Oh man, I can't believe it. We all have to write something about Russell Brand? It doesn't seem fair! But then again, the rule is the same for everyone...
A quick reminder: if you don't complete a blog, article, think-piece, tweet or kitchenette rant about Russell Brand before the end of the week, you will be arrested and will forever surrender your right to have opinions. So don't put it off.
Brand has been saying stuff. If you don't know what, you can google it. It's the same stuff he's been saying for a long time.
As you may remember, I have a history with Brand. And a present. I'm a bit obsessed with him. Lucy and I still listen to his old BBC Radio 2 shows often, and they continue to make us laugh, even on the hundredth listen. His radio show was great, his other work is variable, but he generally seems to be an amusing and thoughtful fellow.
But it annoys me when he talks about not voting. He's never voted, and doesn't think people should.
I understand where he's coming from. Of course he's right that broadly speaking, political parties are very similar. They represent an extremely narrow range of ideas and priorities. They do all work in the interests of big corporations, they do all serve the rich, they do all perpetuate the status quo, they are all boring and lacking in personality, none of them do enough to tackle climate change or inequality, they are unrepresentative of most people. It's true. He's right.
But even within that extremely narrow range of ideas, there are differences that make a huge difference to the lives of people. (I was going to write "everyday people", but then realised how meaningless that term is.)
Whenever I hear people say that it doesn't make any difference who you vote for, I get angry. It's partly because I used to think the same thing when I was a teenager, and the teenage me always makes me angry. It doesn't make much difference, I agree. But if living under a Conservative government has taught us anything, it's that the distinction between terrible and slightly-less-terrible is an important one.
For Brand, it probably doesn't make any difference. But for millions of people, the differences between horrible right-wing elitist automatons and very slightly less right-wing elitist automatons impact on their lives every day. The government is cutting benefits, cutting public spending, privatising health care, vilifying immigrants, and ruining education. If we vote in the other guys, then... well, all of that will still happen. But a bit more slowly.
I think Noam Chomsky said (and I can reference him because it's the kind of thing Russell Brand would do) that there's nothing wrong with the lesser of two evils. You get less evil.
Every day there's a new heartless, stupid, or blindly ideological policy being announced. To say that there's no difference between the two parties is an insult to everyone who is affected by them.
There's a Bill Hicks routine (and I can reference him because I think he's *just a little bit overrated*) about a two party system being akin to choosing between the puppet on the right hand, or the puppet on the left. ("Hey, the same guy's holding both puppets!") But if the puppet on the left is slightly less racist than the puppet on the right, you'd still be better off with good old lefty.
Brand thinks that if you vote, you're complicit in supporting a corrupt system. But I don't think it works that way.
When Brand leads his glorious revolution (and, hey, it might happen, right?), no-one is going to see his electoral abstinence as an indicator of his political integrity. In this new utopia, no-one would judge him harshly if he'd spent elections voting for the slightly more liberal option. It wouldn't disqualify him from being the messiah.
By refusing to vote, and encouraging others to do the same, he's playing into the hands of the Right. The Conservatives will be DELIGHTED that he's not voting. They'll be thrilled that a whole demographic of potential socially-conscious young voters will now be refusing to enter the polling booth. The Daily Mail will be THRILLED. And if you ever find yourself doing something that makes the Mail happy, you can be pretty sure you're on the wrong track.
I'm not saying that democracy in this country is all good and perfect. Change would be wonderful. But whilst we're working on that, let's try to stop some poor children from being trampled by Michael Gove. Just until we get it all sorted out, yeah?
This isn't an attack on Brand in general, just that specific point. To his credit, he's at least out there trying to do something. When I was a teenager opposed to voting, I didn't do anything to make things better. If you're not voting, you'd better be actively trying to improve things. That's the difference between laziness and determined disillusionment.
I like Brand a lot, and I'm pleased that he's out there and is making a lot of noise about things that matter to him, but I think that his romantic ideas of revolution might be a bit counter-productive, at least at this stage.
Who knows? Maybe he will inspire a generation of glorious spiritual enlightenment. But until then, he'd be better off encouraging change through both democratic and revolutionary channels. Or else, we'll find ourselves being ruled by the racist puppet for another five years.
***
(But before all that, he should start doing his radio show again. I miss it.)
No comments:
Post a Comment