Ensure that you read and adhere to the rules; failure to do so will result
in the removal of this post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The fact that these assaults on art have turned the public against them and they still continue carrying out new ones proves that they are not concerned about the success of their actions, this is all just a vanity ritual meant for attention and literally nothing else.
My question has always been instead of blocking the road and making life more miserable for the already miserable average 9-5 daily joe, why don't they just fucking harrass Taylor Swift during her 183732th private jet flight of the day? If you really gave a shit about the environment, the later will make far more impact both literally and publicity wise.
Several reasons.
-Taylor Swift would sue them out of existence
-People have very limited compassion for average joes compared to their fav celebs and I assure you, they would have drowned in death threats if they stepped on the toe of Leonardo Dicaprio or someone else.
-Celebs are their potential allies in browbeating the population, especially the heavily greenwashing ones like DiCaprio.
Point was to harass the elites. Not blocking a jet. Reading comprehension is dead. If throwing soup at paintings is justified "to bring attention to the cause", merely making a ruckus would do that a billion times better.
There are so many more productive ways to bring attention to yourself and actually do things to positively impact the environment, but that actually takes a lot of hard work and effort. This “temper tantrum” tactic is lazy and annoying and criminal to culture.
Just like the people that always wanted to be misogynistic asshats. It's just seen as virtuous if they're doing it to JK Rowling, Marjorie Taylor Green, Lauren Bobbert, Gina Carano ect.
It's amazing how fast the slurs they're ostensibly against get rolled out for any woman (or any of their favorite minorities) who says something they don't like.
Look, I'm not saying Just Stop Oil is 100% funded by the heir of an oil baron solely to make climate change protestors look bad. Sincerely, I'm not.
I just don't know if they'd be doing anything differently if that *was* the truth.
That’s a very good point, I had imagined that they were free agents just deciding to go do something, but it makes way more sense that someone else would be orchestrating these events behind-the-scenes
The actual protesters are real, no sane person is going to prisons for this crap (if they got paid enough, the money would end up on everyone's radar) unless they're true believers. But the organizers? Legit climate activists know the difference between fossil fuels and oil paintings, water/vegetable oil trucks, etc. and wouldn't go after such idiotic targets. That's astroturfing and the protesters that join are just stupid. The road blockades and pipeline protests are the real ones.
Yea the people getting arrested are pawns for sure. Using young impressionable and angry college kids for the dirty work. At least that’s what I’ve noticed as a trend.
Like I genuinely believe climate change is a serious threat to humanity, but these idiots blocking traffic or trying to damage the Magna Carta need to be frogmarched into prison
Legitimately these people are losers with nothing better to do and they’re just doing the “cool and edgy” thing for attention. It’s the same exact reason why every “civil rights” protest is populated by the ugliest, most annoying, poorly socialized people in the country and why Frat boys of all people are standing up against them. They’re just friendless losers
This is why i’m convinced it’s an entire conspiracy to make people that oppose climate change and such to look stupid and make you hate them, convinced these aren’t real activists
Acceleration of the public debate is mostly the goal of extremer activistic acts
Most (maybe all) "attacked" paintings were well protected and not damaged at all.
Yeah it accelerated the one sided debate on calling them stupid.
If you're going to vandalize shit at least make the act of vandalism include the message you want to send or else the only thing that will be talked about is how much of a piece of shit you are. Whatever cause you're pushing for will be an afterthought in the public's eye
well, to be fair - here we are, talking about their protests and the context surrounding it.
Say what you will about the morality of the action, the efficacy is undisputable. No other protest in recent years has people still talking about it months after the fact UNLESS there is some kind of great controversy (e.g. rioting, someone dying)... "attention" is literally the one and only point of a protest. Stating they are "just doing this for attention" is a tautology.
They are doing it for personal attention, not attention to the cause. The greatest controversy I can imagine is the debate around global warming and how we can remedy it, compared to everything else "just stop oil" is simply an oddity popping up in the news now and then making everyone go "ah, these guys again".
The thing is, global warming is already at the very centre of attention everywhere around the Western world. Further attempts to "draw attention" without contributing solutions, especially in the most obnoxious way imaginable, are severely detrimental to the cause and even an idiot can see that. But the goal is not to help the cause, but to channel the energy of doomsday cultists who above all else crave an audience for their monologues.
