Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Sorry, Richard Branson – We Didn't Care About Your Blaze
The British, at long last, are showing a healthy indifference to the ways of the super-rich.
Did anyone feel for Richard Branson and his Necker Island inferno – sympathy, empathy, anything? If not, why not? The story had all the compelling ingredients. Lightning striking the £60m private island, fire raging through the Agatha Christie-sounding Great House. Guest Kate Winslet carrying Branson's 90-year-old mother to safety. Branson racing towards the burning house, stark naked. Perhaps too much information with that last one. I hope his hot-air balloons weren't damaged.
Here was a story with everything. By "everything", I mean, billionaires and Oscar winners in peril! We'd have lapped this up in decades gone by. Fabulous, brave Kate, and her soot-smudged cheeks, carrying Granny Branson through the flames to safety – wow, it's like Titanic, only hotter.
And yet no one I've come across seems that fussed about the Necker fire. Which seems surprising, even cold. Don't the rich burn like the rest of us? Moreover, this story was akin to a 1970s disaster movie. One almost expected the late Liz Taylor to waft on to "set" in mink and pearls, until becoming engulfed in flames and falling off a balcony, still clutching a martini glass. Indeed, maybe this (the feeling of fictional characters playing movie scenes) was part of the problem. Times are hard and getting harder. These people who are richer, bigger, "better" than us – it's as if we don't have the energy for them anymore.
It seems to me that we're sick of them – "them" being the super-rich and/or mega-famous. After all this time, the penny has finally dropped that most of them wouldn't, well, piss on us if we were on fire. All that escapism was a con, a sedation of the masses. This is interesting on several levels.
Where celebrity is concerned, I've long thought that the public had been played for suckers. We are constantly and loftily informed that we are obsessed with celebrities, when it stands to reason that those most obsessed with celebrity are celebrities themselves. After all, they're the ones who fought, schemed and scrabbled to become celebrities. However, in this instance, celebrity may be the ultimate pan-cultural, socioeconomic red herring. Recently, it's the rich who've been flushed out, exposed as "different", in various unflattering ways F Scott Fitzgerald, that big suck-up, probably wouldn't have considered.
In Britain, the general attitude towards the rich and powerful seems to be shifting fast, from a default position of respect, to grudging respect, then simple resentment, right through to anger and disgust. This is for a variety of reasons: the cuts are really beginning to bite; weasel tax breaks are being offered to the top rung; and the seeming absence of homegrown Warren Buffett types insisting that their taxes be raised, because they've had it too easy.
Buffett and others have been speaking out, frequently and eloquently, on such matters, but there's not been much from British millionaires/billionaires.
Hang on, I'll just hang my head out of the window, cock my ears, see if I can hear anything from them. Nope, nothing. Of course, I don't know Branson's personal view. Arguably, he is Britain's most popular billionaire ever, someone who's managed to retain at least a semblance of blokeishness and accessibility. If even Dickie B can't get the British public interested in his near-fatal house fire, then there's no hope for the rest of them.
Yet this is the same nation that was fascinated by the woman who leapt from the burning building during the riots. For days afterwards, we wanted to know who she was, and how she was (Monika Konczyk, and fine, if you're still interested). Where was the famous Brit compassion for those on Necker – what exactly do the super-rich have to do to engage our attention and sympathy these days?
Oh I don't know. Perhaps start realizing it's a two-way street?
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
60 Comments so far
Show AllIf Branson was on fire I wouldn't piss on him either... He is just another welfare queen of: "Bail us out poor people! We know it will hurt, but we have a lifestyle we cannot give up!!!... Anyway, we will get the government to force it out of you anyway!!.. Suck on it!"
Richard Branson is a waste of skin...
I'm not so sure. Methinks that the British public's response to Branson's misfortune is more a degree of media-and life-overload rather than the rich and famous falling out of favor.
As much as it hurts me to say this by exposing my envy for this fellow, Branson is to be admired. He is a true modern "hero" (not my thought, but Joe Campell's theory). He has done fabulously well having started in upper-middle class with dyslexia. A story that F. Scott Fitzgerald would have smiled at. An adventurer and scientist who has done things that is reminiscent of the class of the Explorers Club circa nineteenth century., and he would not be out of place in a Jules Verne novel. What is there not to admire, and even like about him? Blessed with an ability to connect with people (a positive flip-side of his dyslexia), he was the kid at school who was popular with everyone. Today, he donates more money to green technology development and the science of anthropomorphic climate change than any other..... second only to the larger nations such as the USA and Germany.
