{"id":75271,"date":"2013-10-25T12:51:41","date_gmt":"2013-10-25T12:51:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2013\/10\/25\/russell-brand-fabulous-antisysteme\/"},"modified":"2013-10-25T12:51:41","modified_gmt":"2013-10-25T12:51:41","slug":"russell-brand-fabulous-antisysteme","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2013\/10\/25\/russell-brand-fabulous-antisysteme\/","title":{"rendered":"Russell Brand, fabulous<\/em> antiSyst\u00e8me"},"content":{"rendered":"

Russell Brand, fabulous<\/em> antiSyst\u00e8me<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

\tCom\u00e9dien britannique de th\u00e9\u00e2tre, de cin\u00e9ma et de t\u00e9l\u00e9vision, auteur, \u00e0 ses heures pr\u00e9sentateur t\u00e9l\u00e9 et commentateur, activiste et pol\u00e9miste politique de premi\u00e8re dimension, provocateur habile \u00e0 manier le syst\u00e8me de la communication, cheveux longs et \u00e9loquence remarquable, en plus d’une culture politique de premi\u00e8re dimension, voil\u00e0 donc Russell Brand<\/a>, qui passait \u00e0 l’\u00e9mission \u00e0 l’\u00e9mission Newsnight<\/em> de la BBC de jeudi soir (voir le 25 octobre 2013<\/a>). L’occasion de cette pr\u00e9sence \u00e0 la BBC en \u00e9tait que Brand a \u00e9t\u00e9 choisi comme r\u00e9dacteur en chef invit\u00e9 pour un num\u00e9ro du New Statesman<\/em>. Le pr\u00e9sentateur de Newsnight<\/em>, Jeremy Paxman, a un style agressif et accusateur, surtout pour ceux qui mettent en cause le Syst\u00e8me. Brand est une sorte d’arch\u00e9type de l’antiSyst\u00e8me dans le milieu du showbiz<\/em>, pourtant formidablement infiltr\u00e9 par le Syst\u00e8me et en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral align\u00e9 sur lui.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLa vid\u00e9o de la prestation de Brand a eu et a tr\u00e8s grand succ\u00e8s sur l’internet, l’acteur britannique \u00e9tant particuli\u00e8rement \u00e0 l’aise dans cette sorte de joute oratoire. Le rapport que Russia Today<\/em> en fait, ce 25 octobre 2013<\/a> (voir ci-dessous) met en \u00e9vidence ces caract\u00e8res de l’\u00e9mission et les qualit\u00e9s de Brand dans ces circonstances o\u00f9 les imp\u00e9ratifs du syst\u00e8me de la communication jouent \u00e0 plein. Brand est une des illustrations que ce m\u00eame monde du showbiz<\/em> comprend, dans sa branche anglo-saxonne (USA et UK), beaucoup plus de brillantes individualit\u00e9s antiSyst\u00e8me que dans sa branche fran\u00e7aise qui semble anesth\u00e9si\u00e9e et phagocyt\u00e9e dans un extraordinaire conformisme d’alignement-Syst\u00e8me, \u00e0 l’image des directions politiques de l’\u00e9poque Sarkhollande. Ce point doit \u00eatre soulign\u00e9, notamment pour illustrer les situations d’inversion de notre \u00e9poque, dans la mesure o\u00f9 le cin\u00e9ma fran\u00e7ais et les activit\u00e9s showbiz<\/em> associ\u00e9es ont souvent \u00e9t\u00e9 pr\u00e9sent\u00e9es comme r\u00e9ticentes sinon antagonistes des normes-Syst\u00e8me d\u00e9velopp\u00e9es dans les pays anglo-saxons (hollywoodisme notamment). Cette m\u00eame inversion joue du c\u00f4t\u00e9 anglo-saxons, avec des individualit\u00e9s type-Brand, mais aussi un cin\u00e9ma ind\u00e9pendant \u00e0 grande diffusion, clairement antiSyst\u00e8me, qui n’a absolument aucun \u00e9quivalent dans l’actuel cin\u00e9ma fran\u00e7ais.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’\u00e9mission de Paxman a notamment \u00e9t\u00e9 marqu\u00e9e par des attaques du pr\u00e9sentateur contre Brand, apr\u00e8s que celui-ci ait d\u00e9clar\u00e9, en r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 une question, qu’il ne votait pas… \u00abI don’t get my authority from this preexisting paradigm which is quite narrow and only serves a few people, Brand said. I look elsewhere for alternatives that might be of service to humanity.<\/em>\u00bb Les remarques de Brand sur ce que nous nommons le syst\u00e8me de la communication sont particuli\u00e8rement \u00e9clairantes.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Paxman spent more than half of the ten minute interview pushing Brand to explain why he refused vote, challenging the comedian to expand on his mentality even as Brand overwhelmed Paxman with fresh ideas. I am not not voting out of apathy, Brand said. I am not voting out of absolute indifference and weariness and exhaustion from the lies, treachery and deceit of the political class that has been going on for generationsWhy pretend? Why be complicit in this ridiculous illusion?