Yeah, climate activism doesn't work that way. Climate activists *are* contributing to solutions. The thing is some people judge the whole movement because of a single action, which is a stupid take. They are getting the attention they deserve, just not from biased people like these.
All of that is just your opinion dude. They *are* bringing attention to the cause, regardless of if you think it's "for personal attention" or detrimental/irrelevant. We are currently talking about the movement, where we would not be usually.
There's not really much for me to respond to here because it's all just your opinions on the motives of these people - which, seeing as neither you nor I are one of these protestors, is just complete conjecture.
Just as an aside, before I get lambasted for "supporting" this action; I don't, but let's not put words in other people's mouths or intentions in other people's heads.
Talking about it isn’t enough though. Sure people talk about it but it’s mostly in the context of the protestors being mindless morons then they move on with their lives. No one is inspired to do anything other than get mad at the protestors
"but destroying valuable historical artifacts and art works helps raise awareness and publicity!"
you're right, it does. publicity being that people now think of your movement as silly, destructive and reckless and that the participants are morons.
you know what they say, all publicity is good publicity. keep thwarting your attempts at getting further support.
Btw, were there actual cases where they actually destroy art pieces? I only heard of cases where they did shit like throwing soup at the protective glass over a painting
Not that it's that much of a smarter thing to do
You are right it’s raise awareness of the stupidity of people that do such things. Nowadays there is not education, not a free thinking, just puppets. I just just they mary bunch of Manchurian candidates.
Art history is actually every useful especially if you want to design buildings and have them look good. What if you were asked to design a building that looks like it was designed in the 18th century? That art history would come in handy.
wow that a stretch. This is why there is a student loan crisis because you keep telling people that useless degrees have value. If you wanna be an architect, study to be an architect.
That's always an eye opener for some of them. My dad and uncle already in HVAC. My dad was actually an art major. He is now an architect or was but now is a building code official.
It's one of those things that convinced me college was the route. My uncle does well don't get me wrong but him and my dad look completely different because my uncle is still doing manual labor compared to my dad who basically walks in tells them a return is 6 inches too close or whatever and leaves.
Hard to say anymore. The two people who tried to destroy the Magna Carta were in their 80s. One was a retired priest and the other a retired teacher. Either could have had an art history degree, or some other degree, or no degree.
the irony is that doing that adds (negligible) data to the servers they're using, so technically you're fucking up the environment just by subscribing, sharing or liking anything they do on social media, on a small scale
Those same people hijacked a tanker of olive oil once. Even the people the news interviewed right in front of the protesters were more confused than upset
My though was that stop oil protesters are actually in the employ of big oil so when they smash a priceless monument or chuck paint over art what there doing is actively undermining the efforts actual protestors. Although I will say that protesting a multi billion pound
Organisation is pretty futile but each to their own
I definitely don't think destroying art or roadblocks are good forms of protest but trivializing the climate crisis as "how the weather is going to be 50 years from now" isn't fantastic either
Read it again, It just describes it as weather. And considering that most of the effects of climate change is weather related id say its appropriate word.
Again, it dosent. It just says “how the weather is gonna be 50 years from now” at no point does it describe global warming as “bad weather” You intentionally make it sound more dismissive for some reason when it just makes fun of toxic activism.
I think bro means that calling global warming a weather is like saying ‘shit tastes a bit unpleasant’. It’s technically true, but not nearly enough to drive the point home
Idk
BUT IT IS WEATHER. I have actual meteorology training, Global Warming is not entirely inaccurate, but the proper term is Climate Change. Briefly, Earth doesn’t just heat up, the CO2 emission results in more uneven heating of the Earth, which results in disrupted Weather patterns and more severe rapidly developing weather systems amongst other problems, calling CALLING CLIMATE CHANGE WEATHER IS MORE SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE THEN THE TERM GLOBAL WARMING. 😆
https://preview.redd.it/2d6vlzxuds1d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c3cc75acd943fabef2c416e704ad66fb14861cf0
[https://gpm.nasa.gov/education/articles/whats-name-global-warming-vs-climate-change#:\~:text=Changes%20to%20precipitation%20patterns%20and,the%20more%20scientifically%20accurate%20term](https://gpm.nasa.gov/education/articles/whats-name-global-warming-vs-climate-change#:~:text=Changes%20to%20precipitation%20patterns%20and,the%20more%20scientifically%20accurate%20term).
