Russell Brand

[Major Tom]

Someone needs to get some memes on the go to publicise some of the headline issues he raises. We need an Internet version of Katharine Hamnett's 80s t-shirts: "£80bn in austerity cuts, £81bn in bankers' bonuses".

 

 

But it's not that simple an issue, unfortunately. 

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

This is one thing I simply cannot grasp when it comes to the right wing, because it seems they do.

 

And I really resent them for it.

What gets me is low or medium earners who are right wing. Whilst I don't agree with them or their 'fuck everybody else' perspective, I can at least understand the motives of people voting in their own interests. I don't get those who voted Tory last time out who are on a relatively low wage. My ex-Brother in Law voted Tory last time out, he earns significantly less than me (though, to be fair, works much harder - such is the way of this country) but genuinely thought he'd be better off under the Tories. I think it's fair to say that he has changed his mind.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

But it's not that simple an issue, unfortunately.

This is the issue with many of us on the left. We've got this feeling we need to be detailed and explain and intellectually win the argument. We don't. We need to do all of those things between ourselves, then we need to take a leaf out of the right's book and put a message across simply and clearly. That's where the power of oratory and advertising comes in. You don't need to lie, just present the facts in a way that is easy to take in on Twitter or Facebook or 'round the water cooler.

 

There are really cool sites that do infographics and cool little movies a couple of minutes long. They're really powerful. What gets me about the left, especially the academic left, is that they're/we're so caught up in our own minds that we are left in the dirt. It's more evident in the US, but it's the same deal over here really.

[Major Tom]

What gets me is low or medium earners who are right wing. Whilst I don't agree with them or their 'fuck everybody else' perspective, I can at least understand the motives of people voting in their own interests. I don't get those who voted Tory last time out who are on a relatively low wage. My ex-Brother in Law voted Tory last time out, he earns significantly less than me (though, to be fair, works much harder - such is the way of this country) but genuinely thought he'd be better off under the Tories. I think it's fair to say that he has changed his mind.

 

I can understand it also, but I really resent it. And more than is healthy.

 

The low wage earners that I know who are Tories, vote such way because they are swayed by immigration and welfare scammers.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

The low wage earners that I know who are Tories, vote such way because they are swayed by immigration and welfare scammers.

The media is failing us badly on that front, just as they did over Iraq. It's a conspiracy of powerful and wealthy people to hold on to their wealth and power.

[Major Tom]

This is the issue with many of us on the left. We've got this feeling we need to be detailed and explain and intellectually win the argument. We don't. We need to do all of those things between ourselves, then we need to take a leaf out of the right's book and put a message across simply and clearly. That's where the power of oratory and advertising comes in. You don't need to lie, just present the facts in a way that is easy to take in on Twitter or Facebook or 'round the water cooler.

 

There are really cool sites that do infographics and cool little movies a couple of minutes long. They're really powerful. What gets me about the left, especially the academic left, is that they're/we're so caught up in our own minds that we are left in the dirt. It's more evident in the US, but it's the same deal over here really.

 

I definitely agree with you to a point. But I don't want the left to present an argument that can be dismantled in minutes. And I fear this whole banker's bonuses tack is just that.

 

Your last para is the way to go. Viral vids making quick and salient points. You're right; they are powerful.

[Major Tom]

The media is failing us badly on that front, just as they did over Iraq. It's a conspiracy of powerful and wealthy people to hold on to their wealth and power.

 

So is Labour. They are just so incompetent when it comes to getting their message across. Or challenging any of the Tories'.

 

But maybe that all comes back to the media, anyway.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

I definitely agree with you to a point. But I don't want the left to present an argument that can be dismantled in minutes. And I fear this whole banker's bonuses tack is just that.

I don't much agree. That's leftist thinking. We look at the approach from the right, snarf and write 2000 words dismantling their argument. Hurrah, we win right? No, the voter has moved on to things that actually matter to them. The normal electorate - and I do have a positive view of people in general - only puts so much into this type of thing. Sometimes they don't understand it, some do but don't have time for it, some (like my sister, for example) have hectic lives, kids coming at her from every angle, a business to run, etc. She's not stupid, at all, and she would be swayed by solid logic given in a rational way, that both informs and persuades. I don't think Paul is suggesting exactly that slogan, but giving an example of what we should be doing.