There is a place for true heros viz manufactured ones in the cult of celebrity worship. I do not believe that the likes of Branson have fallen from public favor; I believe the public are too overloaded, too exhausted to notice and care.
"Today, he donates more money to green technology development and the science of anthropomorphic climate change than any other..... second only to the larger nations such as the USA and Germany."
So how much does he donate? Source, please?
$3B over 10 years. Check Wiki on Branson.
On;y trolls ask for sources when you are too lazy to do it yourself.
Only trolls ask for sources?
Source?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=troll
Ask your Mommy to read it to you.
It's a good habit to document any facts/statistics you include in a post and, if you haven't, to document them when asked (unless it is something that is such common knowledge that the request makes no sense).
You might try developing a sense of humor too. It goes a long way.
A site you might find of interest:
http://www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.html
WTF- You sure do give them their moneys worth, there is a little bit on your chin.
Just the facts, M'aam, just the facts.
.
I think the word is "anthropogenic"
Although the image of anthropomorphic climate conjures all kinds of childhood images of god, the wind, etc. So thanks for the visuals.
.
Check, check. Jetlag. y'know.
The rich, indeed, burn like the rest of us. But we don't want them to burn - more like roast... Good thing they prefer organic food, too. I don't know whether Jello Biafra said it first; to paraphrase: we may soon be eating the rich. Have you any Grey Poupon?
ha-ha-ha-ha-ha... haha.. "good thing they prefer organic food" hhehehee hahhagha!
Good one!
EAT THE RICH!
Then again, do you see him asking for sympathy? Unlike those thugs who rioted and claimed that it was the fault of society that they had to burn and loot?
Nor do I hear him asking for forgiveness. After all, the outrageous ways he spends his money could go far in alleviating pain and suffering all over the world. His sorry ass worth 1000 laboring stiffs trying to pay the rent? LIke hell. He won't be getting any sympathy from me--even if he didn't ask for it.
Why should he be asking for foregiveness? Because his house burnt?
Show me where he defrauded or coerced others to create his wealth...
Yes, he is asking for sympathy, with his constant bleating to the world about the fire.
The fact that the media chooses to report it is evidence of his asking for sympathy? LOL... The media sees a story and they choose to report it. I'll wager Branson simply goes on with his life
Wimbat- Whose society are you the fault of?
I'm my own fault. Then again, I don't destroy what others create, nor do I ask their sympathy
Do you consider sympathy to be a human trait? Do you consider the environment to belong to the "rich people"? You are all our faults. That is a pun, that I created-please don't destroy this wealth created by someone else..
Branson? Isn't he the guy who flew off into the clouds like Amelia Earhart, except unaccompanied, and vanished without a trace?
No? Well, maybe next year.
At any rate, this story seems to have gotten lost in all the Hurricane Irene hype and hysteria on this side of the pond. This is the first I'm hearing of it, and hopefully the last.
Speaking of hype and hysteria, I'm honestly hung up on whether to give or take away author points for an article that attempts the meta-point that the corporate mass-media has made no end of manufactured fuss about celebrities (especially obscenely rich ones) and the public's alleged obsession with them-- but in the end is still another meta-fuss thrown on the same self-inflating pile.
This IS the stuff of disaster movies, though, and it wouldn't surprise me a bit if this story was made into a film. It needs more plot and connective tissue, though; perhaps the writers will be sufficiently "inspired by actual events" to begin with the naked Branson and Kate Winslet and backtrack from there-- although this might be a deal-breaker for Winslet herself actually starring in the film.
Anyway, thanks for the gratuitous schadenfreude; it's like a hot toddy after apparently dodging the worst of the windy, rainy bullet named Irene.
I once heard that Kate Winslet had agreed to keep her clothes on for a film - as long as it was contextually relevant and tastefully done.
Good one!
There is a business opportunity here for image consulting firms. We are getting wise to the super wealthy. The word is getting out that they refuse to pay taxes. Warren is a good example, as are corporate people Exxon and GE.
Warren reported income of $40 million last year on an investment portfolio of $45 billion. That's 9/100 of one percent ROI for our favorite billionaire and investment guru. Warren paid $7 million tax which would not pay for one wing on a $40 million dollar drone.
GE, the largest arms merchant in the world, with US as its biggest customer, paid $0.00 income tax last year. Exxon with the largest profits in world history, five years running, paid $0.00 income tax last year.