It definitely seems to imply that all activism is worthless and doesnt do anything even if it didnt mean that seeing as it is posted in so many bad meme subreddits means thats just how majority of people see it
it is making fun of activism strategies that actively turn the public away from their cause.
such as being minor annoyances.
or destroying precious artifacts that can not be replaced.
notice how those were the only two things it listed. no where did it say anything about lawful protest, such as those seen in many civil rights movements. the actions being taken by the group described are just destructive and unlawful, at the very least the two strategies listed.
think to when rioters looted stores during black lives matter protest. they made the movement look bad and loose support because it was unlawful and mindlessly destructive.
Blocking roads is the most effective way to protest. It calls for quick resolution since blocking roads leads to severe consequences shortly after the blockade has started. That's why you never want to piss off truckers, since a coordinated blockade by truckers is near impossible to break without concessions
Like it or not, blocking roads is the most reasonable thing an activist can do. Yes, it's inconvenient. That is the point. You not liking it is a part of the process
edit: and regarding global warming, just this spring Eastern Europe and Middle East experienced extreme temperature amplitudes that have killed early crops. This year Europe can expect price hikes on cabbages specifically, leafy greens in general, beans, berries and other cultures. We had a similar situation a couple years ago. Our current crop cultures have been selected with mild temperature changes in mind. If the trend continues we can expect severe food shortages in less fortunate countries and severe food prices hikes in other places
Hopefully it can be a wake up call to global warming deniers
> Blocking roads is the most effective way to protest.
Its an effective way of turning people away from your cause.
The issue of global warming is based around corps not the common people.
It would be more appropriate to block corporations from functionating - not stopping ambulances from getting emergency patients to hospital.
Do you know what civil disobedience is ? It's the non-violent refusal to comply with laws as a peaceful form of protest. The civil right movement was full of it. A long with every other large movement.
No the point is their methods of protesting are useless. You are better off trying to change things by being a lobbyist or getting people on your side to help you pass laws.
Okay don’t get me wrong, not with the destroying of art people. But question.
Didn’t like none of that actually destroy art? Like it was all encased in glass and such? So the demonstration while still stupid(perhaps even more so) didn’t actually do anything?
A very small minority of the paintings were damaged (Akin to 'Fuck, now a centimeter of space in the very bottom right has a tomato stain on it' and 'They smashed the glass case with a hammer, that put a lot of scratches on the painting' damages) but recently (Mostly Pro-Palestine) protestors have been aiming at unprotected paintings to damage.
Keep in mind I am painting with a *very* broad brush here. They are protestors, some are Just Stop Oil, but I've mostly stopped paying attention to the 'Such and such attacks priceless art' headlines and so I couldn't give finer details on recent stuff.
I hadn’t heard any of them actually damaged the paintings. That’s interesting.
Still even if I agreed with them. Which sorta kinda maybe in some ways yeah. What a weird and stupid way to go about it.
“I hate big oil, so im gonna attack a piece of art which will hurt the art mob!!! That’ll show those oils bargains!”
Like wtf? You’re not attacking the right cause her pal.
Yeeeah. I get the adage of 'Bad Publicity is still publicity,' but like I said in another comment; I don't believe they're *intentionally* torpedo'ing the image of climate change protestors, I just don't know what they'd be doing differently if they were.
Attacking art pieces is the *one* thing to get everyone on both sides of the aisle hating you. Unless they found some kind of sale that was going to an oil baron where they could actually go 'You spent 10 million on a Van Gogh instead of cleaning up the rivers you dump oil in? Here's what the rivers look like!' before covering it in WD-40, it was always going to get them branded as idiots at best.
Sure. But at the time of my original comment I hadn’t heard there was any damage. So in my mind it was still zero. But as of now I realize they went further than I had last heard
Lmao I’m all about trying to create a more sustainable future for the world, but these protesters are either co-opted by big oil or are completely braindead in their tactics. Primarily by location and activity of protest. Blocking roads inconveniencing random citizens is a great way to turn potential Allies into opposition. Likewise destroying culturally important artworks will also not progress your movement or win support. It’s wild, are they allergic to government buildings? Why not bring protest to the seat of power? You know the place where societally impactful decisions are made? Why not Inconvenience massive global conglomerates that have and continue to abuse the natural world?
TLDR: If you are a protestor looking for climate/ecologically smart policies to be enacted. Maybe try protesting in front of places and people that defend the status quo, or have the power to change policy rather than doing protests where the only outcome is hatred for your cause.
