Branding Russell: Moonbat Ravings of a C-List Celeb
Somebody takes Russell Brand seriously. You know, the British comic actor? The one known mostly for his brief marriage to pop star Katy Perry? He’s the guy that did the abysmal remake of the classic movie “Arthur.” Maybe you know him for his drug use?
Anyway, people actually watch Brand’s Youtube video channel, “The Trews,” for his take on the issues of the day. The Huffington Post, NPR, Upworthy, The Washington Post and The Guardian have published his opinions. That’s despite (or more likely because) the fact that those opinions are unoriginal, often hate-filled, intolerant left-wing rants that run to conspiracy theories about corporations and “power structures.” He’s a celebrity of sorts eager to communicate opinions that news and entertainment media elites mostly share, so they’re happy to give him a platform.
From barely concealed misogyny to disdain for conservative blacks to excusing terrorism to sophomoric Marxism, Brand’s schtick is shopworn and his targets conventional. Naturally, liberals love him.
Surprise! Russell Brand doesn’t think much of Sarah Palin. At the 2008 MTV Video Music Awards, Brand went on a tirade against the Palin family and made sex jokes Sarah Palin’s expense, such as saying it wouldn’t be a good idea to elect a vice president “he’d like to fondle.” Brand planned to make a joke that Sarah Palin would put daughter Bristol in the electric chair for getting pregnant; but MTV said that was going too far.
Four years later, Brand said Sarah Palin is only popular because “People want to fuck her. That’s why they tolerate the other stuff.”
But Brand isn’t much more respectful of women he actually knows.
After his divorce from pop singer Katy Perry, Brand complained how terrible marriage is because he couldn’t have sex with other women. He told Vogue that he never spoke to Perry after he texted her at the start of their divorce. At a London concert, Brand said these demeaning comments about women and marriage: “When you’re a monk, you’re not allowed to have sex with anyone. When you’re married, it’s one person. That’s one more than a monk. It’s not that different.” He added: ‘I’d be having sex thinking, ‘Think of anyone, anyone else.’”
Sounds like a catch!
In fairness, Brand is a unisex hater, and his tone is just as ugly for men. Brand has called President George W. Bush a “stupid cowboy,” Bill O'Reilly, "a disgrace to [his] flag,.” He’s attacked Sean Hannity, with a mock imitation of Hannity’s voice in several of his Trews videos, even claiming Hannity is “A man hopelessly out of his depth, trying to scrabble around in a universe he can’t understand.”
Besides his individual targets, Brand regularly bashes Fox News as a “fanatical terrorist organization” that is “more dangerous than ISIS.”
Gosh, that’s clever!
Though Brand attempts to come off as someone who holds himself to a higher standard and admonishes Fox News anchors for spewing hate, he seems to manage to do that on his own, often enough.
Though Brand has called Fox News “racist” many times before, he’s ramped up the hate lately.
When Jason Riley, a black conservative Wall Street Journal opinion writer, appeared on Fox News to discuss the Ferguson story, Brand mock imitated Riley’s “white sounding voice” and called Riley “freakish” and “a betrayer of his racial roots.” But somehow, no one on the left managed to call out Brand on his racist bigotry.
So Brand doesn’t like blacks who don’t toe the liberal line. He’s no fan of Jews, either. Last month he called a boycott of Israel, calling on people to divest from companies that “facilitate the oppression of people in Gaza.”
Nor does Brand seem to think much of Muslims, since by his account so many are incapable of coping with iniquity without resorting to decapitation.
His latest video screed blames Britain for “causing this problem” of young British Muslims joining ISIS. These terrorists are "desperate people, so many alienated people" because there isn’t a "coalescent, inclusive, communicative and bonded society here in Britain."
British Muslim men have been stripped of “material comfort,” a “sense of security,” a “sense of connection to the country,” a “sense of togetherness.”
(Yes, it’s so hard to be a British Muslim, where authorities around Rotherham have been contorting themselves for more than a decade to not see the systematic sexual abuse of young girls because their tormentors were, well, Muslim.)
Oh, and despite the beheadings, crucifixions and mass graves, we shouldn’t think ISIS is “madly evil.” Their just expressing themselves. “Terrorism is the nuclear bomb of the disenfranchised," said the sage.
Brand’s terrorism apologetics aren’t new. In an op-ed for the Sun (U.K.) Brand excused radical Islam for the bloody broad-daylight murder of a British soldier in a London Suburb, even though there is video of one of the two killers holding bloody knives and talking about – wait for it! – Islam. “That bloke is a nut. A nut who happens to be Muslim,” wrote Brand. “Blaming Muslims for this is like blaming Hitler’s moustache for the Holocaust.”
Mmm hmm. Oh, and Islam and Christianity are pretty much the same anyway, since neither are crazy about homosexuality. And of course, it’s our fault. “What I think is that all over our country, all over our planet, there are huge numbers of people who feel alienated and sometimes victimized by the privileged and the powerful, whether that’s rich people, powerful corporations or occupying nations.” A penetrating insight, if you’re a gender studies major who just discovered the joys of pot.
Brand’s perspective on Islamist terror (he’s “meh” about it) is informed by his outspoken Marxism. “Profit is a filthy word,” proclaimed Brand in 2013 (when his net worth was about $15 million). The hypocrisy is all the richer when he records some videos in the back of a chauffer-driven limo.
Brand routinely accuses the capitalist system of being much worse than any kinds of atrocities being committed worldwide. For example, he responded to Greg Gutfeld’s rebuke by denying that ISIS was “the deadliest form of bigotry.” What was instead? American corporations!
“Whilst there is no doubt that the emergent phenomena of ISIS and the fear and the barbarism generated from that is really, really frightening, it’s not anywhere near as frightening as the existing power structures,” he said. “I could be crushed in an instant by the United States or the corporations that it represents. The fear incited by ISIS is a convenient prod to keep us all toeing the line.”
Screaming about corporate taxes seems to be Brand’s trump card for a variety of issues. In May, he scolded FNC host Bill O’Reilly for worrying about U.S. border security. Why didn’t O’Reilly “look at excessive corporate wealth and why don't you advocate them lot paying taxes? Why not, Bill?”
The question, to Brand, has a simple, sinister answer: “Is it because Fox, who you work for, is a massive corporation and you are a conditioned citizen coveting only a message of corporate hegemony and disempowerment of the people?” Brand actually managed to utter that sentence and then tell O’Reilly his “economic argument is rubbish and based on bigotry.”
One thing must be a relief to Brand’s fellow Britons: He told the Guardian “democracy is irrelevant,” and thus, he doesn’t vote.
— Kristine Marsh is Staff Writer for MRC Culture at the Media Research Center. Follow Kristine Marsh on Twitter.