Russel Brand in the New Statesman

Ah! Sunday mornings with the newspapers.

A typically bourgeois middle class occupation. 

My email account this morning had a missive from Twitter telling me that Dara O'Briain, Sir Alan Sugar and Eddie Izzard had personally tweeted me. They had not obviously. I just follow them but as I don't use Twitter (It is a technology issue - I just don't understand how to use it on my mobile). These all get saved up for me and then I get insistent e mails from my account.

Amongst Sir Alan Sugar advising me of all the pointless products he is trying to sell and Eddie Izzard changing the world one baby at a time, there was a re tweet from Dara O'Briain about a reply from one comedic talent to another. This centered on Russell Brand doing a piece for The New Statesman

Russell Brand

(Russell Brand on revolution) in which he espouses his distaste for the current political system. The Dara O'Briain message was to direct me to a reply by Robert Webb (Choosing to vote is the most British kind of Revolution)

I read it all the wrong way round of course. I read Robert Webb's article and then, intrigued read Russel Brand's. Or most of it. It was quite long and I did lose interest a bit half way through and skipped to his conclusion. 

I think that you should read both articles, and in the right order. I admire Russel Brand because he is funny, he is very

Robert Webb

articulate and becoming an ex junkie demonstrates enormous strength of character. He is worth listening to if nothing else. The rejoining article by Robert Webb is, of course, a little more conservative but, in my opinion correct. 

I studied History under the old 'O' level system. From the end of the Roman Empire to the start of the Tudor's if you must know. As my teacher said, the beauty of this period is that there is virtually no written record of what actually happened. Just remember the place and the date it happened and you have 60% of you marks (Synod of Whitby 664 A.D. - grade B).

One of the quotes she gave to us that stuck in my memory is that "Revolutions only change the head of state". If you look back on most of the "revolutions" in recent European history you will see a despotic head of state deposed to be replaced by an equally despotic and severe form of government.

The English civil war resulted in such repression that, when Oliver Cromwell died, the Government rushed off and immediately reinstated the Monarchy. The French revolution was bitter and repressive with be headings galore. Next up are the Russians and I think we are well aware of what happened there. Cuba too! Lets not forget what happened in Chile. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

So that is my short submission on the topic. Vote. If the current political system does not include you, vote for the Monster Raving Loony  Party. There could be no greater slap in the face for mainstream politics than voting for a man in fancy dress.