Jump to content

Russell Brand V Peter Hitchens On Drug Addiction

Big Man

Recommended Posts

Russell Brand = Uber twat.


He needs a good wash, a haircut and a shave.


Then he needs to consider his general conduct.


Its just heartbreaking to see him appear on "serious" programs, discussing politics or whatever. It completely strips the proceedings of credibility.


The guy is a celebrity - an act - not a serious commentator FFS.


Why is credibilty defined by appearance?

Link to comment

Brand is despised because he has qualities his despisers wish they had but never will.


Different despisers will covet different qualities of his.


Personally, the fact that he is articulate, irreverent, inteliigent and appeals to women doesn't bother me.


The fact he knows what it's like to use smack and I don't is the only possible area of covetness for me.

Link to comment

Though you could at least have given us a humourous analogy to demonstrate your desire for Perry - eg " like a rat up a drain-pipe".


You think that's humorous? Predictable, yes. Funny, not particularly.


Imagination not your strong point lol.


Comes with the territory of having faith lol.


What a coincidence that your choice of church was the same as your parents lol


Of all the faiths in all the world, you had to end up with the same as your folks.


Remarkable really, if you think about it. What were the odds of that?

Link to comment

You think that's humorous? Predictable, yes. Funny, not particularly.

It was the best I could do off the top of my head.


Damn sight better than your own "like a fast thing".

Imagination not your strong point lol.


Comes with the territory of having faith lol.

On the contrary, it is pure materialism which is the enemy of thought, not faith.

What a coincidence that your choice of church was the same as your parents lol

Only one of my parents, my Father isnt a religious man. So I could have just as easily been one of the "nones".


Rather pisses on your argument! ;)

Of all the faiths in all the world

Only one true faith, I must tell you about it sometime.


I actually briefly looked into Hinduism, on grounds it might provide me with a cheap excuse for smoking weed.


Turns out some of them think you can only be born a Hindu, not become one. Hinduism is most obviously a human construct then and is not "the faith".

What were the odds of that?

Actually pretty low, given how sh*te modern catechesis is, and how generally hostile to Catholicism the UK (esp Scotland) is.


A lesser man would have shat out, for a quiet life.


And my stance has the benefit of having lived essentially until my late 20s as a secular person, and so I can contrast both sides of the coin.


My sides better :)

Link to comment

im amazed that other countries havent taken netherlands lead on drugs (and prozzies); if only for the extra revenue.

I was talking to a Dutch couple recently and they said that Amsterdam is phasing out the window girls, (so that will be rocket-scientist stuck for a ride then).


There was talk of refusing tourists access to the coffee shops for a time as well, but fortunately they didnt take complete leave of their sense.


I am glad they are getting rid of the window girls, their presence is like an ugly scar on the Citys face.


They definitely need to keep the coffee shops open though.

Link to comment

The presence of Brand at a discussion or debate means it is a diddy-affair and not to be taken seriously. If hes on TV I just ignore the whole circus.


Kind of like how I am boycotting both the Telegraph and Spectator, since they started inviting Pippa Middleton to write columns for them. I mean, FFS.


The sorry end of serious journalism eh?

Link to comment

I read this regarding Brand's theories on addiction





But just found it too simplistic. To me, there just isn't such a thing as an 'addict' in the way he describes - and even if there were, people need to toughen up a bit imo. Don't people have any self control?


Anyway, in relation to addiction, my refutal of his stance is two fold. Firstly, some substances are addictive e.g. tobacco. Now people who are addicted to tobacco are addicted to its addictiveness imo, not that they are somehow born 'addicts'. Obviously, the same is even more so for opiates.


Secondly, when taking something like drink, people who have an issue with this most usually in my experience are using drink to mask other problems or have learnt to use it as a fix. The notion of some people being an 'addict' is again far too simplistic and is just a label. I'm not even sure what it would mean and wouldn't suffer any amount of scrutiny whatsoever.

Link to comment



very very good letter. Articulate and very to the point - should be read by everyone who watched Russell's gibbering Newsnight interview.


At times he can be great, but he sucked plums in that interview and came across as utterly clueless. I come across people in real life who hold such views as Brand presented to Paxman and its hard to know where to start. People don't know they're born tbh.

Link to comment

People don't know they're born tbh.


Putting aside the reasons why Brand polarises and why you despise him so, those being too obvious to generate interesting debate, this is good.


This statement is the crux of an attitude that lies dormant within you.


Uncle rocket is hopefully not wasting his time in helping you here. My wish is that you can listen, think properly and reflect.


Brand is an idealist and a romantic. These exist throughout history but they are always the minority, a very small minority.


If we were to debate why idealists and romantics were viewed with scepticism and were vilified, this would be an exercise in regression.


We know why they're not fancied by the majority and we know that the majority includes you. So let's move on.


Consider the nature of the romantic or the influence that the idealist may have on society. Pick any period or century you like.


If we were to accept your notion that we don't know how lucky we are, because it could be a whole lot worse, this is the antithesis of imagination.


Men who build things - and I'm sorry, it's rarely women - do so because of vision, a vision that often is shared by nobody else on the planet.


Worse, acceptance of authority because of a defunct imagination that considers only worse-case scenarios, is providing licence for regression.


It also defines an upbringing.


Parents who force social compliance upon their offspring and fail to ever question the status quo themselves, are dead already.


They might as well have strangled their offspring in infancy. It is only ever by challenging authority and accepted wisdom that man can grow.


Your detestation of Brand is one thing. Your continuing protestations are tantamount to heavily insulting your narrow-minded parents.

Link to comment

Paxman on Graham Norton just now was brilliant.


He dissed Cameron big time and he bigged up Russell Brand.


The world is changing.


Some of you fucks don't even know where it is right now.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...