Russell Brand “Resigns” from Politics following General Election Result


He has been the subject of mockery recently with his “Don’t Vote” persona before drifting between endorsing various parties before the election, but funny man Russell Brand has now announced that he has “quit politics”, though many probably think that he never really started politics in the first place.

Thinking he could influence the political behaviour of voters after initially being a celebrity figure head of voter apathy, the author of the 2014 book “Revolution” provided his own thoughts and criticisms of politics during the General Election campaign, and later decided to back the Green Party. He then interviewed Ed Miliband before backing him and the Labour Party last minute, to which many criticised him for being hypocritical. He said,

“I was feeling the same things they feel. It wasn’t as if I was the leader of the ‘don’t vote’ party, I was just another member of it. It’s not like I had any authority or power.”


However his video backing Ed Miliband was not exactly helpful to everyone, as it came out the day after voter registration closed having previously told people not to vote.

He has been scorned by young people and come under fire from social media users after he tried and failed to get people to vote Labour following his dramatic U-turn on not voting. Many felt, contrary to his opinion, he had in fact influenced the outcome of the election, but in a ultimately negative way and had played a part in Labour’s loss and the Conservative’s victory.

Critics were quick to point out low 46% youth turn out, laying the at least some of the blame on him; “It’s because of this telling people not to vote that the Tories got back into power.”

During his latest YouTube “Trews News” video, he gave his verdict on the news that David Cameron and the Conservatives would have a majority government;

“My only regret is that I thought I could be involved. People were telling me I could make a difference; even it was only a small thing. When we interviewed Miliband I thought we could alter the outcome of the election, now I think we can’t influence the outcome of an election.”

He claims there will be no shortage of “meanness” in the next five years, providing the disabled, immigrants and the poor as examples and claiming that “all we’ve got left is to be compassionate to one another and get involved in causes we care about.” He then had the audacity to say that as a wealthy person in the UK, the election result is not too bad for him personally. Well good for you, Russell.

Russell Brand cannot complain about the government we now have – he played his part, in his own bizarre way – in helping the Conservatives into government. And now he is backtracking and claiming he is just a comedian and “I’m just a bloke with a laptop and a bit of mouth.” Well his mouth probably did make a difference – he made politics seem even more unappealing to young people because of his reputation for being somewhat of a fool. His attempt at getting down with the kids has failed, and those he did influence went along with him and decided not to vote, when their votes could have made all the difference.



News Editor 2015/16. Philosophy and Politics student. Opinionated activist with a questionable sense of humour. Left Wing, Critique of the Status Quo and diplomatic debater who loves writing for you!

Discussion2 Comments

  1. avatar

    I’m afraid I disagree with the entirety of this post. Russell Brand has not said that he will quit or that he has resigned, he has said that he will focus more attention on community activities and grass-roots campaigning. I feel that you’ve completely mischaracterized him and the video that he posted. Russell Brand has been excellent for engaging the British youth in politics, rather the opposite of what he’s been portrayed as doing. If the youth were disengaged with politics, why would they bother watching his videos? And why would his channel have over a million subscribers? He may have initially said that he didn’t believe that we should vote because there was no one to vote for but ultimately he did say that we should vote and that it would make a difference. I don’t understand why people are angry at him for eventually doing what everyone’s wanted him to say for so long. If it’s because he’s changed his opinion then that’s an absurd thing to be angry about, people have different experiences in their life that change their opinions, that’s the whole point. He is by far the most engaging news source that I know of and I think British politics is all the better for it. He’s brought an element of satire to political coverage that has been desperately lacking for a long time. Have I Got News for You is the only alternative and even that humour doesn’t really strike a chord with the youth. Yes Russell Brand is a maverick, and he may be rich but why does that matter? That’s a completely ad hominem argument, his points are still relevant. What would you rather, a rich person who doesn’t get young people engaged and who doesn’t do anything but maintain the status quo? I personally think it was brave of him for changing his mind on an issue that he is probably most known for, especially with the media coverage that he received when he supposedly messes up. If you’re looking to blame Russell Brand for the Conservative victory, then I’m afraid you’re looking in the complete wrong direction.

  2. avatar

    Thank you for your comment, I apologise for such a late reply.

    To some extent, I don’t disagree with you. However I do think he did more harm than good in a lot of ways. I’m not condemning him about changing his mind on who to vote for, but a lot of young people listened to him and decided not to vote because he said so. And by the time he advocated voting, it was too late for people to register and people were rightly annoyed.

Leave A Reply