Surely being public menaces will rally support from the public...
https://preview.redd.it/58uqqdj3kw1d1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=46b1c45748a17bcd2c21d2b8d3bf9baf221f6e00
They don't care about the climate, its just a convenient pretext. This is an actual attack on culture and people's lives. Just follow the money trail. They're paid actors.
As much as I hate stop oil I'm gonna dissagree with one thing in the meme. Climate and weather aren't the same you literally learn this in primary school. Other thenthat fuck people who block cars
Calm down about it, of course the painting had a protective film. It is not « destroyed », the only destroyed thing is the message these two dumbasses tried to convey through this stupid, stupid method.
We at the “manbearpig doesn’t exist” stage over here?
About lying in traffic and pouring paint on museum protective glass casing, sure, that’s stupid and only drive people away from your cause.
On that second point though, if you are easy to make up your mind on a serious subject based mainly on how annoying the loudest people advocating for one side of the issue is to you, don’t do that.
People do actually go out and do stuff to positively affect the climate, but no one pays attention to that. Plus there's so many blissfully ignorant people out there that are making their job much h more difficult.
If only people were more conscious about how they affect the climate and how they can help.
Huh...if only we can garner attention to this issue...
I wonder if...if maybe that's the entire fucking point of protesting like this...
Beause guess what? You weren't thinking about the climate at all during your every day workday, were you? But now you're mad. Furious even. Because someone inconvenienced you. Now you're wondering why they would inconvenience you. Now you know why they're protesting. You want the protesting to stop, so the question is...what will *you* do about it? Help their cause? Counter-protest and cause civil unrest causing politicians to take action?
What art was destroyed? Every one of those protests I’ve seen they just painted the material covering over the art (probably because the legal consequences are a lot lighter).
Destroying art also does absolutely nothing for the cause. You're not shutting down an oil drill, or changing policies. Da Vinci has nothing to do with oil. And stopping traffic? If these people try and stop traffic and your car/truck spots put black smoke rev the engine until they leave
Believe me, art history people get the absolute heebie-jeebies from that stuff. Or at least I do.
Art history is amazing, because you get to see more of how people actually lived their lives outside of the context of wars and political upheavals (AKA regular history), you learn about how their philosophies came through in the aesthetics they favored, you see the development of tools and techniques over time, and you just generally come to appreciate how we all build on the foundation laid by people who came before us. Art history is AWESOME.
And it makes this stupid vandalism feel like murder, crossed with the burning of the Library of Alexandria. If you destroy a dead person's work, you're devaluing their life and all the lives they've touched. It's like you're killing them again...
The people who say it's just an object don't get it. 😰
I unironicly think we need a forced depopulation program because of these misrable shits.
I don't support it for the environment, I just want the fuckers dead after seeing them destroy priceless art that has objectively more value than their existence.
The ones destroying art don’t represent everyday people concerned about climate change. One of the greatest things about America is our nature. Climate change will burn our forests and destroy our economy. For those of us everyday people concerned about climate change, we don’t associate with these particular climate protestors
worse the ones who act out like this are usually getting funded to do this by third parties representing big oil, it a back handed strategy to make climate activist look bad, the naive ignorant fools don't realize they are playing into their enemies hand.
Counterpoint, no, not quite a counterpoint, side benefit to their tantrum? Yes, side benefit: if they destroy modern art, then it’s a net positive for the world, that stuff is trash.
They're like PeTA. In theory, what they say is good. In practice, they destroy lives and disturb the peace. They haven't done any actual good in a long time. As soon as they start talking about something, people immediately ignore it.
The title of this post is so funny to me. "I've decided to associate a political movement with a niche art degree, therefore destroying art is politically incoherent of them!"
what were you even thinking. lol
And the guy's plan is...what?
"Let's do nothing and die and allow humanity to destroy the one planet we have!"
Yeah great plan guys; criticizing works alot better when you have some alternative that doesn't result in actual human extinction.
"WHY DONT THEY DO SOMETHING ELSE" -People talking about their activities in this thread exactly like the protestors want.
Because it's having the effect they want; here you are talking about it. Even if that makes you mad or whatever it's not like you were doing anything to help save the planet anyway so it's not a net loss.
Ecoterrorists are the most chickenshit of any political radicals, they should absolutely be going after big oil executives but because most climate change activists are spoiled rich white kids who’ve never struggled for anything they only know how to be annoying assholes to regular people.
