Russell Brand Peter Hitchens Newsnight 2012

[@markdonaldson1450]

8:23 " But Russel would you have been better off if you had been sent to Prison".......Hold that thought !

[@janeking9540]

There are more drugs in prison.

[@beestonbump1106]

Brand was always a no-nothing charlatan as this programme shows

[@neonbible08]

@@beestonbump1106addiction is a disease pretty clear

[@MJW238]

He won’t be going to prison.

[@markdonaldson1450]

@@MJW238 and how would you know that ?

[@68marconi]

I prefer Hitchens' early work. He was excellent as Parker in Thunderbirds

[@Romanplaystation]

:D

[@CIMAmotor]

Fuck, he looks like like him. Nice one!

[@krainey]

Mme..lady !!

[@MartTLS]

marc h When he had a code.

[@mrtambourineman6107]

Yeah but he looks too woody and inhuman these days...

[@TheDarkInstall]

The legality of a drug has no relation to how damaging it is. Peter Hitchens' brother died from cancer caused by a life long addiction to nicotine, which is legal.

[@dtothebtotheh]

And alcohol, a very good point nonetheless

[@MartinShannonHayes]

Touché sir, legality has no relation to morality.

[@smsjmsjsk4575]

Nicotine isn’t illegal

[@cherylno583]

@@smsjmsjsk4575 cool info bro

[@patriceaqa288]

As Brand said legality was 'at best an inconvience.'

[@pietersteenkamp5188]

Would love to hear a conversation between Dr Gabor Mate and Peter Hitchens on this matter. From what i've watched so far, no mention of how trauma and pain is rooted in addiction.

[@michaelbashford2733]

This was my experience with addition and many others I spoke who've had similar experiences. In my opinion however, the problem with Peter's argument is that to treat it solely as a criminal issue does not get to the heart of it and so the real help isn't offered but Russell's argument of it being 'a disease' is that it attempts to totally remove the responsibility of the individual in there participation of breaking a known law. I believe the solution is actually a combination of both.

[@fiftylester]

As am I listening to this conversation and as a massive advocate for Dr Gabor Matè I could not agree with you more. The understanding he has of addiction is light years beyond Peter Hitchens.

[@ElectricLadyland87]

@@fiftylester Hitchens is like a toddler compared to Gabor in this regard. Also I wonder if his stance has changed with the success of places like Portugal and Uruguay who have taken a much more compassionate and intelligent approach to drug decriminalization. The data shows that Peter is straight up wrong.

[@JasonGafar]

Exactly. I don't think anyone psychologically healthy would experiment with hard drugs, such as methamphetamine, fetanol, heroine, and others, needless to say become addicted.

[@Competitive_Antagonist]

I thought it would be the other way round.

[@sholaadedeji225]

“How does one deal with a person who cannot debate seriously?” That’s actually a really good question when you think about it.

[@goodyeoman4534]

the answer is you can't. so no sense in trying.

[@tiarnan76]

exactly - russell brand is a marxist piece of hypocritical shit

[@goodyeoman4534]

@Detriment Hip Hop agreed. but don't confuse humour with personal attacks

[@comatoast5610]

Hitchens does not debate seriously. He can't help but hijack the conversation and inadvertently make himself and his prejudices the focal point of any discussion he takes part in. He will be possessed by his ego for as long as he has a stiff upper lip...bygone times indeed.

[@goodyeoman4534]

@@comatoast5610 Why do you completely ignore Brand's childish 'debate' style and only focus on PH?

[@ME4503]

Peter Hitchens is a perfect example of what happens to you if you don't take drugs.

[@JustAnotherPerson4U]

Yeah, he tempts me to do it just because of how utterly heartless and stupid he is. Note: I'm not actually going to take drugs. It would just give this smug git ammunition.

[@Markustajahoyrylaiva]

you are all so fucked up that occasional voice of reason sounds funny to you

[@gerryfromthevoid8986]

@@Markustajahoyrylaiva he's not a voice of reason. abstinence based recovery has good results, throwing people into prison is just daunting, especially when it's only for the crime of putting a chemical in your own body.

[@Markustajahoyrylaiva]

@@gerryfromthevoid8986 "putting a chemical in your own body." can often cause disaster for loved ones or society because when it ruins your live they will have to feed your stupid ass and pay your bills

[@gerryfromthevoid8986]

@@Markustajahoyrylaiva yeah i'm not saying it's good, but there are hundreds of reasons people take that first step, social alienation, personal issues, apathy brought on by depletion of incentive towards positive life goals. loss of hope etc. then even if they regain some of that, they still have a chemical addiction that compels them towards the drugs or alcohol even when they don't want to be, creating a vicious cycle. prison would only serve to worsen the initial issues that led them down that road to begin with

[@ozricaurora6943]

Peter loves to play the victim about not being allowed to speak while he constantly talks over everybody

[@harveydodd8803]

No idea why anyone would debate someone like this voluntarily, especially with an absentee moderator. He talked over every single person who tried to make a point. Then he had the gall to talk about respectful and reasoned debate.

[@joshoverhoff2402]

You should watch his brother destroy him with a smile Rip the real hitch

[@jovi9918]

@@joshoverhoff2402 Christopher had a sense of humour which balanced him out into the most agile and dynamic speaker, he also never let bias or oddly personal vendettas flood his ego like Peter did off the get go.

[@jovi9918]

He literally says "There you go, Ad Hominem and Interrupting", and then proceeds to engage in Ad Hominem and interrupts everyone.

[@joshoverhoff2402]

@@jovi9918 a true contrarian

[@robertexley5193]

Forget the Russell Brand element of this, Peter Hitchens says drug addicts should be sent to prison to deter them and help them recover and then admits that prisons are full of drugs. That makes a lot of sense

[@jamesragonesi]

I'm not sure if that's what he was saying. To my understanding, Peter is suggesting that proper criminalization will deter drug use and reduce the number of people in prisons. According to him, the current lack of enforcement on this issue undermines this effort. It seems like common sense to me; if you no longer treat a crime as such, then you shouldn't be surprised when its occurrence increases. I'm not quite sure how treating something that's a crime as a crime can be considered uncompassionate. Every functioning society needs its rules, and the law is one such method of upholding the good from the bad.

[@robertexley5193]

@@jamesragonesi So to deter drug use you'll send someone somewhere that's full of drugs

[@antun88]

Well that's the part of the problem he's complaining about. The law is not enforced in prisons either.

[@robertexley5193]

@@antun88 and yet his solution is to send drug addicts to a place he knows is full of drugs. I don't think he cares about whether the addicts are rehabilitated or not, he's just trying to appeal to a reductive lowest common denominator.

[@antun88]

@@robertexley5193 both streets and prisons are full of drugs since the law of possession is not enforced, that is his point. But you are right he cares more about people not getting addicted to drugs in the first place them rehabilitating people who had.

[@Isomorphist]

Brand should invite Hitchens back to his podcast

[@theSacredAtheist]

that would be EPIC!! i thinbk both are different persons now.

[@wanderer1955]

Why? They would be talking over each other constantly and yud'e not understand a single word spoken 🙄

[@bruce8359]

my son got heroin in prison ... hes now dead

[@Isomorphist]

@@bruce8359 sorry for your loss

[@bruce8359]

brands a tosser

[@Jezer1990]

"You talk about abstinence, that is one way of approaching abstinence" That lady has obviously never been to prison

[@patriceaqa288]

Jezer1990 so she rolled with the Gambinos for a few years, BBC wiped her sentence from her resume

[@roykeane1922]

The biggest thing that Peter misses in his argument is that a lot of the people who engage in drug taking do not buy into the system that he suggests would deter them. I grew up around people who didn’t fear prison because they didn’t value life

[@lifeisajourney268]

Look at Dubai not much drug taking there.