 

First thing we need to do is stop using exclusive language when trying to convince somebody. It doesn't resonate. A lot of people in politics are so used to using certain terms that they alienate people with complicated terms for simple matters. Then we really need to do what I suggested and you just agreed with:

 

For me, I genuinely believe the argument on 'our' side is much stronger than theirs. Even then, consider that those watching full debates

 

Your last para is the way to go. Viral vids making quick and salient points. You're right; they are powerful.

I think the days of shaking every hand and kissing every baby are out and those with a political agenda should get creative with the internet, with guerrilla marketing type promotions, etc. Connect with people that way. Screaming over each other's arguments at the dispatch box is important to just about nobody. Not anymore. A lot of people feel like they're treading water, just to keep their head over above it, so I don't think it'll take much to convince people.

[Major Tom]

I don't much agree. That's leftist thinking. We look at the approach from the right, snarf and write 2000 words dismantling their argument. Hurrah, we win right? No, the voter has moved on to things that actually matter to them. The normal electorate - and I do have a positive view of people in general - only puts so much into this type of thing. Sometimes they don't understand it, some do but don't have time for it, some (like my sister, for example) have hectic lives, kids coming at her from every angle, a business to run, etc. She's not stupid, at all, and she would be swayed by solid logic given in a rational way, that both informs and persuades. I don't think Paul is suggesting exactly that slogan, but giving an example of what we should be doing.

 

First thing we need to do is stop using exclusive language when trying to convince somebody. It doesn't resonate. A lot of people in politics are so used to using certain terms that they alienate people with complicated terms for simple matters. Then we really need to do what I suggested and you just agreed with:

 

 

I agree in general, yes, but just leave the banker's bonuses out of it as the left are on to a loser there.

 

Just concentrate solely on the standard of living under this gov't. And how bad it's become for a lot of people.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

I agree in general, yes, but just leave the banker's bonuses out of it as the left are on to a loser there.

 

Just concentrate solely on the standard of living under this gov't. And how bad it's become for a lot of people.

Not sure why it's a loser? It's just one aspect of the lopsided, unequal, unjust society. To see bankers getting six or seven figure bonuses, as they did, for doing a bad job and harming the economy, whilst being selfish cunts and paying less tax than their secretary's secretary is something that can resonate with people if the message is delivered in the right way.

[Paul]

But it's not that simple an issue, unfortunately. 

You're joking? Christ, I thought that would solve the problems of the whole country and possibly even lead to world peace. 'kinell.

[Paul]

This is the issue with many of us on the left. We've got this feeling we need to be detailed and explain and intellectually win the argument. We don't. We need to do all of those things between ourselves, then we need to take a leaf out of the right's book and put a message across simply and clearly. That's where the power of oratory and advertising comes in. You don't need to lie, just present the facts in a way that is easy to take in on Twitter or Facebook or 'round the water cooler.

 

There are really cool sites that do infographics and cool little movies a couple of minutes long. They're really powerful. What gets me about the left, especially the academic left, is that they're/we're so caught up in our own minds that we are left in the dirt. It's more evident in the US, but it's the same deal over here really.

Precisely. 

[Boss]

And, rather ironically, I'm being treated like - you believe - Brand is on this here forum.

 

People attacking the messenger because of the message.

 

People would rather attack Russell Brand for being Russell Brand because it's easy. It's much harder to de construct a message that preaches more taxation for corporations, legislation to stop corporations exploiting resources and cutting corners to deliver profit. Benefits reinstated for those with physical disabilities or mental disabilities due to the austerity measures taken out by the tories. Removing wage caps in the public sector, increasing the minimum wage, delivering pensions as promised, culpability for global corporations that destroy the planet (global warming, deforestation, carbon emissions, oil spills etc) promotion of greener sustainable energy sources, legislations against Monsanto and global frankenfood companies with their GMO products. No BNP/ UKIP style bans on immigration, curtailing banker bonuses and penalising those responsible for the global economic crash. Basically looking out for the people.