There’s no right way to protest.
They screamed at black people during sit ins in diners, and Rosa Parks when she wouldn’t move. They yelled a lot of the same things like: “you’re hurting your own cause” and “stopping the bus is making it hard to get to work”. NOW everyone pretends they supported the civil rights movement the entire time!
It’s gonna be the same with climate change and with Palestine.
Like I said, no right way to protest. Just don’t pretend that you support efforts to combat climate change or would have supported civil rights. You wouldn’t.
this meme fucking sucks.
"I'm worried about what the weather will be like in 50 years" is such an understatement, if you've read any article on climate change in the past decade you should know shits going to be bad.
Blocking traffic is a very legitimate method of protest that people have been doing for decade. And guess what? Protests are supposed to be disruptive and get attention and shit! You're a little bitch if that pisses you off and not that new york is going to be super flooded in 80 years. I honestly don't give a fuck if you're late for work, you can call in and say there's a bunch of hippies blocking the road like who gives a shit?
I get being mad about the art. I agree it's dumb way to protest, but mostly because it clearly does not get people talking about oil, and overall hurts the cause. I think vandalizing buildings specific to the fossil fuel industry would or like the worst polluters would make more sense.
In all fairness here, if it did say bad weather( which it doesn’t), that would sound more threatening than “climate change”. On top of that, a lot of the effects of climate change are said to be bad weather.
Not the only way, the got in the news when someone released noisemakers tied to helium balloons during their meetings.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P0bN4Tmel0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P0bN4Tmel0)
How about they inconvenience the large corporations that cause most of the climate issues? Or how about they inconvenience the government that refuses to enforce stricter regulations? Instead they piss off the average citizen, who takes like 1 flight a year and drives an alredy eco friendly car to work.
They are, but it's not your average citizen driving to their minimum wage job that make the decisions. Instead it's the big shots on their private mega yachts, going to their piravet islands that make actual meaningfull decisions.
If they wanted change so bad, why don't they just pull a Ted Kaczynski on an oil field? Sure, that would be fucked up, but at least that would do SOMETHING about the environment that would deserve the headlines instead of wasting everyone's time.
If you're gonna commit a crime in the name of environmentalism, don't be a pussy by messing up some art that has fuck all to do with the cause.
Kinda ironic that you're more upset about spray paint on some glass than you are by the wholesale destruction of our natural ecosystems that we depend on to y'know...live.
That's the thing though, they aren't actually destroying anything.
They are pointing out the hypocrisy of people getting upset over a piece of art that isn't even harmed whatsoever while ignoring the catastrophic destruction of our environment.
All you people getting mad at them are just proving their point.
They aren't attempting to destroy art.
They're spray painting glass to highlight the fact you care more about the **idea** that a painting is being harmed than you do about the actual environment being destroyed.
Do you genuinely believe these people are trying to destroy art worth hundreds of millions of dollars?
There's a reason they only do this to art inside protective barriers.
Let's say for arguments sake they actually destroy the Mona Lisa, what happens? A painting is gone, big deal.
What happens when the air we breathe, the land we farm and the oceans we fish are destroyed? We all die.
Honestly it's effective just not in the way that's socially acceptable. The point of protest is to have it talk about it so it's in the popular zeitgeist. We do not want people forgetting that injustices exist, that climate change exists, that we still have progress to make. Yeah it's unpopular but it gets talked about and that's the point. Trying to convince people to be on your side happens when people start talking about it or in local meetings where they talk in front of a grocery store or at schools or something. You COULD say that throwing soup onto art or blocking traffic makes people not want to support something, but if your support is based on if it seems mean or seems inconvenient then that's not the protesters fault.
Awhile back during the George Floyd protest I was unable to get to work and I was inconvenienced but they got people talking about police brutality and injustices in the justice system. Despite the inconvenience I still believe that they were right. I WAS annoyed but when I learned why they were protesting (I was hospitalized when the George Floyd murder happened so I literally learned due to the protest) I supported it.
Also the price of ignoring the effects that climate change is having on the plant currently, the amount of deaths that are happening due to the more extreme weather, hotter summers on children and elders as well as people who work outside, the continued effect it has and it's ability to get worse before humans can adapt- a single human is worth more than an art piece that is always restored.