[@patriceaqa288]

@@lifeisajourney268 untrue. It's clandestine and reports manipulated. Many countries with the harshest penalties for drug users have outrageous drug problems

[@fiddlecastro1453]

@@patriceaqa288 Untrue. Japan and South Korea have far lower drug taking than US/UK

[@patriceaqa288]

@@fiddlecastro1453 Prison doesn't come into it when we're considering alcohol

[@fiddlecastro1453]

@@patriceaqa288 Why would it? Alcohol isn't illegal

[@clearz3600]

Who would have ever thought that Russel would have ended up to the right of Peter Hitchens politically?

[@michaelthorpe9733]

Chips Summers, the one guy who appeared to have a complete, relevant and qualified view only spoke once. What a shame.

[@CharlieGeorge_]

Hitchens seems to overlook the fact that most so-called addicts do get arrested and sent to prison (often for long periods) but they show up statistically as robberies etc.

[@jasonrichards2371]

rubbish they old get locked up after becoming complete drains on society and the overstreched benefits system

[@redrob6026]

My dealer got sent to prison for 8 years, it was a really hard period in my life

[@feonor26]

Hitchens doesn't live in the same reality as the rest of us it seems.

[@kazejah1014]

Hitchens and Brand legit need their own program together, the rating would be thru the roof. LMFAO

[@susannamarker2582]

No it wouldn't.

[@patriceaqa288]

@@susannamarker2582 hot boxing with Mike Tyson featuring Peter hitchens

[@susannamarker2582]

@@patriceaqa288 Now you're talking !

[@bruce8359]

brands a dick and he knows it

[@jamiecurran3544]

@@patriceaqa288 🤣😂👍

[@SoraxSpace]

Glad I watched 'til the end for "was that you, Peter?" 😂

[@AlittleRedPepper]

Hahahah

[@patriceaqa288]

sorax space I'd love to put Peter Hitchens on china white heroin for 5 months. He'd be coming to interviews looking dishevelled saying 'we DON"T enforce our laws, the biggest problem is corruption of the substance, what I want to see is clear and pure china white for all involved.'

[@GTJIGPC]

@@patriceaqa288 Hitchens' entire point is that he has the wherewithal and modicum of willpower required to not use illicit narcotics in the first place. Besides, what would be the point of asking a drug abuser's opinion on the legal status of illicit narcotics? You might as well ask an illegal alien for their opinion on whether everyone who has entered a country illegally should receive amnesty.

[@patriceaqa288]

@@GTJIGPC This isn't a debate on illicit drugs, it's a debate on 'addiction.' You can be a heroin addict and people say 'the law you never feared enough' or be hopelessly hooked on opiate prescribed pain killers how can you enforce a law on that?? Alcohol kills more people and costs the tax payers more money every year 20 fold than heroin does. Most importantly Hitchens fails to realize usage of class A drugs amongst young people in the UK is declining not increasing. He also doesn't realize that in countries with the death penalty for drugs addiction is rampant. The war on drugs launched by Nixon didn't work anyway it backfired

[@paulirimia4488]

@@patriceaqa288 Totally agree with you here. Peter is on the side of fear as the only way to keep people away from drugs, whilst ignoring the facts of life that lead to addiction, which are not addressed and, most likely, cannot be resolved. You cannot say that the issue with drugs is that people don't fear them enough, that's not a solution to anything. I can see it as a partisan view of someone that's entitled, someone that did not have to live a life where addiction to drugs was ever a problem. One wonders if Peter is even aware of the UK government programs involving the use of drugs in the military. I would assume that he would be quite at a loss when it comes to the use of drugs in order to enhance the performance of the military in the second world war. We won because of that? Hmmm.

[@bob24611]

Great debate. In the mean time, 11 years later and still sitting on our hands. The world and the people in it, go the way they will.

[@RcH382]

and while everyone shuffles their feet the country of USA sinks into the hell of societal collapse

[@cosmolotclem217]

I want to see more of Brand and Hitchens

[@kevinparker461]

I would like to see less of Brand!. all i have been hearing about the last 2 weeks!

[@devinmichaelroberts9954]

Peter Hitchens is a brilliant debater even when facts are not on his side. In fairness to Russell there are more addicts now because population has doubled since 40 years ago, the rate of drug addiction in many countries has stayed stable with population growth.

[@sacred1827]

I don't think Hitchens is a great debater tbh. Often comes across a bit of an oddball.

[@MrDenzal27]

And yet alcohol is worse than them all. Nobody has ever died from herion withdrawals, but people have from alcohol ones.

[@jazzman1954]

You kinda forgot to factor in what happens when people over dose! Heroin kills- don’t kid yourself.

[@MrDenzal27]

@jazzman1954 i know iam a recovering herion addict and allky. My point is u dont die from trying to give it up like u can from drink.

[@jazzman1954]

@@MrDenzal27 I wish you well. I am not disputing your post but I don’t want youngsters to think heroin is less dangerous than alcohol. I’m sure you don’t want that either.

[@feonor26]

@@jazzman1954 That's not what he said now was it? You don't die from withdrawal, that is not the same as an overdose. You can overdose on anything, even water.

[@jazzman1954]

@@feonor26 Show me a reliable link to the number of deaths annually in your region from water overdose please.

[@Namaste1001]

Newsnight in a nutshell - "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate." - Noam Chomsky - Do they ever question the illegitimacy of coercive governance?

[@Namaste1001]

Then you are refusing to look outside of that limited spectrum that Chomsky refers to. The BBC is the worst kind of propaganda as it has the majority of people fooled into thinking they are getting an objective assessment of events when they are merely being fed partial information that affirms the perceptions about the inherently corrupt system that we live under. The most effective form of slavery is when people have just enough comfort and autonomy to believe they are genuinely free. Free range slavery if you like. Try not doing what the government demands and see how free you are.

[@Namaste1001]

Don't imagine, don't question, don't think for yourself. Who do you think you are, George Orwell? When a news media tows the official political line it's not journalism, it's public relations. I'm afraid you are ignoring the facts that challenge your belief system rather than changing your views to fit the facts. That is a mindset that is impossible to reason with.

[@Namaste1001]

david bacon How can you know if that is your only source of information? There is a level of belief involved which isn't the same as knowledge.

[@chazattic]

How is Russell childlike? He respectfully listens whereas peter interrupts and speaks over everyone

[@chazattic]

Except he doesnt

[@motorhead48067]

I don’t agree with Hitchens and don’t particularly like his approach to this issue but I love how relentlessly he argues. He has no fear of offending people and doesn’t give an inch that he thinks he shouldn’t.

[@edwinjamespope8118]

Fact is; someone who is struggling with substance abuse is going to find far more advice & comfort from Brand, than Hitchens.

[@ln5747]

Comfort is the last thing a drug taker requires. Advice is subjective. Addiction doesn't exist.

[@JoBlakeLisbon]

What about the wider society?

[@brentmeistergeneral6074]

Addiction doesn’t exist? 😂 🤡

[@user-ju7ze9to4k]

More comfort but less help.

[@Dekoherence-ii8pw]

Hitchens wants to stop the problem at source, by having a strong deterrent. He wants to prevent people from even trying drugs in the first place.

