Hello everyone and welcome back.
According to Merriam Webster dictionary
adjective \fə-ˈsē-shəs\—used to describe speech that is meant to be funny but that is usually regarded as annoying, silly, or not proper
Here’s a perfect example of a “Serious” interviewer, questioning the validity of arguments brought up by his guest, simply because the man is a comedian. It’s also a perfect example of said comedian showing the aforementioned “serious” man that one can be funny and intelligent (not to mention compassionate) all at the same time.
An interviewer (and not for the first time), chooses to patronize Russell Brand or label him as a “Comedian”, instead of really listening to what he has to say. He asks his questions and gets really interesting answers, but because it’s “Just an actor” with some “ridiculous” ideas then he’s just being facetious.
But let’s hear what Brand is saying and treat him with just as much respect as we’d expect people to give to our opinions.
- economic disparity grows and no one makes a real effort to resolve it, or even think about a way to resolve it. Instead, some might attempt to maintain it.
- Abusing the environment – no real change is taking place. Semantics and minor adjustments is all there is out there.
- Governments are apathetic to the public (The 99%)
- voting hasn’t brought change (real change) so far, so why vote?
Have I quoted something outrageous here? Did Russell say anything that can be considered outright disconnected from reality? Or did Russell Brand, again, hit the nail right on the head?
Economic inequality has been pretty much the focus of political debate over the past 8 years. Brand didn’t re-invent the wheel here. As he says in the interview, he’s simply trying to draw attention to these topics. But excuse him for cracking a joke at the expense of the people who aren’t struggling to make ends meet. Yes, the rich and the governments.
Then of course, when one can’t argue the validity of his guest’s opinions, one has to fire the so cleverly sounding but ridiculous question – So tell me (Russell Brand) the specifics of the revolution you’re advocating. Tell me here and now, specifically how we’re supposed to change,
Now who’s being facetious?
Luckily, Brand didn’t fall for this one too. Rightfully so, he simply stated that the purpose of him voicing these ideas is to start a discussion, raise awareness and get the ball rolling.
The one thing we can specifically say at this moment is that the current system is full of shit. And excuse me for being facetious about this.
Let me know what you think right after you watch the full interview below:
Until we meet again,