what monkeys and the queen taught me about inequality _ culture _ the guardian

8/10/2019 What Monkeys and the Queen Taught Me About Inequality _ Culture _ the Guardian

1/8

Search

What monkeys and the Queen taught meabout inequalityWe humans have an inherent sense of fairness.

Deep down, we dont like inequality. In a second

extract from his new book, Russell Brand goes

in search of ways to build a more just world

Russell Brand speaks: I want to address the

alienation and despair

Read the first extract from Russell Brands new

book Revolution

Russell Brand

The Guardian, Sunday 12 October 2014

Russell Brand at a G20 protest in London. Photograph: Geoff Caddick/AFP/Getty Images

When travelling in impoverished regions in galling luxury, as I have done, you have to

undergo some high-wire ethical arithmetic to legitimise your position. If you cant
http://www.theguardian.com/profile/russellbrandhttp://www.theguardian.com/profile/russellbrandhttp://www.theguardian.com/profile/russellbrandhttp://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/oct/11/russell-brand-revolution-exclusive-extracthttp://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/oct/11/russell-brand-revolution-exclusive-extracthttp://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardianhttp://www.theguardian.com/profile/russellbrandhttp://www.theguardian.com/profile/russellbrandhttp://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/oct/11/russell-brand-revolution-exclusive-extracthttp://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/oct/11/russell-brand-revolution-alienation-despairhttp://www.theguardian.com/us


2/8

geographically separate yourself from poverty, then you have to do it ideologically. You

have to believe inequality is OK. You have to accept the ideas that segregate us from one

another and nullify your human instinct for fairness.

Edward Slingerland, a professor of ancient Chinese philosophy at Stanford University,

demonstrated this instinct to me with the use of hazelnuts. As we spoke, there was a

bowl of them on the table. Russell, he said, scooping up a handful, we humans have

an inbuilt tendency towards fairness. If offered an unfair deal, we will want to reject it. If

I have a huge bowl of nuts and offer you just one or two, how do you feel?

The answer was actually quite complex. Firstly, I dislike hazelnuts, considering them to

be the verminous titbits of squirrels. Secondly, they were my hazelnuts anyway; we were

in my house. Most pertinently though, I felt that it was an unfair offering when he had

so many nuts. He explained that human beings and even primates have an instinct for

fairness even in situations where this instinct could be seen as detrimental. You still

have more nuts now than before, he chirped, failing to acknowledge that all the nuts

and indeed everything in the entire house belonged to me.

We then watched a clip on YouTube where monkeys in adjacent cages in a university

laboratory perform the same task for food. Monkey A does the task and gets a grape

delicious. Monkey B, who can see Monkey A, performs the same task and is given

cucumber yuck. Monkey B looks pissed off but eats his cucumber anyway. The

experiment is immediately repeated and you can see that Monkey B is agitated when his

uptown, up-alphabet neighbour is again given a grape. When he is presented with thecucumber this time, he is furious he throws it out the cage and rattles the bars. I got

angry on his behalf and wanted to give the scientist a cucumber in a less amenable

orifice. I also felt a bit pissed off with Monkey A, the grape-guzzling little bastard. Ive

not felt such antipathy towards a primate since that one in Raiders of the Lost Ark with

the little waistcoat betrayed Indy.

Slingerland explained, between great frothing gobfuls of munched hazelnut, that this

inherent sense of fairness is found in humans everywhere, but that studies show that its

less pronounced in environments where people are exposed to a lot of marketing.

Capitalist, consumer culture inures us to unfairness, he said. That made me angry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKhAd0Tyny0


3/8


4/8

famous, I have money, I have had private security on and off for years. There is no doubt

that I as much as anyone have to change. Revolution is change. I believe in change,

personal change most of all. Know, too, that I have seen what fame and fortune have to

offer and I know its not the answer. Of course, I have to change as an individual and

part of that will be sharing wealth, though without systemic change, that will be a sweet,

futile gesture.

Now lets get back to Matt Stoller, banning private security and ensuring that Ill have to

have my own fist fights next time Im leaving the Manchester Apollo.

The definition of being rich means having more stuff than other people. In order to

have more stuff, you need to protect that stuff with surveillance systems, guards, police,

court systems and so forth. All of those sombre-looking men in robes who call

themselves judges are just sentinels whose job it is to convince you that this very silly

system in which we give Paris Hilton as much as she wants while others go hungry is

good and natural and right.

An Occupy Wall Street demonstration in New York. Photograph: Lucas Jackson/Reuters

This idea is extremely clever and highlights the fact that there is exclusivity even aroundthe use of violence. The state can legitimately use force to impose its will and,

increasingly, so can the rich. Take away that facility and societies will begin to equalise.

If that hotel in India was stripped of its security, theyd have to address the complex

issues that led to them requiring it.

These systems can be very expensive. America employs more private security guards

than high-school teachers. States and countries with high inequality tend to hire


5/8

proportionally more guard labour. If youve ever spent time in a radically unequal city in

South Africa, youll see that both the rich and the poor live surrounded by private

security contractors, barbed wire and electrified fencing. Some people have nice prison

cages, and others have not so nice ones.

Matt here, metaphorically, broaches the notion that the rich, too, are impeded by

inequality, imprisoned in their own way. Much like with my earlier plea for you to

bypass the charge of hypocrisy, I now find myself in the unenviable position of urging

you, like some weird, bizarro Jesus, to take pity on the rich. Its not an easy concept to

grasp, and Im not suggesting its a priority. Faced with a choice between empathising

with the rich or the homeless, by all means go with the homeless.