[@vlndfee6481]

Would be nice to see these two talk about this again

[@frasermair2516]

Peter Hitchens rules the waves! He is not antiquated as brand suggests, he is on point and right! God bless the man.

[@ConsideringPhlebas]

The problem with Hitchens' idea is that it assumes drug users will act rationally, which of course they won't. No one takes drugs thinking the inevitable adverse consequences will fall on them. If drug users were deterred by consequences they wouldn't be using drugs in the first place.

[@Zephy795]

@valleywoodworker No Peter is saying he believes that prison in a country where that is used as an absolute punishment, would be an effective deterrent, where as consideringphlebas is saying , if it hasnt worked in any country so far ( of which there are many that do enforce they way peter wants it to be and even have capitol punishment) , and the conquences that arise from being addicted including death or poverty aren't enough to detract people from taking drugs then it simply makes no sense to assume it will work now in this country

[@freakdancing4144]

The war on drugs has been a catastrophic failure.

[@battmarn]

Not for the drugs

[@numbers7n]

Yes, perhaps it’s too much to expect people who already break the law to stop doing so simply because the drugs have been outlawed. The only way I see now is to stop the drugs from ever being made to begin with... Because once they are produced, the people who are addicted to them and those addicted to their profit will do almost anything for their next fix.

[@putinstea]

@@numbers7n In the US sure. UK hasnt fought it the last 40 years

[@paulgibbons2320]

There hasn't been one. That's Hitchins point.

[@boobopish]

Not much done on alcohol tho. That’s ok

[@mendicantbias1337]

11 years later: Russel is totally clean and anti government The quack is still a quack The torie did nothing Hitchens was always correct

[@martin_sole9633]

It"s hilarious how Hitchens, who is unqualified to talk about drug policy, resents another contributor as being unqualified to talk about drug policy.

[@exclamationpointman3852]

100% qualified as a tax paying citizen paying for the enabling and have to be subject to them in society.

[@Charlieb6308]

Brand losing debate turns too aiming cheap shots at Kitchens which didn't work.

[@russellthompson9271]

​@@Charlieb6308 Here here.

[@kyleduncan1724]

The policies that Russell brand is trying to emphasise here, has been working well in Portugal with lower crime lower deaths less illnesses and had been categorically classed a complete success, so why wouldn't we want to follow suit into something that is quite clearly working?

[@cooperarthur3]

+Kyle Duncan And they've been working badly here. Why would you use a less relevant foreign example?

[@kyleduncan1724]

+Bobishere yes the drug policies here in Britain quite clearly don't work, if we don't change the nappy we will still have the same old shit! It baffles me why the government is scared of change when it's been proven to work in other countries?

[@kyleduncan1724]

+Bobishere I used Portugal as an example as its a good example, why would I use a bad example for us to look at.

[@cooperarthur3]

Kyle Duncan I agree that its baffling, I suggest the government should look at the examples of China and Korea as opposed to Portugal though.

[@kyleduncan1724]

+Bobishere I'm unaware of there procedures? although I am aware of human rights problems within China so I'm going to guess they probably enforce the death penalty for certain drug activities & problems? Something I'd be totally against.

[@nh3heathen348]

As a recovering drug addict I can't stand how Russell Brand has become the poster boy. Peter is right about him and the issue

[@goodyeoman4534]

you're not an 'addict'. you're just weak and self-indulgent.

[@vladivanov5500]

​@@goodyeoman4534 _Recovering_ addict. That was uncalled for, considering they acknowledged their own weakness. They agreed with Hitchens that it's a matter of will.

[@goodyeoman4534]

@@vladivanov5500 I agree - it's a matter of will. Pointing out that 'addiction' does not exist is not uncalled for - you just disagree.

[@vladivanov5500]

​@@goodyeoman4534 It was the "you're just weak and self-indulgent" I was saying was uncalled for, considering the poster had since corrected course. I understand what you're driving at regarding addiction. I agree insofar as conscious people have free will, but the way I see it: at a certain point we're talking about creatures of impulse, people that have effectively relinquished their free will to chase a never-ending high. At that stage they are practically a wild dog. This is why Hitchens' call for deterrents is the proper way to correct course. We don't correct a feral dog's behaviour by comforting it and saying 'it's okay, I forgive you', we apply appropriate deterrents and with time the behaviour corrects itself. Over time they gain greater impulse control and their natural impulses are directed towards more healthy habits.

[@russellthompson9271]

Pity 99% arseholes on this thread don't share your correct opinion..

[@cg7487]

This clip seems ancient now. The idea that you could jail everyone taking drugs is universally accepted as mental but I like the lively debate. It’s way better having polar opposites debating, it shows the middle ground the best.

[@SagaciousFrank]

Way to miss the point. Hitchens is saying you don't have to jail everyone, you set an example by enforcing the drug laws at zero tolerance which acts as a deterrent against widespread drug taking. Most illicit drug users don't want to go to jail, but if they believe the justice system to be a toothless tiger, which it has become, nobody takes the law seriously. When I took drugs if I thought for one moment I could land a custodial sentence for possession, I'd have been deterred where my own willpower failed me. Funny how deterrence works in countries that use their laws to set an example, and their prisons are less full because of it. It sends out a message, and that is the old saying, crime doesn't pay.

[@VolatileFroggy]

Exactly dude. I think this is a great debate. It shows how narrow minded some people are. Thank god they don't have too much power.

[@SagaciousFrank]

@@VolatileFroggy , hardly a great debate, it's like threw against one, with the main one of those, Russell Brand, behaving like a spoiled child, pulling silly provocative faces.

[@roy6419]

''because he has first hand experience'' so does my mate joe doesnt mean he should have a show on the bbc.

[@roterfuchs8201]

come on man, Jimmy Savile had first hand experience with children all his life, thats why the BBC went ahead with "Jim'll Fix It"

[@roy6419]

Nineteen Eighty loooool

[@imnotgayyy8489]

Roy I think your mate joe should have a show with Karl Pilkington

[@anotherbadseed]

Yes - but Peter's purported disengagement with the idea that a comedian might have something of an intrinsically philosophical bent to say, leave son easking what was that in Woody Allen, John Cleese, Lenny Bruce, hell Erasmus, etc ....??

[@glanemann]

It's like saying I had cancer, therefore I know how to cure it.

[@aor3220]

Brand is the epitome of passive aggressive when he suggests Hitches should look upon human. Beings with compassion rather than aggression

[@nonhuman7562]

Funny how Peter Hitchens accused Russell Brand of "ad-hominem and interruption" when he was the one who immediately launched a personal attack against Russell instead of discussing the actual topic at hand...

[@truthteller99999]

He's just a Right wing idiot, put on TV to whip the Daily Mail and Telegraph readers into a frenzy with his hateful and bigoted rhetoric.

[@danbreen6946]

A Russell Brand Fan Then

[@nonhuman7562]

@@danbreen6946 ...no, just someone who is skilled in regards to communication, both spoken and unspoken. Russell Brand himself is a master when it comes to communicating ideas and ideologies, which is why he was considered to be one of the smartest and funniest comedians in the world for nearly 20 years. Until he started speaking out against the establishment and its elites, of course...

[@truthteller99999]

@@danbreen6946 Excellent comment. For a 3 year old.

[@Chichesterfrotesque1001]

Russell Brand"​" A master" give me a break...

[@ElementsMMA]

Ten years in and the two of them could barely agree more on massive topics such as Covid masks and lockdown. Incredible turn of events.

[@user-ju7ze9to4k]

Russell has probably matured a lot since then.

