He is right on about the corporation thought. I even think the socialists, who talk against the corporation, wouldn't want a revolution to end them.
I don't think the labels of old have anything to do with the blatant truth that politicians are literally employees of big corporations and do their bidding, especially interested in them only, against the rest of The People. For a looong time. The worst offenders are the banks and the weapons companies who start wars and all sorts of horrors for money, but only because some greedy, deceptive politician enables it all
A Tory friend shared this on Facebook (yes, yes, I know) yesterday: Open Letter to Russell Brand. Sure enough, the Torys came together and attempted to critique it themselves by way of ad hominem attacks against Brand and a hell of a lot of back patting. I replied: "In response to Deansway's article. First, he starts out by calling Brand a hypocrite. "A different type of privileged, rich person than yourself of course" who has "amassed... wealth by hosting the MTV awards, shilling Hewlett Packard computers and appearing in films like the remake of Arthur". Does Bill Gates get the same criticism? "How dare you try and help the poor, Billy, you put 'em there in the first place". He dismisses Brand's suggestion for a revolution as naive. Isn't it interesting how we are now talking about it? Isn't that how the Occupy Movement, and any other movement or revolution began? Grassroots democracy is what got Cathy McGowen the Indi seat at the last Federal election, dethroning the complacant Sophie Mirabella. Somebody has to have the balls to say what is not being said. And in this case, amongst others who said it too, we are fortunate enough to have a 'hypocritical' celebrity say it so articulately - which has resulted in huge media coverage. Slovenian philosophy and cultural critic, Slavoj Žižek, is suspicious of those that obsess over an ideological dichotomy. He proposes the "Bartleby Lesson". Bartleby often answered "I would prefer not to…" Brand, here, is responding by saying I would prefer not to play the existing game. Žižek goes on: "There is something fundamentally wrong with the system and the existing forms of institutionalized democracy [when they] are not strong enough to deal with problems. Beyond this, they don't have an answer and neither do I. For me, Occupy Wall Street is just a signal. It's like clearing the table. Time to start thinking." Brand may not have an answer himself but he proposes we clear the table and start thinking. Let's stop feeling trapped by the corrupt dichotomy. And then Deansway starts prattling on about his penis or something…"
Depends on the corporation. EA or Sasaki Crystal, no. Mosnanto, yes. Corporations, since they think they are "individuals" in the eyes of the law, should be brought up on charges that includes every f'n shareholder accountable.