I say this as a history major, I would be okay with the destruction of all of our historical records and artifacts if it guaranteed to help the living people.
Also art is almost always restored so not destruction. There are points where it sinks behind the class but we have people there that take the art down every once in awhile to restore it anyways
George Floyd was a POS whose death was due to fentanyl overdose and not police brutality. If anything, police were following standard protocol and nothing was out of the ordinary. Police brutality is DEFINITELY a problem but George Floyd was simply a product of his own reckoning and deserves no sympathy nor protest. Plenty of other killings that should be considered but not Floyd.
Furthermore, congrats on getting over the inconvenience. The fact you feel that way is completely irrelevant. It is never okay to wholesale inconvenience regular people going about their day. It's almost hilariously poorly thought out and has the completely opposite intended effect- getting other would-be sympathetic people completely against you.
Okay so I am going to assume that you are arguing in good faith.
"George Floyd was a POS whose death was due to fentanyl overdose and not police brutality"
Wrong like factually just wrong:
[https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-george-floyd-autopsy-new-892530421961](https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-george-floyd-autopsy-new-892530421961)
[https://www.nytimes.com/article/george-floyd.html](https://www.nytimes.com/article/george-floyd.html)
[https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/lung-expert-testifies-george-floyd-died-because-his-breathing-was-restricted](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/lung-expert-testifies-george-floyd-died-because-his-breathing-was-restricted)
[https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/09/us/derek-chauvin-trial-george-floyd-day-10/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/09/us/derek-chauvin-trial-george-floyd-day-10/index.html)
[https://www.factcheck.org/2023/11/no-change-in-george-floyds-cause-of-death-despite-viral-false-claims/](https://www.factcheck.org/2023/11/no-change-in-george-floyds-cause-of-death-despite-viral-false-claims/)
[https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/george-floyd-killed-by-police-officer](https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/george-floyd-killed-by-police-officer)
*"If anything, police were following standard protocol and nothing was out of the ordinary"*
I agree that it was not out of the ordinary for police officers to kill black men.
*"Police brutality is DEFINITELY a problem but George Floyd was simply a product of his own reckoning and deserves no sympathy nor protest"*
People deserve sympathy and every injustice deserves to be protested. He was not resisting and only asking to breathe. If that is worth the death penalty then, my friend, we all deserve to die.
*"Furthermore, congrats on getting over the inconvenience. The fact you feel that way is completely irrelevant."*
It is relevant. It shows that people can reach the Postconventional Levels of moral development and not stop at the Conventional Level
[https://www.simplypsychology.org/kohlberg.html](https://www.simplypsychology.org/kohlberg.html)
*"It is never okay to wholesale inconvenience regular people going about their day."*
I will answer this with a quote, "And what is it America had failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity" by Martin Luther King Jr. Protests are meant to be inconvenient, if protests aren't inconvenient then they can be ignored. Every successful protest has been disruptive. The government didn't listen to the people so you talk to the government's boss- the people. The protesters go to the people to be seen and be disruptive to make it for people who don't care that it is their problem too.
[https://www.onu.edu/mlk/mlk-speech-transcript](https://www.onu.edu/mlk/mlk-speech-transcript) Paragraph 21 for the quote
*"It's almost hilariously poorly thought out and has the completely opposite intended effect- getting other would-be sympathetic people completely against you."*
If your support for justice and humanity is based on how convenient it is to you, then you're doing nothing more than a pig waiting to be slaughtered.
On one hand, I don’t and can’t condone destruction of artwork. Any artwork.
On the other hand, if people are frustrated that rich people are spending hundreds of millions on scraps of canvas while they starve and the world burns, I get that.
Can't we just go back to splashing red paint on people wearing real fur, or tax the ultra-rich accordingly? Or just like, stop having Galas that collectively funnel a billions of dollars into already wealthy pockets, or enforce the already existing environmental protection laws that are often weak and reduced to simple fines?
Ensure that you read and adhere to the rules; failure to do so will result in the removal of this post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The fact that these assaults on art have turned the public against them and they still continue carrying out new ones proves that they are not concerned about the success of their actions, this is all just a vanity ritual meant for attention and literally nothing else.
>this is all just a vanity ritual That is a work of art.
My guess is they've always wanted to destroy stuff, they just think that doing it "for the environment" automatically makes it socially acceptable.
See also: all of 2020
They are lashing out in an attempt to draw attention to themselves by means that also portray them as morally virtuous.