He continues: Companies spend a lot of money protecting their CEOs. Starbucks spent

$1.4m. Oracle spent $4.6m. One casino empire the Las Vegas Sands spent $2.45m.

This money isnt security so much as it is designed to wall these people off from the

society they rule, so they never have to interact with normal people under circumstances

they may not control. If you just got rid of this security, these people would be a lot less

willing to ruthlessly prey on society.

Matt here explains that at the pinnacle of our problem are those that benefit most from

the current hegemony. The executors of these new empires that surpass nation. The logo

is their flag, the dollar is their creed, we are all their unwitting subjects.

People can argue about the right level of guard labour. You conceivably could still have

public police, but their job should be to help protect everyone, not just a special class. If

you got rid of all these private systems, or some of these systems of surveillance and

coercive guarding of property, youd have a lot less inequality. And powerful and

wealthy people would spend a lot more time trying to make sure that society was

harmonious, instead of just hiring their way out of the damage they can create.


6/8

A security guard at a gated community in India. Photograph: Tom Pietrasik

Matts next idea to create a different world was equally cunning and revolutionary: get

rid of all titles. Mr President. Ambassador. Admiral. Senator. The honourable. Your

honour. Captain. Doctor. These are all titles that capitalism relies on to justify treating

some people better than other people.

Matt is an American, so when it comes to deferring to the entitled, he is, lets face it, an

amateur compared with the British. Look at me, simpering to Professor Slingerland. I

cant wait to prostrate myself before his sceptre of diplomas. Plus weve got a bloody

royal family. Whats he going to say about that?

One of the most remarkable things you learn when you work in a position of political

influence is just how much titles separate the wealthy and the politicians from citizens.

Ordinary people will use a title before addressing someone, and that immediately makes

that ordinary person a supplicant, and the titled one a person of influence. Or if both

have titles, then theres upper-class solidarity. Rank, hierarchy, these are designed to

create a structure whereby power is shaped in the very act of greeting someone.

Im getting angry again. Matts right! Titles are part of the invisible architecture of oursocial structure. Im never using one again. If I ever see Slingerland in the street, I shall

alert him by hollering: Oi, fuck-face! and then throw a hazelnut at him.

What does Matt propose?

One thing you can do to negate this power is to be firm but respectful, and address

anyone and everyone by their last name. Mr, Ms or Mrs is all the title you should ever

need. This allows you to treat everyone as your equal, and it shows everyone that they


7/8

should treat you as their equal.

This is a provocative suggestion particularly to those of us who live in monarchies. I

mean, in England, we have a queen. A queen! We have to call her things like your

majesty. YOUR MAJESTY! Like shes all majestic, like an eagle or a mountain. Shes

just a person. A little old lady in a shiny hat that we paid for. We should be calling her

Mrs Windsor. In fact, thats not even her real name, they changed it in the war to

distract us from the inconvenient fact that they were as German as the enemy that

teenage boys were being encouraged, conscripted actually, to die fighting. Her actual

name is Mrs Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

Mrs Saxe-Coburg-Gotha!! No wonder they changed it. Its the most German thing Ive

ever heard she might as well have been called Mrs Bratwurst-Kraut-Nazi.

Titles have got to go.

Russell Brand speaks at an anti-austerity rally in London. Photograph: Ben Cawthra/Rex

Im not calling her your highness or your majesty just so we can pretend there isnt

and hasnt always been an international cabal of rich landowners flitting merrily across

the globe, getting us all to kill each other a couple of times a decade. From now on shes

Frau Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

Come on, Frau Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, its time for you to have breakfast with Herr Saxe-

Coburg-Gotha. And you can make it yerselves. And by the way, were nicking this castle

youve been dossing in and giving it to 100 poor families.

Actually, you can stay if you want, theyll need a cleaner. Youll have to watch your lip,

Herr Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, some of em aint white.


8/8

;

2014 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

We British have much to gain from Matts titleless utopia.

He continues: If this became common, youd shortly see sputtering rage from the

powerful, and increased agitation from the erstwhile meek. People need to mark their

dominance; that is the essence of highly unequal capitalism. If they cant do so, if they

arent allowed to be dominant, to be shown as being dominant, then the system cannot

long be sustained.

Matts ideas are like the schemes of a cackling supervillain from a Bond movie. At first,

they seem innocuous, but then they elegantly unravel the fabric of society. He suggests

we start now: This is something that anyone and everyone can act on, a tiny act of

rebellion that takes no money, influence or social status. You just need courage, and

every human has that.

This is an edited extract from Revolution by Russell Brand, published by Cornerstone.

To order a copy for 13.50 (RRP 20) go to bookshop.theguardian.com or call 0330 3336846

Enter our competition

Win a pair of cinema tickets to watch Brand in conversation with Guardian columnist

Owen Jones on 23 October. The Guardian Live event is sold out, but will be broadcast

live to more than 200 cinemas across the UK. Each participating cinema has a pair of

tickets to give away: to enter, and for terms and conditions, visittheguardian.com/russell-brand-cinema-competition before 15 October.
http://theguardian.com/russell-brand-cinema-competitionhttp://bookshop.theguardian.com/

what monkeys and the queen taught me about inequality _ culture _ the guardian

Documents