Charting Russell Brand’s Decline into Reactionary Ideological Entrepreneurialism

The next speaker in this AoIR 2024 conference session is Rob Topinka, whose focus is on conspiracy theories that are promoted by reactionary ideological entrepreneurs like Russell Brand. Their rhetoric doesn’t need to make any positive propositions: all they need to do is point out things that (in their view) have ‘gone too far’, in in doing so position themselves as bold new heroes who speak for ‘the people’; this can be understood as a new and reactionary form of counter-culture.

People like Brand have gradually moved further into this milieu, and are spouting increasingly far-right rhetoric; they also position their followers and subscribers as co-participants in a journey of discovery towards greater awareness of global conspiracies. Brand moved there from more general lifestyle and health advice, and did so like many others via an engagement with COVID-19 conspiracy theories.

This is also promoted by audience responses and engagement: followers were discussing COVID-19 scepticism before Brand did, and as he picked up on these themes his engagement numbers also grew. Conversely, conversations in YouTube comments declined – there were more single-message comments commending Brand for his views, and fewer multi-turn discussions in the comments.

Some such comments were also self-aware of the status of Brand’s claims as conspiracy theories, but expressed a strong belief in the future verification of these claims; conspiracies thereby become part of a practical network for constructing beliefs, and communities of believers. Video takedowns and other actions and accusations against Brand only further enhanced believers’ affective connection to Brand and his messages. The paranoid mode always finds more cause for paranoia, and refuses any surprise; attacks by others are seen as badges of honour.

This paranoia can produce collective solidarity amongst majoritarian communities; conspiracy becomes an ontological anchor for them. Critiques and dismissals of their views will not change them, and we must better understand how their self-reflexivity works if we are interested in rolling back the dangerous consequences of their beliefs.