[@Dilkingt0nne]

Well people agree on some things and not on others that’s what happens when you’re a thinking human and not an NPC who parrots the views of your “”side””

[@Si_Mondo]

Peter's take on drugs is still ridiculous. He would do well to read up on what St Augustine wrote about legislating against vice (spoiler: he was against it), since he's a Christian.

[@tomperry5947]

@@user-ju7ze9to4k I think you mean become power hungry in the pursuit of manipulating right wing nut jobs

[@tsiddig]

@@user-ju7ze9to4k Er …nope

[@TheEternalOuroboros]

Hitchens is right in saying that prison should be scary enough that less people commit crimes, although Brand is correct in suggesting that prison itself doesn't necessarily provide good motivation to heal as a person and rehabilitate.

[@jtothecc2421]

The tragedy of life is both Peter and Russel are right.

[@neonbible08]

Correct. Both in their own ways

[@feonor26]

Peter's views are totally unrealistic and borderline childish!

[@johntgw]

Only one of them is a rapist though

[@dailyreactive]

It's easy not to take drugs if you decide beforehand that you will never do drugs. Many years ago when I was in my early 20s, I drove a local junkie home and his mother assumed I was one of his cronies.. she verbally and almost physically attacked me.. I had to drive away fast as she proceeded to start hitting my car with her fists.. Though I got a chance to speak with her some time later and explain the misunderstanding; she broke into tears speaking about how her son cannot seem to break the habit.. It was that incident that reinforced my will to never even try drugs; witnessing the wreck they cause to people's lives. Perhaps I am just lucky.. I am 40 and to this day I have never considered taking any form of hard substance. I did some weekend drinking as a young man, but even that wasn't really fun once I reached my mid 20s. I sometimes buy some beers for guests and if I don't have someone over for months; those leftover beers will be still there in the fridge.. some have even gone past their expiry date in the past.

[@luciusesox1luckysox570]

No there not. I'm 66 years old and have been through my own drug hell. There are two sides to nearly everything and to make a statement like you did I suspect you have not seen enough of the nasty side of drugs. Having said that neither has PH and I get that as well@@feonor26

[@SRPC21]

Russell brand's argument is always reduced to petty and personal insults. He thinks he's an lot more intelligent than he actually is

[@RobSmith2016]

Samuel Coe Brand is dilettante who has gathered a from a group of headless chickens who know nothing about politics.

[@SRPC21]

pookomoo He's obviously not stupid but he always attacks the man rather than the argument. He can be a rude, closed minded, delusional shit

[@pigknickers2975]

Samuel Coe He's actually quite a bully too.

[@shaunewilliam]

Rob Smith What do you know of the Venetians, Conte ,Voltaire MI6 and its origins, Newton and the foundations of the British Empire, the Fabian Socialists, Tavistock, the work towards the vote ?.Just another putting his opinion around, using empty phrase.Skilled in the art of the uptake of standpoints on subjects, when your feet are free to giro and expand your scope Turn 90 degrees and you get a different standpoint. Feeble minds revelling in the glory of another souls Oxford education, weeping and gnashing their teeth. Here is some wisdom.Look inside your heart wormwood.You are the words you speak, waxing vicarious death without life, wretch.Realise your potential

[@walsjell]

sorry but educationis not the answert toward drugs.. if you are stupid enuff to take drugs you are doomed and stupid! tehre is no other way!if you a funing morron you dont desetv to life in long term...nature i nature.. ppl should start to use own mind! education? what education ? did they start to educat ppl about pregnacy in uk?and what it helped?

[@toon87mill]

"I think you're a Harry Enfield character" 😂

[@RossKempOnYourMum01]

Taking drugs is not a moral issue. Stealing or mugging to fund a drug habit is. I don't particularly care what Brand puts in his veins so long as he doesn't mug my granny to pay for it.

[@gwasgray9309]

+RossKempOnYourMum01 Yes, there's nothing unethical about taking drugs because the people who produce and supply them are all nice, non-violent people.

[@RossKempOnYourMum01]

Gwasgray The reason the producers and suppliers of drugs are warlords/gangsters is BECAUSE the drug trade is illegal. It's the same as Al Capone during prohibition. There's no moral reason why a tomato farmer in Dorset couldn't produce marijuana instead. The reason is the law.

[@gwasgray9309]

+RossKempOnYourMum01 People still counterfeit alcohol and cigarettes to avoid paying duty.

[@RossKempOnYourMum01]

A tiny % of the overall trade. Funny how Budweiser, Heineken etc aren't staffed by AK47 wielding psychopaths.

[@sumeetsinghlehal1907]

+RossKempOnYourMum01 That is a very Libertarian view which I respect and agree with. In case, you are looking for a argument against the very use of drugs. There some very good De ontological ones which are a good read.

[@T800System]

11:57 Peter Hitchens with a face as though his ADHD nephew just burst uninvited into his home office

[@gwasgray9309]

T800System Did you know Peter's youngest child was born when he was pushing 50? Imagine him dealing with the "terrible twos"!

[@Here4theComments9]

Brand and Hitchens: best duo cop comedy film idea

[@stanmonzon5788]

Watching Peter Hitchens and Russell Brand debate each other is joyful. It’s also great watching the last few seconds of the clip as Brand shouts various things out and Hitchens just silently glowers.

[@eju547]

Stripes ... he didn’t need to debate, his experience was a case study in addiction. Peter Hitchens didn’t offer anything other than an antiquated view of addiction which is out of step with the overwhelming evidence of comparative drugs policies. His definitions of criminalisation/decriminalisation did not sit within the conversation either. How can you debate a topic when someone comes to a debate with an entirely irrelevant worldview which sits outside the realms of conventional logic. He couldn’t even contend with the idea that we do currently criminalise drug use. The fault of criminalisation is that ‘has’ not reduced drug addiction, and it does not act as a deterrent.

[@nigelft]

@@eju547 I'm guessing that his idea of criminalising addicts, especially drug addicts, is far more punative in terms of sentencing ... in fact, he may only be two steps away from a certain former Filipino president, whom practically wanted all drug addicts executed ... I doubt Peter Hitchins would go _that_ far, but, in order to make his idea of increasing the punitive nature of drug taking, that means turning Britian into a surveillance state, to the point that everyone lives in almost virtual paranoia, ala '1984' ...

Hitchens was right, why was he given a platform? Especially now as it looks like he is a predator.

[@Dekoherence-ii8pw]

Peter had a point about drug use increasing over the last 4 decades. That does rather suggest that the current approach isn't working@@eju547

[@kevinb9830]

@@eju547 Modern thinking isn't always right or better. Lord knows we should have learned that by now.

[@eminentgentleman]

Peter Hitchens has obviously got no idea about the medical diagnosis of addiction.

[@Jammil2477]

Merv van der Swerv addiction is a state of mind. You can become addicted to many things, but as pointed out in the video, it's the harm, cost in life, money and resources. Criminalise drugs effectively and you'd have less people use them. Currently they are ten a penny, easily and result available. But the police do very little except stop cars.

[@eminentgentleman]

Toza And you've no idea about addiction either.

[@Jammil2477]

Merv van der Swerv so you're telling me that addiction isn't a state of mind? Because otherwise your saying that an drug addict must have his addiction fed forever otherwise. To stop the addiction as some addicts do it comes down to mental willpower.

[@eminentgentleman]

Addiction is a medical condition; requiring medical treatment, not criminalisation.

[@Jammil2477]

Merv van der Swerv my brothers heroin addiction wasn't treated as a medical condition. It was down to him to break the addiction through family support and will power. You can become addicted to anything. To stem the addiction it requires willpower and the mental choice too abstain.