Our biggest expense is defense and unless ET is on his way back to take me out I'm getting screwed. I'm paying to make the world free for Warren, GE and Exxon to do business. Key word being free. The neoliberal free market types are really just freeloaders.
Warren just made $367 million yesterday. He claims an effective tax rate of 17.4%. 17.4% of $367 million is $64 million. What are the odd that Warren will pay 10 times the tax he did last year? Zero to none.
It is beyond poor taste to ask the people for austerity when Warren is sitting on $45 billion dollars that he never paid his fare share of tax on. Forbes reported Warren worth $37 billion in '09 and $47 billion in '10. His investment portfolio increased by $10 billion - 27%. The $10 billion dollar increase is an extremely under-taxed capital gain. Where is our tax Warren? Talk is cheap. Tell US about following the letter of the law like GE did. Tell US how you are going to do the right thing when you die.
Time for the wealthy to get new image consulting firms. WE see you!
"It is beyond poor taste to ask the people for austerity when Warren is sitting on $45 billion dollars that he never paid his fare share of tax on."
How would he pay taxes which the IRS hasn't assessed for him? There's no mechanism for doing that and the IRS doesn't take tips. If he were to send money extra to what he was assessed, the IRS would send him a refund of the excess, probably with a note or a checked-off form telling him that he sent too much. Their books have to balance, too!
Rainborowe,
You are missing the point, perhaps accidentally on purpose? Buffett has MANY avenues besides the IRS to help the overly taxed poor and middle class. The fact that he is not doing so (spare me "he donated his wealth" baloney - it's a tax dodge and he has done nothing of the kind) just shows his claims of improper taxation in the US are just PR points for his class.
Buffett is probably worse than the most libertarian billionaire crook around because of his successful con as the "good grandpa" prudent investor. That bastard has had the inside track on US government future technology and/or wars since he began milking his politician daddy for information. He is an empire apologist, period.
"It seems to me that we're sick of them – "them" being the super-rich and/or mega-famous. After all this time, the penny has finally dropped"
That's funny, in the sense of "interesting on several levels" - only yesterday I was struck by the thought that tv in general is getting old, that we as a culture are moving on.
We seem to be moving on, not only to the internet, but to a different thinking about what joy is. Collective sources of joy and meaning have been churning for some 50 years (tv), 100 years (movies), 150 years (photographs) and 200 years (newsprint) - all round numbers for mass penetration. Now they've been much depleted, used up.
After everything went digital, not even dvds seem more magical than bits of plastic anymore. Flatscreen tvs are just part of the ubiquitousness of screens. Nothing much magical on the horizon, either: Ipad 3 isn't really something great to long for for Christmas. - Not even Christmas is, come to think of it.
We're in a sense saturated with images of all sorts, and are turning back to ourselves, to make our own mental images of the world, our selves and our world, our own meaning. We're getting personal. Perhaps. It does feel that way, after the we the public now have been thoroughly excluded from meaningfully felt participation in the development of our human cultural world.
Wars take off, our collective money and resources are spent, we scream and complain, to little avail. Events churn on without our input. (Even hurricane Irene wasn't all she was pumped up to be: hurricanes we've had, boring, got anything new?) Open public lies and crimes are disregarded. Corruption just continues as if unrevealed. Such things do take a toll. Even if not immediately, or in the immediately expected forms.
We don't necessarily feel controlled, but neither participating. Cloud-computing and cloud-thinking is buzzing around us, making everything available and nothing meaningful - pointedly put.
Maybe a new mode of thinking is growing on us, not yet having gained a name. New media, new connectednesses, new kinds of meaning. We'll see.
And, yes, not caring much about the plight of an overexposed self-made millionaire is part of the new style. Branson, evidently good at his many business-things, still is too bland - Bill Gates he's not. Not much to love or hate. "Too bad, Richard, about your house. But like you said, you'll build again. And you can afford it. It's not like it concerns US - the house was on a rich-people playground-island we don't frequent much, or ever, to be honest."
So maybe we don't care much. Maybe I don't care much. But I did care enough to write this. That's still care, and looking for meaningful ways to apply it. That's the kind of search we're into.
Delightful and full-sail post. I think Irene is doing what she is intended to do, to cleanse, humble, inspire without giving a second thought to the nature of being in the natural brew of the planet. She has been forcing us to look up - literally. How immense, powerful, terrible in her beauty. As with the fire, I hope all are well and truly moved far beyond the plastic fantastic burly show.
Surfeit fatigue. Context-free overabundance. Too much, we shut down. Glad you opened up, tho.