 

How are you really gonna argue against that? easier to play the man than the ball.

[Major Tom]

You're joking? Christ, I thought that would solve the problems of the whole country and possibly even lead to world peace. 'kinell.

 

My comment was entirely in context with what Brand was protesting about and what you were commenting on. Quite how you get the idea I was talking about world peace, I have no clue.

 

'kinell, Paul.

[Major Tom]

How are you really gonna argue against that?

 

I don't need to.

[Major Tom]

Not sure why it's a loser? It's just one aspect of the lopsided, unequal, unjust society. To see bankers getting six or seven figure bonuses, as they did, for doing a bad job and harming the economy, whilst being selfish cunts and paying less tax than their secretary's secretary is something that can resonate with people if the message is delivered in the right way.

 

Sure, but the reality can is that it was not all, hell not even anything approaching a majority, of bankers that caused this meltdown. It was a particular product traded by a particular group of people. And over a relatively short time frame.

 

Bankers, like footballers, are in industries that generate a lot of money. They are well within their rights to claim their share. I would. So would most others. The world in which we live dictates most people want to be paid their share of the pie. The fact that capitalism deems a banking or football to be worth more the a nursing or a teaching grates me greatly. But that's the reality.

 

The RBS angle is a no-goer either. The gov't could have let it go to the wall as the yanks did so with Lehmans. But look what happened there. Then people may claim we should cap the bonuses of RBS employees, which would obviously see the cream of the crop jump ship. Leaving a state owned concern unable to pull its weight in a competitive market. The people lose out in the end anyway as the gov't would have shares in a lemon. If the bank didn't ultimately fail.

 

That's the way I see it. You (or someone else) may well have a counter view and I am interested to hear it. Because if it's solid enough, it's the one the left should be running with.

[Stu Monty]

It was the banking system and culture that caused the problems Tom, not a few bad apples.

 

All the major banks, pretty much all colluding in criminal activity with no personal responsibility.

[Boss]

I don't need to.

 

I wasn't necessarily talking about you Tom, i was talking about the media. Your analogy got me to that point because you said "people attack the messenger because of the message" when in reality, as it relates to Russell Brand they "attack the message because of the messenger".

[Pidge]

I think the resale of debt obligations, while clearly the driving force behind the credit bubble, only really became an issue in the context of equity (in particular property) being pushed as a "wealth creator", rather than as a tool for wealth retention. That's not a situation that came about as a result of a subsection of anything and the whole of the financial services sector needs to recognise it's responsibility there. It hasn't and as a result we're seeing more and more property sold overseas as the bubble is artificially being pumped up again.

[Rocky Sullivan]

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/dec/18/us-investors-set-sell-new-era-estate-london-protests-westbrook

 

US investors who planned to evict dozens of families and more than double rents at the New Era estate in east London are on the verge of selling it to an affordable-housing provider after a vocal campaign against their ownership.

Westbrook Partners, an $11bn asset management firm with offices in Manhattan and Mayfair, is close to agreeing the transfer following negotiations with London’s deputy mayor, Richard Blakeway, and the elected mayor of Hackney, Jules Pipe, the Guardian has learned.

The new deal for the estate has been forged between the current owners and an unidentified social landlord already operating in London. The Guardian understands City Hall expects the sale to go through before Christmas.

It would represent a dramatic climbdown by Westbrook, which was set to make a significant profit by increasing rental yields before selling on the Hoxton estate, which is located just north of the City on the fringes of one of the most fashionable areas of the capital.

The New Era estate in Hoxton, east London. Photograph: Graham TurnerPhotograph: Graham Turner/Guardian

Families had been distraught after Westbrook’s takeover and feared being evicted before Christmas. Some had planned to barricade themselves in. They said Westbrook’s plan to increase rents from around £800 a month for a two-bedroom flat to more than £2,000 amounted to social cleansing.

The previous owners had kept rents at below-market values, allowing several generations of families to stay in their homes and maintaining a close-knit community. Some of the families said the increases would force them out of London, causing them to lose jobs and school places.

