I find that Brand just highlights things that are wrong in society, without suggesting viable alternatives - which anyone is capable of. His politics are simply 'the rich are morally bankrupt, the poor deserve more and the middle should be doing something.'
The difference is that he wraps it in superfluous rhetoric in order to hoodwink the intended victim into an ethereal plane wherein the text becomes conflated to that of an everyman champion, assuring the proletariat that although he liases with the bourgeois - he surely is one of them. And then comes the mixed metaphor scattered throughout, like a shaving of truffle on the risotto of a gluttonous financial worker, only to have the extensive tedious journey curtailed with a single idea. The only idea. So you come away with it. And that one nugget is so vague, and reactionary that it inspires nothing but contempt towards the rule makers, without a thought for how the rules should be.
Having said that, I think he was very funny in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and seems like a nice enough person in general.
(oh, and the favouring thing is very hard to measure from a KPI perspective in terms of qualitative gain, especially over click through - but I was half playing up to the jargon nonsense peddling stereotype...which I seem to have continued in this sentence!)
chrismoyles.net