Yes, a really nice post! Good thoughts, thank you for sharing!
2b - Check out Dr Leonard Shlain, The Alphabet Versus The Goddess. You will be glad you did.
Screw Branson. What's next?
Very worthwhile for the author to bring these phenomena to the forefront, and with this example. Branson has long been near the bottom of my personal billionaire shitlist, for his self-promoting showmanship, and for his symbiotic relation with the media in loving his "joie de vivre" lifestyle - as if almost any of us couldn't summon up more enthusiasm for life if we had hundreds of millions to throw around cooking up grand adventures.
Branson is the perfect example of the unapologetic plutocrat, high on money and life and acting like he deserves every penny, and the public's reaction to the destruction of some buildings on his $100 million *private island* is deservedly muted. If the public were wiser about class war, that reaction would be much more contemptuous.
Please no free pass for Warren Buffet.
His multi-billion support / investment in the quite corrupt Moody's, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and now Bank of America show whose side he is on (bankers and the status quo graftopia) even if he is willing to pay a couple million more in taxes. Some note he lives in a modest house. So did Osama bin Laden.
Investing is an amoral activity. People do it for the same reason they go to work: to make money. To make money they invest in companies that offer the biggest return with the least chance of going under during the period of that investment. The only side an investor is "on" is the company that is best positioned to make him/her a good return on the investment. The time to be charitable with their money is after the money is made, not before or during the initial investment.
Yeah, that's what I noticed, too. First, Buffet makes a speech about creating economic equality and then he invests in the problem. He looks a little insincere to me.
If Buffet weren't a hypocrite, he'd just make a voluntary contribution to the Treasury to help pay down the debt rather than set up a charitable foundation to avoid taxes
Yeah- he lives in over 5,000 square feet of modesty.
This article and most of the comments are really snarky, cheap shots. I have frequently flown on Branson's airline and shopped at his stores and his employees are all happy. His philanthropic endeavors are really imaginative and he puts himself personally on the line for them. Can you name another billionaire businessman who went on a hunger strike?
The guy has a lot of style. I think he's a gas and you people are a bunch of sore-losers....or maybe just plain losers.
Comment background music: Rolling Stones, "Sympathy for the Devil"
Well, after reading your post I feel terrible. I'd like to make it up to Mr. Branson somehow.
Is there an address where we could ship him some caviar to make amends?
"Can you name another billionaire businessman who went on a hunger strike?"
A 3-day hunger strike. I can think of few things that have more over-inflated symbolic import. A rich showman's version of activism. Branson will devote a chapter to it in a future autobiography.
You beat me to it. Branson has created an airline with thousands of well paying jobs and benefits. We need more Bransons and fewer of the envious losers who've never created anything helpful to their fellow man.
How well paying? Figures please. How much does one of Branson's pilots earn yearly? How about his flight attendants? Got a salary figure for them? Maintenance workers? Need some dollar figures here. What the hell do you mean you don't know? You made a statement. Back it up.Thousands of well paying jobs and benefits. Okay, I'll settle for averages. What is the average salary of Bransons airline employees, and what is the average value of their benefits. You don't know? What?!?!
DkShaw- Thank you.
Exactly. Every time I hear this "jobs-jobs-jobs" from the rich, I ask "and what wages do they pay?" Considering that even as a licensed civil engineer, I didn't earn what, say, the Union Verizon workers are fighting to keep, until I went to work for the US government, I am deeply skeptical that ANY capitalist pays a worker a living wage - aside from that dwindling 5% or so who still have a union.
It is the difference between whatever he is paying and ZERO. If he hadn't started the airline, those jobs wouldn't be there to be filled.
Your short posts, do not reveal your true intent. Let me ask you this- do you think the oligarchy ruling brittain, of which Branson uses the "knight" and "sir" designation, is the legitimate "owners" of the economy of brittain? Did they (including branson) create all those jobs of being peasants, with out which none of the people would even have that much vaunted difference beyond ZERO? Did the strange and inbreed german aristocracy ever use coercion, malfeasance, or even violence to attain and protect the domination of the rest of the humans in brittain? Does Branson hold such a sway over you , or is it the greed in your heart, and the wanting of power that curbs your love?
And if workers hadn't been there to fill his jobs, he would never have made his millions.
Employment is a transaction. Gratitude, if any is appropriate, needs to flow both ways.
I'm sure all of Branson's employees with private islands will be happy to put a roof over his head.
If we're sick of "them" then why another article about "them?" This article just seemed like a waste of time.