[@Rising.consciousness]

“Control people through fear” is Hitchens main point...

[@namelessnobody7611]

Profoundly ironic considering his current views on Covid.

[@baileyrob]

Hitchens' main fear is that people would become controlled by the drugs, and therefore drugs cannot be part of a free and functional society. I can see his point there, but his conclusions about the means to ending that control are completely self-contradictory. He thinks that the government has not enforced their laws properly, but when asked how we could possibly afford to admit that many drug-possessing convicts (hundreds of thousands of people) to prison, he has no answer other than "Well, you send SOME people to prison to deter everyone else"............ Which is what the government has been doing, by only half-enforcing their laws. I respect Peter Hitchens, but on this issue, he is just arguing circularly, and clearly has some sort of personal issue with drug addicts.

[@numbers7n]

Your attempt at presenting a straw man argument in the place of what he meant has failed. If we have a hundred people, and 1 uses drugs, punish him. If another uses drugs, punish him too. Eventually, the other 98 will not try to use drugs. This is what he meant... If every drug user was actually punished, people would stop taking the risk of being punished.

[@xtraspecialmango]

Good call

[@baileyrob]

@@numbers7n How is that a strawman? I just summed his argument up in a few words. An argument he literally makes in this video, and one you just repeated. 'Punish some to deter them all', basically. Which is what the government has been doing. And it isn't working. You honestly think that there are no criminal convictions for drug possessions in this country? Whether it's to punish 2/100, 1/100 or 1/1000 is irrelevant. Laws should always be enforced equally. The Rule of Law can't just be subjugate to petty social concerns, otherwise we lose justice, and with justice goes freedom.

[@LukeThompson28-A]

I remember watching this at the time and strongly agreeing with Russell. Watching it back now, 10 years later, while I don’t agree with the point that Hitchens is making, I do think Russell damaged his argument by being so obtuse, while Hitchens actually comes across as more reasonable.

[@laurencosh7690]

My thoughts exactly.

[@TheEternalOuroboros]

"Oh my dear chap" hilarious (10:22)

[@drdeadbeat1604]

Such classic way to shut down such a tasteless 'joke'

[@drdeadbeat1604]

@@Alexlamb442 certainly, but in his mind it was probably hilarious

[@MadCapMag]

@@Alexlamb442 so you can’t say Brand was calling Hitchens out “for being” a homophobe, as that’s making the assumption that he is. And if one cares to listen to Hitchens, he doesn’t care about the issue enough to hate them.

[@suefreewoman6581]

Yeah. Exactly what I would expect from an upper class twit.

[@777static777]

It's amazing that this guy uses the "think of the children" line as (somehow) an argument for super-harsh drug penalties, and refusing to see drug addiction as a health issue. Seriously, Hitchens needs to do some serious deep thinking and research.

[@generaltech512]

I'm sure the Talibans cut down on drug addiction when the Americans ditched. And I am certain that it had nothing to do with treating it as a disease.

[@archie7218]

The reality is Peter is just innocent and doesn’t understand the problem. It’s hard for someone who 1. Doesnt have a huge amount of empathy, and 2. Probably hasnt been exposed (especially not at a young age) to the communities this problem effects to understand it. He’s coming up with the best solution he can with the tools he has available to him, he just doesn’t understand the problem.

[@ericanderson8795]

Drug overdoses are now at an all time high (in America). Have we given the power to the wrong people to solve the problem?

[@chazwyman]

Peter has a deep psychological problem being a lesser mortal than his brother. Chris clearly liked a drink and his addiction to booze and fags was probably what killed him. That is the ONE area of life that Peter thinks he had one up on this brother, so he uses his unhinged POV on addiction to attack his brother in his grave.

[@bobbydylanio]

Has Peter ever been to prison. I was on a jury in court once and the overwhelming truth that I came away with was that more people come out of jail addicted to drugs than go in. The idea that jail prevents people from taking drugs is pure fantasy.

[@Snobbishbumpkin]

He mentioned that point at the end you didnt listen.

[@SagaciousFrank]

He's an experienced old school journalist, he always does his research before pronouncing on matters. There are times, although rare, in interviews where he'll say he can't comment on something because he has no knowledge or care about the subject matter. He's been to numerous British prisons. His approach is more what British justice used to be, firm but fair (don't read 'perfect', there's no such system in history, as humans are fallible), and both Japan and South Korea now, and our history of tougher justice at a more zero tolerance has proven to deter widespread crime, including illicit drug buying and possession - as demand drives supply in any market, punishing the users impacts on the dealers. I think the Americans called it the Broken Window policy, nip crime in the bud early, and it sends out a message of deterrence to would be law breakers. The research shows that sadly many people who eventually land a custodial sentence have become hardened criminals created in part by a lax justice system that has let them off time and again before for numerous lesser offences.

[@waxingwampeter]

He wants to reform prisons so that they aren’t like that. See his book “The Abolition of Liberty”.

[@wanderer1955]

The technical terms for anybody starting to take Class A drugs is "RETARD".

[@wanderer1955]

@@SagaciousFrank Summed up nicely I think✌️

[@Coppertunes]

This was 11 years ago, and drugs are now worse than ever. I've news for you, in another 11 years they will be a lot worse still. Another strategy is needed.

[@duncanbedford4765]

Hitchens states that criminalising drugs would be a deterrence,if this is so then why doesn't criminalising burglary or murder work as a deterrence?

[@7EiamJ7]

So we should decriminalise burglary and murder?

[@duncanbedford4765]

@@7EiamJ7 haha!!thanks for making me smile.

[@chrismostert5338]

Very possibly because the so called deterrent is laughably lenient with regard to the crimes committed. These days the victims seem to suffer far more than the perpetrators, which is absolute bullshit. Justice for those wronged becomes non-existent. Sad but true and it's getting worse. [ in my opinion ]

[@DaveMcKinley-bm5mh]

Hitchens is speaking from his cosseted position of his ivory tower. He has failed to grasp, or chosen to ignore, the reasons for addiction in the first place, and therefore his argument is entirely flawed. People taking Hitchen's standpoint have left the door wide open for the RBs to come in and dominate this subject. My opinion.

[@apasolini]

@@DaveMcKinley-bm5mh he is an absolute dickhead. Typical right-winger. He doesn't mention alcohol being legal, does he?

[@AnniePBeautyDefyingAge]

It didn't scare me to go to prison for drugs. Ive been there 4 times. I wasted 7 yrs in state prison here in NJ. I stopped when I had enough running and chasing for the drugs. I was tired of doing the things I had to do for the drugs. Prison was only a big day camp. We get everything there as well. Prison had drugs and plenty of sex so basically prison for me was a place to relax and kick back for a few yrs. This way when I hit the streets again I only needed a little but of drugs to get me high again. My tolerance was low and by the time I built it back up to were I had to do all these crazy things again I would be back in jail. It was a cycle. So no asshole prison isn't scary. It's a day camp. It doesn't stop people. You have to want it. You have to know how to live a normal life again which is what rehab teaches you. You gave to know yourself again. Know what you like and enjoy in life. Prison only teaches you how to get and use drugs better and easier.

[@halasipipacs]

That isn't the kind of prison Peter Hitchens, or any thinking person advocates and one must wonder how and why prisons got that way.

[@CaseyDavies-od7ir]

Female and male prisons are very different, it might have been a picnic for you, but when it comes to being a man it's more likely a case of aggression and survival of the fittest.