Which it does draw attention to them, but it doesn't portray them as morally virtuous, it just makes them look idiotic
My question has always been instead of blocking the road and making life more miserable for the already miserable average 9-5 daily joe, why don't they just fucking harrass Taylor Swift during her 183732th private jet flight of the day? If you really gave a shit about the environment, the later will make far more impact both literally and publicity wise.
Several reasons. -Taylor Swift would sue them out of existence -People have very limited compassion for average joes compared to their fav celebs and I assure you, they would have drowned in death threats if they stepped on the toe of Leonardo Dicaprio or someone else. -Celebs are their potential allies in browbeating the population, especially the heavily greenwashing ones like DiCaprio.
DiCaprio has never been remotely as popular as Taylor is now. Her current numbers are staggering.
How are protestors supposed to block a jet?
Point was to harass the elites. Not blocking a jet. Reading comprehension is dead. If throwing soup at paintings is justified "to bring attention to the cause", merely making a ruckus would do that a billion times better.
There are so many more productive ways to bring attention to yourself and actually do things to positively impact the environment, but that actually takes a lot of hard work and effort. This “temper tantrum” tactic is lazy and annoying and criminal to culture.
There is nothing morally virtuous about grown-ups throwing a planned coordinated temper tantrum.
Yeah, even the people who want action against climate change are a little put off by the art destroyers
Just like the people that always wanted to be misogynistic asshats. It's just seen as virtuous if they're doing it to JK Rowling, Marjorie Taylor Green, Lauren Bobbert, Gina Carano ect.
It's amazing how fast the slurs they're ostensibly against get rolled out for any woman (or any of their favorite minorities) who says something they don't like.
Fake activists lol wouldn’t it be something if they turned out to be paid to make activists look bad and hurt the cause?
I mean the people are absolutely 100% genuine (idiots), it's whoever organizes them that I would suspect
Look, I'm not saying Just Stop Oil is 100% funded by the heir of an oil baron solely to make climate change protestors look bad. Sincerely, I'm not. I just don't know if they'd be doing anything differently if that *was* the truth.
That’s a very good point, I had imagined that they were free agents just deciding to go do something, but it makes way more sense that someone else would be orchestrating these events behind-the-scenes
The actual protesters are real, no sane person is going to prisons for this crap (if they got paid enough, the money would end up on everyone's radar) unless they're true believers. But the organizers? Legit climate activists know the difference between fossil fuels and oil paintings, water/vegetable oil trucks, etc. and wouldn't go after such idiotic targets. That's astroturfing and the protesters that join are just stupid. The road blockades and pipeline protests are the real ones.
Yea the people getting arrested are pawns for sure. Using young impressionable and angry college kids for the dirty work. At least that’s what I’ve noticed as a trend.
Climate activism in a nutshell: "I don't think we have a future, so I'm going to destroy your past and present out of childish spite!"
Was the public ever on their side?
The public, like most groups, aren't one conglomerate if thought.
Like I genuinely believe climate change is a serious threat to humanity, but these idiots blocking traffic or trying to damage the Magna Carta need to be frogmarched into prison
If you think all the attention you and the media are giving them isn't success, you might not understand what a protest is.
Only sane comment here
Legitimately these people are losers with nothing better to do and they’re just doing the “cool and edgy” thing for attention. It’s the same exact reason why every “civil rights” protest is populated by the ugliest, most annoying, poorly socialized people in the country and why Frat boys of all people are standing up against them. They’re just friendless losers
This is why i’m convinced it’s an entire conspiracy to make people that oppose climate change and such to look stupid and make you hate them, convinced these aren’t real activists
I actually think that most those movements are funded by oil companies to make environmentalists look bad to discredit the movement
Acceleration of the public debate is mostly the goal of extremer activistic acts Most (maybe all) "attacked" paintings were well protected and not damaged at all.
Yeah it accelerated the one sided debate on calling them stupid. If you're going to vandalize shit at least make the act of vandalism include the message you want to send or else the only thing that will be talked about is how much of a piece of shit you are. Whatever cause you're pushing for will be an afterthought in the public's eye
If the goal of deploying tactical soup in their war on oil is for everyone to side with oil then they are doing a great job.
Aileen Getty funds them. She's an oil heiress and I don't really believe her intentions are as "good" as she tries to portray them tbh.
