point he is making in fact he says...

"ask my landlord how much my house is worth"

1st he knows full well its a silly money house,
2nd that landlord is exactly the type of person buying up cheap properties for development for rich people, as such Brand by renting off them is furthering the problem..............................HYPOCRITE!

My point is he in reality couldn't care less for the poor , what he cares about is his publicity.
1 Like #32
davewave
He has a book to sell.
Everything else is bs.

In all fairness he donates 100% profits to an addiction charity. this he should be applauded for.

Edited By: haritori on Dec 02, 2014 22:51
1 Like #33
Cant watch the druggie. Completely full of manure.
3 Likes #34
He's no worse than a bunch of billionaires getting together and asking the hardworking public for money, ie. Comic Relief, Children In Need etc., etc.
1 Like #35
J4GG4
Cant watch the druggie. Completely full of manure.
ex-druggie, people can change
#36
Python
He's no worse than a bunch of billionaires getting together and asking the hardworking public for money, ie. Comic Relief, Children In Need etc., etc.


Was just about to make a similar point
#37
I can't afford to live in London. So I don't live in London.
Keeping poor people in London costs a lot of public money. Is it worth it? How many hospitals could we build instead?

Get the super-rich in, and tax the land. If land is sought-after, if it commands a premium, let's collect that premium for society.
#38
This guy is intelligent...he talks about the bigger picture and not what you've been brainwashed into doing.
1 Like #39
It's not about where he is now, but where he is from. kudos to him for speaking out about important issues. The media will discredit him as they are all mainly right wing propaganda. If only more people like him would speak out, maybe somthing would change. but most people with cash seem to like to take their money, dodge their taxes and not give a jot about society on a whole.
1 Like #40
Craiglights
...but most people with cash seem to like to take their money, dodge their taxes...

People without great wealth can do that too... if they earn enough to pay taxes, of course.

Craiglights
...and not give a jot about society on a whole.

That is not an exclusive viewpoint of the rich, either.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!