[@DenniWintyr]

To Peter Hitchens I'd just have to go with this quote from Martin Luther King: "We have a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws".

[@DenniWintyr]

***** & he wouldn't care if he did. That's his problem, complete indifference to other's problems... a total lack of empathy.

[@DenniWintyr]

***** Empathy is the single most important facet of the human condition that allows us to live together as a society.

[@DenniWintyr]

***** Reason & empathy are not mutually exclusive, in fact, they're both needed to make the best of any situation. One without the other is pointless. Hitchens' also fails at using reason. "It's against the law, therefore it's wrong"... if that were solid reasoning, then laws would never change. His idea that society would be better if its laws were draconian is demonstrably false.

[@jonastuart7280]

***** Stop stroking your coveted "reason" ... your hubris and myopia aren't astounding, they are merely a sad example of what's out there. Your opinion of Russell's comedy is noted. It is ONLY your opinion. Others may share it... and it's still an opinion. You don't really "know" anything. ... and by default, neither do I.

[@Dominic-fd2wz]

Denni Wintyr so we have a moral duty to be a degenerate and a smack-head? I guess this is your mind on drugs.

[@brooksie9999999999]

Seeing there combined passion on the subject is perfection This should have been allowed to go on longer The complete confliction of both peoples views allowed it to so perfectly get both points across bloody miss good debates :/

[@poepstreepmeholboe]

I sort of agree with Russell Brand, but Peter Hitchens is right when he says that Brand is utterly incapable of debating in a serious way.

[@StanslaMichael]

This is exactly why Brand fails. Thinking that anyone who does not agree in what he is saying is aggression and therefore has no love.

[@oldskoolrools3087]

exactly.....started off by implying he has no compassion and is a bigot.....ie. you're the bad guy and by default I'm the good guy and must be right...he's wrong

[@jimmd-g7m]

Peter will be understood when it's the norm

[@jakw97]

To be honest, the pro-compassion drug policys treat addicts like helpless kids, even if they are 6"3 and stab people for drugs.

[@antheablackmore5838]

As a foster carer of 30 years Peters attitude was wrong in my opinion…..there is not and never has been enough mental health care in the child care system …..scandalous

[@TheSignatureGuy]

Russel: Peter I think we want the same thing. Peter: We don't. xD

[@macosauruscheese8766]

Are we really still debating whether or not prohibition works?

[@CucumberpatchAddict]

I seem to remember already having watched this years ago thinking: this man is not a legislator, a doctor, or an addict, he has neither authority nor expertise in the subject of the discussion, what is the point of wasting so much time trying to explain to him things he is unable to get through neither logic nor empathy? Is he meant to represent the public? What a strange conversation

[@suspunk.germany]

Is Peter Hitchens the HG Tutor? Does anybody know? They sound the same to me and it would explain soooo much!

[@lauraj8429]

That is literally the question I've been asking recently. I really want to know; they sounds so alike. I wonder though if I can imagine HG Tudor having these kinds of views. And Peter Hitchens doesn't seem very self aware. I'm tempted to ask HG Tudor to analyse Peter Hitchens...

[@owenowen212]

11:01 "all crime is caused by law" lol

[@onlymurgs]

l NEVER thought l would ever EVER see this, but l agree with Russell

[@shaunk.s.1556]

"Worried about their soft bones getting broken...", Was that you, Peter? xD 12:07

[@saiyaniam]

I like both but Peter is totally ignorent of various experiences, he literally interrupted Russells time to speak at the start. Peter is rich, relatively, easy to enjoy life when you've money.

[@stephenmurray2851]

Time is the great revealer. Hitchens was always right

[@stugil1986]

He's not right though is he? Take a look at Portugal. They took away criminalisation and put the money they would've spent on law enforcement into rehabilitation. The stats are staggering. Do some research and come back. Criminalisation hasn't worked for decades. The definition of insanity etc...

[@Tonyclifton-q4f]

outstanding comment

[@BossySwan]

12:12 was that you Peter? 😂😂

[@JasonGafar]

I died. 😆😅😅😅😆😆😆

[@traceybanting3952]

Peter Hitchens on Russell Brand... “you’ve got a programme on the BBC and I haven’t”. And that, Mr Hitchens, is why you are so peevish. What a shame you don’t have the debating skills of your late brother! Russell, I for one admire your courage in the unremitting fighting of your addictions.

[@cockoffgewgle4993]

Except he wasn't wrong.

[@Hypergangnam]

@@cockoffgewgle4993 Who was wrong, and about what?

[@riboid]

Ok, Peters views may be antiquated (who said they are wrong?) but I could listen to him all day long, to be honest.

[@danieloneill9560]

I'd prefer to listen to Russell. Or Christopher Hitchens. Peter can do one!

[@Bulldogrunner]

Switch alcohol addiction for drug addiction and Peters argument falls down completely.

[@suefreewoman6581]

Exactly.

[@aaronbogatch548]

Serious discussion with Russel Brand??? Gimme a break!

[@religulous420]

+Aaron Bogatch The guy has written a book on metaphysics, I think he's alright for discussion.

[@sithersproductions]

+religulous420 ive written a book about tax

[@toiletfriend420]

metaphysics is merely attempting to extrapolate substance from thin air and semantics. which ironically fools people who don't know what either are.

[@jackiekinner3826]

“Your like a peculiar child “. Blinder!! So sad that Chip only spoke once as he’s an exceptional man and a legend in the drug community.

[@orphanoforbit7588]

It's YOU'RE.

[@kevinparker461]

@@orphanoforbit7588 Or better still, you are!!

[@chrissammels5444]

I would like to remind the audience that this broadcaster is staffed up with recreational drug takers who started at university, and they engage drug taking entertainers.

[@RA30st08]

laughed my ass off at the end...."was that you Peter?"

[@kashmiripunditadkaul]

Apparently playground juvenile humour is your thing.

[@purplenote]

kashmiripunditadkaul Unbeknownst to many who consider themselves mature through the rejection of humour is that humour is an intrinsic part of human nature and as such is an important facet of inter-human relation. Those who are not developed enough to include it are a paradox of their own argument that it is juvenile, because they have simply not matured enough to accept it.

[@CamMoreRon]

Brent Proctor Very well said.

[@kashmiripunditadkaul]

Brent Proctor Apparently, in the Brandian Universe, a rejection of a particularly juvenile attempt at humour equals to a complete rejection of humour and all that is 'natural'. That was not embarrassing for you at all then! :-)

[@monoperative]

Brent Proctor A quite elegant putdown, sir. Nicely put. kashmiripundi - humour is still humour, irespective of whether you personally find it amusing or not, trying to convince others that they are somehow less sophisticated for laughing at something that you didn't is pointless and silly.

[@julielevinge266]

What a total disappointed Hitchens is, hard to believe he shares same DNA with Christopher Hitchens a very cleaver & compassionate man 👍♥️

[@harrying882]

Your the disappointment, Christopher loved peter and vice versa.

[@truthteller99999]

@@harrying882 I really don't know where you got that idea! Have you been taking drugs? Anyway julielevinge266 didn't say they didn't say anything about their feelings, just that Peter is not as smart. (And anyone who disagrees with that is even more stupid, angry and delusional than Peter Hitchens.)

[@fraggit]

Are you the #MustBeMarxist(yawn) #FreePalestine(lol) #BLM(that aged well), NHS worker Julie Levinge from Twitter? Is that why you disagree with Peter, or is it just plain hormones? To say Peter is not as "cleaver" as Christopher is as dumb as your hashtags. Just plain dumb if that isn't you.

