In recent news, actor and comedian Russell Brand has found himself at the center of controversy. Using his platform to lift up independent-minded individuals like US presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Brand has questioned the involvement of the US and NATO in the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, as well as the mainstream media narrative on Covid-19. However, his outspoken views have not been well-received by establishment neoliberals, who have launched a coordinated attack against him, resulting in his facing cancellation, MeToo style.
Accusations of rape and abuse have been leveled against Brand by several women, leading to significant consequences for his career. He has lost his YouTube ad revenue, had his live shows canceled, been dropped by his publisher, and had shows featuring him removed from the BBC’s video-on-demand service, among other things. While the MeToo movement initially aimed to empower women to speak out about sexual abuse, it quickly became co-opted by political agendas, particularly by Democrats who used it as a weapon to silence those who disagreed with the establishment narrative. The movement has since faded into obscurity, but its return in the form of canceling Brand appears both tiresome and disingenuous.
This issue hits close to home for me, as I have personally experienced the repercussions of speaking out against a powerful Democrat. I was raped by a Democrat in my workplace, who is now the president of the United States. Instead of an investigation into Joe Biden’s actions, I faced a coordinated attack across social and establishment media that lasted for years, destroying my personal and professional life. The MeToo movement was nowhere to be found because the founder of Time’s Up, a primary organization supporting the movement, was on Biden’s payroll. The truth was never given a fair chance. Even when I had the opportunity to testify before Congress, the DNC machine worked relentlessly against me, forcing me to seek asylum in another country to avoid prosecution or violence. I understand all too well what it’s like to have the narrative engineered for one’s complete destruction, and now Russell Brand does too.
The facts surrounding the allegations against Brand are unclear, with many accusers remaining anonymous. No criminal charges, investigations, or civil cases have been filed to date. The allegations were brought to light by Channel 4 Dispatches in a program called ‘Russell Brand: In Plain Sight’ and The Times, but they have yet to be substantiated. Cases of sexual misconduct, particularly those involving high-profile individuals, always attract attention. However, discussing sexual assault and rape is difficult due to the power dynamics at play and the complexities of consent. Politically, rape has become a highly divisive issue, often manipulated by Democrats to further their own agenda. When a woman comes forward with allegations, her reputation is often attacked, making it easy to dismiss politically inconvenient accusers and silence them. The accusations then become a tool to deplatform or discredit chosen targets.
While some individuals on social media have shown support for Brand, including figures like Elon Musk, Tucker Carlson, and Andrew Tate, it is unlikely to change the minds of those who already view Brand as controversial due to his anti-establishment views. If Brand is innocent, he will face an uphill battle to prove it, both in a court of law and in the court of public opinion. In the latter case, it may be difficult for his image to fully recover.
It is important to ask questions about the timing of these allegations against Brand, as they date back several years but only came to light after he began speaking out against the establishment narrative on Ukraine. Additionally, it is worth considering how the same neoliberals that Brand has criticized are now leading the charge against him.
Ultimately, if crimes were committed, they should be thoroughly investigated and brought before a court. However, the mainstream media, particularly media with clear political biases, is not the appropriate venue for conducting trials. Trial by media is never accurate and only serves to harm the pursuit of truth.
The views expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of RT.