Does the world need another comment about Russell Brand? Whatever, it's getting one. And with special regard to that period between, roughly, 2013 and 2015 when Brand assumed a left wing persona and was variously feted by the radical and mainstream sections of the labour movement. Following Brand's convictions for rape and sexual assault, point scoring has been the order of the day. For the Daily Mail, Brand is the left's "fault". Presumably because his ascent to prominence was through Channel Four and the BBC, which long set the grounds for that infamous Newsnight interview with Jeremy Paxman and his one-issue editorial take over of the New Statesman. Handily the Mail have memory holed the last 10 years when the politics he proffered were much closer to the paper's wingnut columnists than anything else.
But why was Brand taken seriously by some sections of the left and indulged? That includes this place. He was obviously a narcissist, well known for his promiscuity and sexism, and his output was hardly sharp or original. Others already knew a lot more about Brand and his criminality, but this simply wasn't common knowledge at the time. As far as I was concerned, here was someone moving left who had a very large following, and so it was an opportunity to deepen that radicalisation, repudiate the sexism, and utilise his celebrity to bring more people into progressive politics. For the centre left, Brand was a conduit for reaching younger people and encouraging them to vote Labour. Ed Miliband wouldn't have shown up on Brand's YouTube show, The Trews, if they thought otherwise.
Obviously, that commitment didn't last. It's telling that when the left did hit an upsurge with Jeremy Corbyn's campaign for Labour leadership, this was the moment Brand the leftist disappeared. But before then, there were few signs that left wing and socialist ideas were on the cusp of a resurgence. That was the context, and ultimately why so many on the left, me included, were so pathetically grateful that a big name was moving toward our politics. It would be nice to say that the lessons have been learned, but experience since suggests not. There are few obviously problematic prominent people around the left these days, but the tendency to overlook "issues" some activists have inside the left, be they of a behavioural and/or political character, is very alive and very well at all levels. It's right and proper that justice has been done and Brand can look forward to a substantial sentence. But depressing that there are many more little Brands in and around our movement, along with the people prepared to cover for them.
9 comments:
> the tendency to overlook "issues" some activists have inside the left, be they of a behavioural and/or political character, is very alive and very well at all levels
Hardly a characteristic which is unique to "the left"!
Such as whom?
A certain fiction writer on the left stole (and published) a book idea he'd got from a close friend of mine after she rather naively asked his for advice about it. He threatened her with his lawyers when she threatened to go public. I don't think there will be many people who have been active on the left will not have a story about abuse of power from one of 'our own'.
I think some of the conclusions being drawn about Brand are missing the bigger point. He is a charismatic charlatan who craves attention. One way he gets attention is regurtating facile nonsense that happens to affirm some people's priors. He was popular with some on the left because they liked his emotive mix of not-economics and naive sixth form radical politics. Later he was popular with the conspiracy theorist fringe because he regurtated the tin foil hat rubbish they believe in.
It's not a surprise that people fall for confident, charismatic charlatans, it's not a surprise such people exploit their skills in terrible ways. But the first defence is to raise a red flag when someone tells you exactly what you want to hear without any consideration to plausability. It's kind of how all populism works whether it is left or right.
Shame you posted that from a named account. I assume that libel laws can't touch her for talking privately to friends - and couldn't touch you if they couldn't you, e.g. because you spilled beans in an anonymous comment posted whilst using a VPN. (If you didn't name her in the process, then he would presumably implicate himself by even trying to target her close friends.)
The left is of course not immune to being used as a vehicle of convenience by narcissists and psychopaths.
However, it does have this over the populist right: once publicly unmasked, it should be very unlikely for such characters to remain venerated. The left's grassroots seem to far better understand the folly of indulging them as a means to an end. The grassroots of the populist right have just had a very pointed lesson in this - a lesson which isn't over yet... but it's in the latter's nature that they learn very slowly, if at all.
Mainstream sections of the labour movement have ignored and actively covered up misogyny as well as deflecting accountability within political party/ parties. Never any excuse.
Thank you Phil for discussing. Always important, for as you say, there are indeed many more, and people prepared to cover for them.
Yes the little Brands
Post a Comment