Naivety exemplified

RUSSEL BRAND TOLD HIS followers not to vote; but after a meeting with Ed Milliband, he changed his mind - suddenly it became cool to vote as long as you voted for Labour, was now his message.

                

                Ed thought he had played a master stroke that had wrong footed his opponents during the election campaign. Our prime minister-in-waiting believed he had uncovered a zeitgeist missed by the other parties and the media locked up in London. Brand's views, so both Milliband and Brand believed, could deliver millions of extra votes to Labour among the youth that Brand appealed to. If true, labour would be elected with a majority, when all the polls were showing that there was to be another coalition in the making with either himself or Cameron at its head – this 'alliance' with Brand could give Ed (or so he wanted to believe) the majority government that eventually went, in the end, to Cameron.

                

                 Brand, after the election result, is now toxic among his youthful disciples. He was last seen running like a thief in the night from the austerity gathering in London over the weekend: he had a car waiting for him, and he made his getaway. He attended the event to deliver a speech, which he did. There are photographs a plenty of this later day Che Guevara posing on the stage, and believing his reception would reflect the idolatry he feels his supporters have shown to him.

                 

                  The great man was contrite, if not exactly humble (that would be a step too far, even if he was capable of such humility); he blamed himself for the Cameron victory; which was the only part of his speech his assembled misfits agreed with. He, no doubt, hoped his act of contrition would redeem himself with his audience – happily for the nation it did no such thing. They were mad as hell with him and they freely displayed it in the most appalling language. However it fell short of a public lynching, but the animosity sent in his direction; and the foulness of the views expressed and directed to our later-day Che Guevara, sent him scurrying from the event after his contribution was so ill-received.

BRAND, IN THIS YEAR of the 200^th anniversary of the Battle of Waterloo certainly met his own over the weekend. He had been ordered by his flock to fuck off and go back to Milliband: he was described as a "turncoat" in the same sentence that he was told to fuck off to Milliband.

                

                One woman screamed;"'Fuck you Russell. I hate you. He should not be on the stage here. Ask how much he has been paid to be here. You have no place here, you’re disgusting'. Another yelled 'You’re a turncoat, Brand. Sell me a book on revolution and then tell us to vote Labour. Fuck off back to Miliband you twat'. Not exactly a lynching, but for someone like Brand it would have appeared as such.

                

                 I wonder what he is doing now after such a reception: will it be coke or pot? I doubt it; although the image he seeks to present to the nation's youth would encompass a press innuendo surrounding such practices. But Russell has too much respect for the cash cow known as Hollywood to indulge him, accept by inference, in order to keep his youthful supporters on board.

                

                 Russell Brand and his briefly one time political ally Ed Milliband would thoroughly deserve the ignominy of (of for instance) appearing on Big Brother at some time in the future, once they fade from the celebrity limelight. But while Ed will eventually be delivered up to the House of Lords (which of course as a Marxist, his father would have also done had he been offered it); Brand will continue to purvey his own unique brand (sic) of humour to those lefties that forgave him.

RUSSELL BRAND was a commercial brand, a brand that however, like the mayfly, commands only a short life span. He remains inarticulate to most of the country. But he gathered his appeal among the trendy youth; and even at that, not the very intelligent ones. He may have engaged a few students studying social science and media studies in his comic opera, but he became overwhelmed by the belief that he had orchestrated a following that was always delusionary.  

                

                 Both Brand and Milliband believed themselves before the election, to be the foremost individuals who would bring about the end of austerity. In his 'secret' meeting with Brand, Milliband assured (as he did the unions that provided the pivotal role in his election to the leadership of the Labour Party) that he would support an end to austerity by introducing further increase in taxation and borrowing to protect the welfare state; the imprint of failed Labour governments since the 1950s.

BRAND understands little about politics or economics and is easily persuaded by someone whose lineage has overindulged themselves in the subject. Brand was any easy target for Ed Milliband; Ed was use to promising the earth to those, like the unions, who he needed to advance his career. But on this vital occasion Milliband failed.

                

                Milliband proved his naivety, and his unsuitability for high office, by even approaching Brand for his support. There were many heads swaying from side to side in disbelief among his party workers and his parliamentary colleagues, at his night time rendezvous with the comic book revolutionary.

               

                I suppose Brand should be sympathised with; but after the ghastly way he used his 'comedic talent' to humiliate Andrew Sachs, he deserves little sympathy from anyone; but he will get it from what is left of his coterie of supporters and hangers-on.

               

                If he does remove himself from public life (which his ego will of course prevent) he will be able to retire as a multimillionaire like the many landlords he fought against.  As far as his wealth is concerned; he was paid the market price for whatever it was he did, and so deserves it – although the imbeciles, who once believed in him and attended the Great March for Austerity in Parliament Square, will beg to differ. They tolerated his wealth, for as long as they felt he was on their side – which is all part and parcel of the Left's hypocrisy.

                

                But once Ed attended Russell's nocturnal court and word got out that Brand had anointed Ed with his blessing – then the game was up for both of them; and good riddance to both of them. Neither had anything to contribute to nation in the 21^st century – politically they were both hidebound by the past, where class envy drove politics and very nearly the country to destruction.