Russell Brand May Have Started a Revolution

[Serryah]

What's Canada got to do with this?

Brand wasn't talking about a revolution in Canada. I don't even think he once said the word "Canada".

As mentioned, this is a Canadian forum, and it was mentioned in a Canadian forum. If your comment about Australia would have been relevant, that'd be fine, but it had nothing really to do with the convo at all.

One of the things I really detest about the people we vote for is that in essence it is a grown up version of "who has the most money, popularity and friends" that we should have grown out of from high school. Granted Average Joe can get into provincial or federal politics easier than in some countries, but it's still the same thing. The more money you have, the more likelihood of you getting into office. IMO that's not how it should be.

But then I also think the voting populace needs to stop being so idiotic when it comes to voting itself which is why if you want to vote, you should have to pass a small test to see if you even know WTF is going on. If you can't name basic issues, name your own MP/MLA, name your PM or questions like that, then you shouldn't vote. Voting for people just because your family's done it for centuries does NOT help. We need knowledgeable voters voting, not the clueless types.

 

[wulfie68]

I like Russell Brand the comedian, but I am not enamored of Russell Brand the political pundit (for lack of a better word). Its not so much that I think he's a "leftie", "rightie", "innie", or "outie", but I have a problem with someone who sits there and says "the system doesn't work so I won't participate and try to work on fixing it".

I believe that voting is a responsibility in a democracy, as well as a right, and thus I agree with the Australian stance (if I recall correctly, there is an ABSTAIN option on Aussie ballots in case none of the candidates appeal to the voter). I agree with Karrie that voter apathy is our greatest enemy in this regard, but I disagree that a boycott of the polls does anything to foster change; rather I feel it exacerbates the problem by leaving those working within the system to try and address those outside without any meaningful feedback mechanism.

 

[Zipperfish]

Voter apathy is a sympton, not a cuase. the reason voter apathy exists is because the process to become a politicians is identical for all mainstream parties, the personality type is the same. So we end up with the same bland liars and their blandishments over and over again. That's the real complaint--that no matter where your vote goes, it all ends up the same.

Maybe this was the appeal of Rob Ford, who was a different kind of politician. Straight talker and all that.

 

[Blackleaf]

This is a Canadian forum.

And this is the International Politics section of it, not the Canadian Politics section of it.

As mentioned, this is a Canadian forum, and it was mentioned in a Canadian forum. If your comment about Australia would have been relevant, that'd be fine, but it had nothing really to do with the convo at all.

If you want to discuss Canadian politics do it in the Canadian Politics section of the forum. You obviously haven't noticed that this is the INTERNATIONAL Section of the forum. And there's more to the world than a small country of 33 million people in North America.

And this thread didn't start off all about Canada. It was Russell Brand calling for a revolution in BRITAIN. Since when was Brand referring to Canada at any point?

 

[mentalfloss]

Democracy is not benefitted by mandating people vote for politicians they do not want representing them.

Political apathy is what we are attempting to battle when we encourage voting, and Brand would appear to be anything but apathetic.

I think some people are making assumptions here.

Most are already aware that you don't have to vote if you don't like a candidate. And I'm pretty sure we already know that being active doesn't just mean your support at the ballot.

But where Brand is misplaced is in his assumption that you must deliberately avoid voting to make the difference that you want. That's just factually incorrect and paints a misleading picture of the current political landscape. There are numerous occasions where politicians DO listen to their constituents or they DO make the right decisions on their behalf.

All he is doing right now is strengthening the existing system as politicians research people's values and use those to grab votes.

There is nothing revolutionary in that and media figures have always played this kind of advisory role in politics.