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbFrustrated by his own failure to trip Brand, Paxman at one point calls the comedian a very trivial man and implies that the revolution Brand is advocating cannot be taken seriously. I think what it won’t be like is a huge disparity between rich and poor, where 300 Americans have the same amount of wealth as their 85 million poorest Americans, where there is an exploited underserved underclass being continually ignored, where welfare is slashed while [PM] Cameron and [Chancellor] Osborne go to court to continue the right of bankers receiving bonuses, Brand said.<\/em> […]<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb… When asked to guest edit the most recent issue of The New Statesman, Brand chose to structure the stories around the theme of revolution. This movement is already occurring, it’s happening everywhere, he goes on. We’re in a time when communication is instantaneous and there are communities all over the world. The Occupy movement made a difference even if in that it only introduced into the popular public lexicon the idea of the 1 percent versus the 99 percent. People for the first time in a generation are aware of massive corporate and economic exploitation. These things are not nonsense and these are subjects that are not being addressed.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbFor all of his bluster Paxman is, at times, visibly amused with Brand. He voices his agreement more than once and is speechless when the comedian references Paxman’s appearance on the British show Who Do You Think You Are? The program explores celebs’ family histories and Paxman’s episode turned emotional when he visited the tenement where his great-grandmother was forced to raise her family. I remember seeing you on that program where you look at your ancestors and you saw the way your grandmother had to brass herself or get f**ked over by the aristocrats that ran her gaff and you cried because you knew that it was unfair, that it was unjust. And that was what a century ago? That’s happening now.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’action de Brand est-elle l\u00e9gitime ? Un acteur a-t-il le droit de faire savoir ses positions politiques au nom d’une c\u00e9l\u00e9brit\u00e9 qui n’est pas politique ? (Ce genre de question n’est gu\u00e8re soulev\u00e9e pour ceux de showbiz<\/em> qui r\u00e9citent leur cat\u00e9chisme-Syst\u00e8me au Grand Journal<\/em> ou n’importe o\u00f9 ailleurs.) R\u00e9ponse impeccablement antiSyst\u00e8me de Brand, du type ce droit, je le prends : \u00abIf we can engage that feeling and change things, why wouldn’t we? Brand went on. Why is that naive? Why is that not my right because I’m an actor’? I’ve taken the right. I don’t need the right from you. I don’t need the right from anybody. I’m taking it.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n

dedefensa.org<\/em><\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Russell Brand, fabulous antiSyst\u00e8me Com\u00e9dien britannique de th\u00e9\u00e2tre, de cin\u00e9ma et de t\u00e9l\u00e9vision, auteur, \u00e0 ses heures pr\u00e9sentateur t\u00e9l\u00e9 et commentateur, activiste et pol\u00e9miste politique de premi\u00e8re dimension, provocateur habile \u00e0 manier le syst\u00e8me de la communication, cheveux longs et \u00e9loquence remarquable, en plus d’une culture politique de premi\u00e8re dimension, voil\u00e0 donc Russell Brand, qui… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[4646,3882,15371,3015,9054,12196],"class_list":["post-75271","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ouverture-libre","tag-antisysteme","tag-bbc","tag-brand","tag-communication","tag-inversion","tag-showbiz"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75271","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=75271"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75271\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=75271"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=75271"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=75271"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}