[@antiducktwenty]

@@harrying882 You're in need of some written English tutoring

[@Nickademas1]

What Mr. Hitchens suggested from the commencement of the debate, was a system already in place to deter drug addicts from being drug addicts. "Learn to use some reason"... he says.

[@jazzman1954]

Why is no one talking about the dealers? Forget the sad people who take drugs for whatever reason. Eliminate the dealers.

[@RobLate]

This debate goes nowhere on either side. I know a mixture of people from ALL walks of life that have abused opiates, cannabis, alcohol, cigarettes - you name it. Some of these people can dive in and out of use with long periods of remission, some dabble momentarily and never again, and others don't stop until absolute oblivion. The one thing the latter group all have in common is that they're all performing some form of avoidance and compensation ritual. When someone doesn't know how to handle a traumatic event, a deep rooted inadequacy, depression / chemical imbalances and a host of other psychological issues, drugs remain a reliable tool in coping with such problems. Yes drug abuse IS a disease, but the cure lies in bringing forward the notion that the disease is based in ones psychological make-up, caused by nature and nurture. People in poorer areas have higher rates of substance abuse because their lives aren't fulfilling, we need to help people to be happy and to not need these substances in the first place, that is true drug rehab. Much like the flawed rat in a cage experiment where the rat was given a drip with cocaine and - big surprise - the rat consumed the cocaine until it died, but this doesn't mean that with humans every person who touches these drugs will go the same way. These rats were in cages void of any other stimulus - they later recreated the experiment but gave the rats company, stimulating toys and other things to play with, and no rat prioritised the cocaine over any other activity. Open your eyes people.

[@Tomadair1]

Thank you ,you are right the other name for drug use is medicating, people in pain often self medicate regardless of the consequences ,when asked they will say things like : anything is better than the anguish I feel in my normal life ,due to ,say parental child abuse ,loss of a child,partner ill or dying or any of lifes other trials.The methods Mr Brand is advocating hopefully address these trials and methods of surviving them.Punishing someone into compliance,or the threat of it does not work ,if it did we would be governed into ,and by Nazis.Lest we forget..

[@homegardens7682]

Rob Earley good intelligent comment.

[@shrimpanzee001]

Rob Earley drug abuse is a crime. drug addiction is a health problem. things which turn people to the drugs can be diseases such as mental disorders. some people just want to get fucked up with the lads however.

[@lazarusthehumblecritic8390]

Rob Late Finally someone who is thinking for themselves not picking sides. Nice post.

[@goodyeoman4534]

'avoidance and compensation ritual' sounds like pseudo-scientific waffle to me. drug users choose to take drugs and break the law. they are not the victims; their families are, the community is, the taxpayer is.

[@mylovelyman2]

Interesting interaction here. I think Peter is excellent, and is always measured in his augmentation. However, I sense a tincture of bitterness creeping in with his interaction with Russel. I think this exchange had a lasting effect on Russel ( whom I also think is excellent) he has spent a lot of time learning from great thinkers and developing his augumentation and reasoning skills.

[@aimanahmad645]

Idk who this Peter clown is but he seems like a religious fundamentalist or at least is as ignorant as one lmao The recidivism rate using the outaded judicial system he is advocating for is abysmally low. Its clealy failing and anyone who can't see that is either extremely ignorant or wilfully ignorant.

[@DDL-n2u]

You find him excellent? Gross

[@mylovelyman2]

@@DDL-n2u Yes I do Doug. He has matured a lot recently, his podcasts reveal a genuine desire to learn and grow, which he has. These are truly excellent traits. There was a time when his verbosisity and arrogance annoyed the hell out of me. You can clearly track a change in the man.

[@Anawackp15]

@@aimanahmad645 Just say you don't like people opposing illegal and dangerous drugs being made a free-for-all and enabled to do more damage on society and move. Thanks.

[@aimanahmad645]

@@Anawackp15 prohibition causes astronomically more harm than drugs themselves that's just an indisputable fact darling. Why don't you just say your completey ignorant of reality, that way no one losses brains cells by listening to your mindless drivel. Putting consenting adults in cages for deciding to ingest a substance that the state doesn't like is barbaric and solves no problems.

[@PauloConstantino167]

It's unbelievable to me that these people say that taking drugs is a crime. This is sad, very sad. This kind of mind is to be pitied.

[@TheMiist]

Engineer Of Wonders it's literally a crime though

[@victorjones3536]

Engineer Of Wonders .... recreational drug use a few joints at the weekend tottaly agree. but sadly mentally ill people shoot smack in kids play parks. and ruined it for all of us. they are like Russell brand they promote the fact they are smack heads whilst making a career out of it. could you imagine going to your work and declaring that. no but he does.

[@joedennehy386]

I agree with Peter on many things, but not this. The war on drugs has been lost.

[@irishelk3]

Wow so cemented in his own point of view, part of what Mckenna coined 'The Dominator Culture''.

[@contactkeithstack]

brand?

[@irishelk3]

contactkeithstack Why would i use a Terence Mckenna phrase to criticize Russell Brand?

[@PeterSellers22]

I'm Irish. Try and see past your prejudice. Hitchens is advocating self-discipline and self-respect i.e. don't take drugs in the first place

[@irishelk3]

PeterSellers22 No your from Ireland, im from Ireland, its not who you are though, haha.

[@toiletfriend420]

"Why would i use a Terence Mckenna phrase to criticize Russell Brand?" because you were previously a leftist and learned the error of your ways?

[@chanchaokiitos1184]

People have always wanted to get high, one way or the other, because it makes them feel good. That's why drug use will never stop, no matter how harshly the users are being punished. Prison doesn't make anyone a good person, quite the opposite, and trying to scare young people from not even trying drugs in the first place by giving long prison sentences to offenders simply doesn't work. Some people become physically and mentally addicted more easily than the others, so there clearly is a thing called "addictive personality". Those people need help above anything else.

[@wanderer1955]

Excuses excuses 😴 Listen m8t As soon as some dumbass offers anybody a poison to swallow, common sense should kick in, and the person being offered that poison should say to the person doing the offering, "ARE YOU FUCKING NUTS!!!! NO THANKS!!" Right?

[@Sa1iba2-m8m]

Well said! 👏👏👏

[@healingprotectioncreation7117]

It's rather ironic of Russell Brand to accuse someone else of "rambling".

[@Rapid_GT]

He rants not ramble, whereas Hitchens mumbles 😂

[@davescott6090]

Brand is an A1 class PILLOCK how Hitchens had the patience t o debate with this turf shows what a decent chap Peter is

[@russellthompson9271]

Tell that to the 99% of all other idiots on this thread with the brain cells of a turd.

[@DragonQ]

I wonder if anyone has told Peter Hitchens that his ideas have been tried many times before, including for alcohol, and have never worked.

[@swingingmonk]

What do you expect he's a Victorian!

[@avatarion]

Yes, like in Saudi Arabia?

[@KtmLama]

the US has been throwing people in jail for drugs forever now and that shit aint working at all.

[@goodyeoman4534]

It works in Japan and South Korea. Since you cannot deny this provable fact you can only shrug it off as 'cultural differences'.

[@trytwicelikemice7516]

@@goodyeoman4534 Japan and South Korea are vastly different societies to ours. How's it been working over in the US?

[@oldskoolrools3087]

If we use Russell Brand's logic, I think we should also treat burglars, murderers, paedophiles, etc with kindness and compassion and see them as human beings in the hope that they don't do it again....

