Why do people credit him with "taking down" or "challenging"...

Try watching his videos, then you wont have to ask. Dont worry. He wont make a pound from it now.

An internet twist on the age-old phenomenon of the personality cult. A lot of these grifters tap into a niche American market that grew up in churches listening to preachers and/or around that kind of faith-based environment. They're not a million miles removed from televangelists.

He's got 6.6 million subscribers on youtube alone and really doesn't describe himself as either right wing or left wing but trusts neither and asks the questions that should be asked but few do.

Anyone who doesn't listen to him will discount him as the promiscuous junkie that he use to be. He's not that. But he does have influence now and he does examine things that are risky to examine.

He reaches an audience that others cannot, one that includes the left and the right. That receptive audience might not have been as receptive to someone that identified themselves via political lines, yet he doesn't scare away conservatives or as many libs as others might. This creates a hub of like-minded Americans, bolstering their shared opinions and organizing them to a degree if only by their recognition that those opinions are indeed shared and agreed upon by a mainstream fellow like Russell. He takes on the difficult topics du jour, prefers to deliver the facts, especially those that MSM skips over, and allows the viewers to make their own minds up. So he takes few hard lines, attracts folk across political lines and respects the decisions of his viewers- this is unheard of in modern politics and a danger to the powers that be, and they know it.

Challenging - sure
Taking down?
They are still out there in full force - nobody went to prison - most peeps are still wearing their ukraine flag pins like good little sheep
Who is saying he's taken down anyone though?

i saw a clip of him talkign to Bill Maher. He was spouting some claimed "Facts" about big pharma, some of which I knew, and some that I have not heard elsewhere, that IF true, would be relevant and cast big pharma in a bad light.


He also had a CONCLUSION, that I assume was his personal thinking, that seemed... reasonable and relvant.


FYI.

Because they are morons .

He taps into their fears and predjudices and self pity by enabling and confirming barmy notions of the illuminati , or big pharma , or robotic birds

Unsurprisingly spreading that net has caught a lot of right wingers recently , so they are his new zombie army of unthinking blindly loyal apologists

I don't know what Russell Brand talks about or what his views are - and one doesn't care.

I hope others aren't formulating their views because of something Russell Brand said.

I read somewhere he was being hassled because of his political views.

Fine - but is anyone out there seriously basing what they think on Russell Brand?

If so, please, use your own brains, your own thoughts.