The terms of the draft deal are said to mean the homes will remain as private rented accommodation rather than becoming social housing, but the new owner is believed to have offered some guarantees about rent levels for at least a year. It will then look at how to set future rents, which is likely to mean increases.

Residents greeted the news on Thursday night with a mix of delight and caution. “This is brilliant news and a victory,” said Lindsay Garrett, chair of the New Era residents association. “If they are going to offer us affordable long-term rents we welcome it. But they have to put the deal on the table. We will continue to make sure the residents get the best deal we can. Anyone who comes into this estate and takes it on will do so with trepidation.”

The sale is likely to send shockwaves through the booming international investment market in central London homes. Investors from America, Malaysia, China and Singapore have bought housing sites in the capital amid forecasts by the agency Savills that prices will rise 25% over the next five years.

But Westbrook faced a storm of opposition. Senior Labour figures, including the shadow London minister, Sadiq Khan, joined the Conservative mayor, Boris Johnson, in demanding they rethink their plans. Three women who live on the 93-home estate mounted a vociferous and media-savvy campaign. They enlisted the support of comedian and inequality campaigner Russell Brand, who lives nearby, and organised hundreds of residents and other supporters to march on Westbrook’s UK offices in Berkeley Square last month to deliver a 300,000 signature petition to David Cameron, calling on him to save their homes.

Comedian Russell Brand joins residents and supporters of the estate as they deliver their petition to 10 Downing Street. Photograph: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

Sources involved in negotiations over the future of the estate said that, while the likely deal gave hope that residents would be able to look forward to more secure tenancies and lower rents than if Westbrook had continued with its plans, the terms of the new tenancies are not yet known.

Johnson gave a clear sign on Wednesday that a deal was imminent. During an event at City Hall he said: “We are very sure that there is a favourable and a fair outcome for the tenants who, I agree, had the shock of seeing their rents potentially go up, and what I want to achieve is the sale of that estate to a social landlord.”

Asked by Labour’s Tom Copley if the mayor was asking Westbrook to sell the estate, he said: “I think that would be not a bad outcome and obviously we are not there yet but think that would be a reasonable way forward, yes.”

 

New Era residents fight back against US owners of east London estate – video

At a public council meeting on Monday, Pipe reportedly told residents that he was hopeful of a sale.

Westbrook had showed earlier signs of responding to the pressure. On the last day of November the owners told the tenants there would be no changes to the tenancy agreements and no increase in rents during the first half of 2015.

The firm bought the estate in March with the Benyon Estate, the family property company of the Conservative Berkshire MP, Richard Benyon. The Benyon Estate had a stake of less than 10% and acted as managing agent, but it pulled out in November after residents protested outside the company’s offices. The firm said the residents, “made it clear that they wanted us to pull out, and this is what we have reluctantly decided to do”.

The Guardian approached Westbrook Partners for comment but they did not respond before publication.

[ZonkoVille77]

Good stuff. Pressure can work.

[Section_31]

Absolutely. Can't believe people actually moan about this shit.

[General Dryness]

Great stuff and a fantastic victory, but its also quite depressing that you know its only going to be relatively short term.

 

The cunts will move on to other money making opportunities, but the New Era will just be on the backburner. A big moneyspinner blocked by humanity? No chance. We can't have all these ordinary people taking up space that could be occupied by big spenders now can we? Lets just wait till something else is big news, then quitely nip in and assfuck them.

 

Hate to be a downer because it is such good news. But they'll be gone in the next 5-10 years. Guaranteed.

[Dr Nowt]

 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/dec/18/us-investors-set-sell-new-era-estate-london-protests-westbrook

 

US investors who planned to evict dozens of families and more than double rents at the New Era estate in east London are on the verge of selling it to an affordable-housing provider after a vocal campaign against their ownership.

Westbrook Partners, an $11bn asset management firm with offices in Manhattan and Mayfair, is close to agreeing the transfer following negotiations with London’s deputy mayor, Richard Blakeway, and the elected mayor of Hackney, Jules Pipe, the Guardian has learned.