[@stizzylank6684]

All those crimes necessarily involve a victim. Someone goes out of their way to harm someone else, which justifies criminal punishment. Taking drugs is necessarily a victimless crime. You're not harming anybody but yourself when you decide to drink a cup of coffee or having a beer, and the same goes for heroin users.

[@oldskoolrools3087]

@@stizzylank6684 I in no way agree with the current laws on drugs, and your point has some merit. However, in order for your logic to have merit, you have to break down what we mean by “drugs”, as some drugs are far from victimless crime, and when you mention heroin, you are completely wrong Should individual 1 who goes out on a Saturday night to a club, drops ecstasy with friends, maybe does a line or two, has a great time, taxis home without causing any trouble, smokes some weed on his come down, and then gets up for work Monday morning be treated as a criminal? That’s victimless crime. He didn’t hurt anybody, rob anybody and funded it all himself. I think the law needs changing to decriminalise weekend party people. But individual 1 is currently treated same under the law, or even worse, as a individual 2, the heroin addict who burgles homes, mugs people and steals from shops to fund their addiction. That is in no way victimless, takes up masses of police time, and ruins many many family homes. I know, as it’s happened to me. Far from victimless. Russel Brand wants us to treat these people with compassion and empathy….he’s fucking deluded. These people need to be locked up in solitary, no access to drugs…that will break the habit. Then when they’re off the shit, you’ll find out if they really want to change.

[@stizzylank6684]

@@oldskoolrools3087 The only reason people resort to petty crime to pay for drugs is because drug prohibition & the toxic supply & increased pricing of drugs created by it directly cause it to happen. A dose of lab made heroin is safer for human consumption than a beer. Illicit heroin is contaminated by drug dealers to contain extremely addictive and potent non-heroin additives. A legal clean safe supply would see this type of behaviour massively decreased. Sure, alcohol is legal & we still see people committing petty crimes to pay for that drug, but if it were illegal we'd see hundreds of thousands more people in this situation. All drugs are equal. There's no such thing as good drugs, bad drugs, harmless drugs or dangerous drugs. Its all relative &, most importantly, it all very heavily depends on legal status. When a drug is illegal, all related harms skyrocket. Prohibition of drugs caused all these issues you brought up, & ending the prohibition of drugs would rectify all of them

[@oldskoolrools3087]

@@stizzylank6684 Fair point on the prohibition and effect on pricing. Prohibition simply puts money in the pockets of criminals in my view, and leads to no end of violence. Seems to me there’s a quite a bit of common ground shared here. “All drugs are equal”….I don’t agree with this statement though. For want of a better expression, in my view, there are “good drugs” and “bad drugs”. The good drugs are the ones that people take on a weekend and have a good time. The bad ones are the ones that people take on a daily basis, as they have lost control. Control is the key, and for some people, heroin and the nasty drugs will control them. People will always take drugs. Decriminalize the weekend drugs, and focus resources on education and stopping people taking the nasty drugs....we can all have a good time then....

[@stizzylank6684]

@@oldskoolrools3087 What constitutes a "bad drug" would you say? Is someone who uses caffeine on a daily basis using a bad drug? Prohibition makes drugs as dangerous as they are. A dose of lab-made non-contaminated heroin is safer to use than a pint of beer. It all comes back to prohibition. During alcohol prohibition, alcohol related deaths skyrocketed as the market was run entirely by the black market, just like the current heroin market. Control is absolutely the key. If all drugs were produced and sold under strict regulation like alcohol and caffeine, then all drugs would necessarily be as safe as can possibly be.

[@lujkeaaron9100]

Peter speaks for ages. Peter interrupts Russell's first dialogue and takes over to speak again for ages. Peter proceeds to complain about being interrupted.

[@mattkinsella9856]

Because he's an arrogant narcissist who has no knowledge or understanding of drug addiction, yet he's asking why Russel Brand is there, who was a former drug addict with personal knowledge of the subject. Any intelligent person would ask why Peter is there and why he gets to dominate the conversation. Arrogant narcissistic idiots with a superiority complex like Peter is what is wrong with Britain.

[@TheGregcawthorne]

The compression on this video is absolutely wild.

[@williampaterson4333]

Sending Drug Addicts and alcoholics to jail DOESN'T and WON'T ever work as you CAN'T punish EMOTIONAL PAIN out of people. Addicts need COMPASSION and NOT some "VICTORIAN ATTITUDE" to drug users. I wonder how Peter would feel if he had a user in HIS family ? 💖💖💖💖💖💖💖💖

[@ciaran82359]

Well said.

[@rustymcrae7739]

I feel sorry for Peter. He's lived his whole life in the shadow of the greatest speaker of our time, Christopher Hitchens, and although one can tell Peter and Christopher share the same DNA, Peter just lacks something likeable in his persona.

[@rustymcrae7739]

@pete ohara What is nonsense?

[@au6294]

@@rustymcrae7739 thats why people dont like him as much, cause Chris spoke sense and Peter speaks nonsense lol

[@1man1bike1road]

hes dishonest first of all and tied by religion and the hatred that comes with it

[@pixels2u]

worth watching just to see Russell's presence irritate the hell outta Peter!

[@Peter-dr9ch]

Russell & Peter best mates now that Brand has turned right around the corner.

[@Crackfox69420]

If you think Russel has turned right you are delusional. Peter is just a hypocrite.

[@policematrixx]

in other countries possession gets you 10 to life they still have the same % of drug users

[@lewiskennedy6673]

Paul Judkins there are loads of drugs in Thailand,you just have to go there and see for yourself

[@policematrixx]

@valleywoodworker try Thailand 🇹🇭

[@floorskin1]

@@policematrixx not tue

[@BenCarnage]

Tbh, Peter Hitchens should've been able to keep his cool. Sure Russel has a childlike manner in a way, but how quickly he was able to get Peter down to his level. I wonder what Christopher Hitchens would've responded to this debate :) I can only imagine a great big smile.

[@Tlevids]

Peter Hitchens is much weaker than his brother was.

[@robsawalker]

Tlevids Not necessarily true. Peter is a very intelligent guy, don't be fooled. But, like most intelligent men, he has weak areas which he cannot accept due to arrogance. His whole credo on drugs is frankly childish and bizarre. I can only imagine he has never come across or recognised addiction in anyone before.

[@MrThorFr]

Maybe a alcohol addiction in his brother?,,,,

[@jide1000]

But then Christopher Hitchens could hardly be described as anal whereas His brother is a walking personification of the term.

[@zootsoot2006]

jide1000 I think this is one issue where the two brothers would have been almost allied. I can imagine Christopher baulking at anyone telling him he was addicted and completely powerless over his drinking. Christopher was an old-style leftist and if you want to know what happened to drug addicts in the USSR or the PRC (still), they certainly weren't given much sympathetic treatment.

[@thethe6232]

“ You are like a Peculiar child Peter “ I Love it 👍

[@wanderer1955]

How ironic that Russel Brand who is the mental age of 14 and has been forever!! Telling someone else he's a child. LOVE IT!!🤣🤣🤣✌️

[@yippeeki-yay1691]

"You're a rapist and a sexual predator Russ" Thought I'd update it for you 👍

[@laurencosh7690]

And yet really Russell is like a peculiar child...

[@tsiddig]

Pot kettle black springs to mind

[@kevinparker461]

@@laurencosh7690 Exactly what i thought!!. When Brand first appeared on the scene he gave me the creeps!, it seems he may be about to prove my instincts correct!!

[@marcusaurelius9123]

The late & great Christopher Hitchens got the charm. His brother seems to have missed out