The new deal for the estate has been forged between the current owners and an unidentified social landlord already operating in London. The Guardian understands City Hall expects the sale to go through before Christmas.

It would represent a dramatic climbdown by Westbrook, which was set to make a significant profit by increasing rental yields before selling on the Hoxton estate, which is located just north of the City on the fringes of one of the most fashionable areas of the capital.

The New Era estate in Hoxton, east London. Photograph: Graham TurnerPhotograph: Graham Turner/Guardian

Families had been distraught after Westbrook’s takeover and feared being evicted before Christmas. Some had planned to barricade themselves in. They said Westbrook’s plan to increase rents from around £800 a month for a two-bedroom flat to more than £2,000 amounted to social cleansing.

The previous owners had kept rents at below-market values, allowing several generations of families to stay in their homes and maintaining a close-knit community. Some of the families said the increases would force them out of London, causing them to lose jobs and school places.

The terms of the draft deal are said to mean the homes will remain as private rented accommodation rather than becoming social housing, but the new owner is believed to have offered some guarantees about rent levels for at least a year. It will then look at how to set future rents, which is likely to mean increases.

Residents greeted the news on Thursday night with a mix of delight and caution. “This is brilliant news and a victory,” said Lindsay Garrett, chair of the New Era residents association. “If they are going to offer us affordable long-term rents we welcome it. But they have to put the deal on the table. We will continue to make sure the residents get the best deal we can. Anyone who comes into this estate and takes it on will do so with trepidation.”

The sale is likely to send shockwaves through the booming international investment market in central London homes. Investors from America, Malaysia, China and Singapore have bought housing sites in the capital amid forecasts by the agency Savills that prices will rise 25% over the next five years.

But Westbrook faced a storm of opposition. Senior Labour figures, including the shadow London minister, Sadiq Khan, joined the Conservative mayor, Boris Johnson, in demanding they rethink their plans. Three women who live on the 93-home estate mounted a vociferous and media-savvy campaign. They enlisted the support of comedian and inequality campaigner Russell Brand, who lives nearby, and organised hundreds of residents and other supporters to march on Westbrook’s UK offices in Berkeley Square last month to deliver a 300,000 signature petition to David Cameron, calling on him to save their homes.

Comedian Russell Brand joins residents and supporters of the estate as they deliver their petition to 10 Downing Street. Photograph: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

Sources involved in negotiations over the future of the estate said that, while the likely deal gave hope that residents would be able to look forward to more secure tenancies and lower rents than if Westbrook had continued with its plans, the terms of the new tenancies are not yet known.

Johnson gave a clear sign on Wednesday that a deal was imminent. During an event at City Hall he said: “We are very sure that there is a favourable and a fair outcome for the tenants who, I agree, had the shock of seeing their rents potentially go up, and what I want to achieve is the sale of that estate to a social landlord.”

Asked by Labour’s Tom Copley if the mayor was asking Westbrook to sell the estate, he said: “I think that would be not a bad outcome and obviously we are not there yet but think that would be a reasonable way forward, yes.”

 

New Era residents fight back against US owners of east London estate – video

At a public council meeting on Monday, Pipe reportedly told residents that he was hopeful of a sale.

Westbrook had showed earlier signs of responding to the pressure. On the last day of November the owners told the tenants there would be no changes to the tenancy agreements and no increase in rents during the first half of 2015.

The firm bought the estate in March with the Benyon Estate, the family property company of the Conservative Berkshire MP, Richard Benyon. The Benyon Estate had a stake of less than 10% and acted as managing agent, but it pulled out in November after residents protested outside the company’s offices. The firm said the residents, “made it clear that they wanted us to pull out, and this is what we have reluctantly decided to do”.

The Guardian approached Westbrook Partners for comment but they did not respond before publication.

 

"I know I said I could get anything up there, but that really burns.  Three bungalows, max.  And a shed.  And a bin store."

 

[Major Tom]

Absolutely. Can't believe people actually moan about this shit.

I'd say the only people who will moan about this shit will be the Westbrook folk.