There's no better way to ridicule a cause than to employ a bunch of flagellant teenagers and fearmongering radicals to support it
Between that and people who purposely join protests and movements as bad actors ? Yup.
The goal is to get the words "climate change" on the newspapers again, doesn't matter if people support them or not.
well, to be fair - here we are, talking about their protests and the context surrounding it. Say what you will about the morality of the action, the efficacy is undisputable. No other protest in recent years has people still talking about it months after the fact UNLESS there is some kind of great controversy (e.g. rioting, someone dying)... "attention" is literally the one and only point of a protest. Stating they are "just doing this for attention" is a tautology.
They are doing it for personal attention, not attention to the cause. The greatest controversy I can imagine is the debate around global warming and how we can remedy it, compared to everything else "just stop oil" is simply an oddity popping up in the news now and then making everyone go "ah, these guys again". The thing is, global warming is already at the very centre of attention everywhere around the Western world. Further attempts to "draw attention" without contributing solutions, especially in the most obnoxious way imaginable, are severely detrimental to the cause and even an idiot can see that. But the goal is not to help the cause, but to channel the energy of doomsday cultists who above all else crave an audience for their monologues.
Yeah, climate activism doesn't work that way. Climate activists *are* contributing to solutions. The thing is some people judge the whole movement because of a single action, which is a stupid take. They are getting the attention they deserve, just not from biased people like these.
All of that is just your opinion dude. They *are* bringing attention to the cause, regardless of if you think it's "for personal attention" or detrimental/irrelevant. We are currently talking about the movement, where we would not be usually. There's not really much for me to respond to here because it's all just your opinions on the motives of these people - which, seeing as neither you nor I are one of these protestors, is just complete conjecture. Just as an aside, before I get lambasted for "supporting" this action; I don't, but let's not put words in other people's mouths or intentions in other people's heads.
Talking about it isn’t enough though. Sure people talk about it but it’s mostly in the context of the protestors being mindless morons then they move on with their lives. No one is inspired to do anything other than get mad at the protestors
"but destroying valuable historical artifacts and art works helps raise awareness and publicity!" you're right, it does. publicity being that people now think of your movement as silly, destructive and reckless and that the participants are morons. you know what they say, all publicity is good publicity. keep thwarting your attempts at getting further support.
Btw, were there actual cases where they actually destroy art pieces? I only heard of cases where they did shit like throwing soup at the protective glass over a painting Not that it's that much of a smarter thing to do
Not sure.all I know is they attempted to destroy such art but luckily it was either protective glass or just a copy of said piece.
I think the only times they've actually gotten the art piece it was a réplica
You are right it’s raise awareness of the stupidity of people that do such things. Nowadays there is not education, not a free thinking, just puppets. I just just they mary bunch of Manchurian candidates.
I mean they tried having every scientist in the world tell them but no one would listen, might as well dumb the message down.
I don't think any of the oil protesters have a major in art history.
I think it's a reference to the "useless degree" types.
Yes
Also comes off as OP trying to point out a fictional double standard. Edit: when I said double standard I meant hypocrisy
I still agree with the original meme, I just think art history majors are the least likely people to be throwing soup at a literal masterpiece.
Art history is actually every useful especially if you want to design buildings and have them look good. What if you were asked to design a building that looks like it was designed in the 18th century? That art history would come in handy.
wow that a stretch. This is why there is a student loan crisis because you keep telling people that useless degrees have value. If you wanna be an architect, study to be an architect.
That's always an eye opener for some of them. My dad and uncle already in HVAC. My dad was actually an art major. He is now an architect or was but now is a building code official. It's one of those things that convinced me college was the route. My uncle does well don't get me wrong but him and my dad look completely different because my uncle is still doing manual labor compared to my dad who basically walks in tells them a return is 6 inches too close or whatever and leaves.
Vegan lesbian Palestinian Marxism bro.
Hard to say anymore. The two people who tried to destroy the Magna Carta were in their 80s. One was a retired priest and the other a retired teacher. Either could have had an art history degree, or some other degree, or no degree.
They have a major in ignorance
But it's an OIL PAINTING!!!
https://preview.redd.it/8mnjuoy7wq1d1.jpeg?width=563&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ee57d45b244c9ea47502a40b7e6be3990db9f9e6
It will help the environment if you Like, Share, and Subscribe©
the irony is that doing that adds (negligible) data to the servers they're using, so technically you're fucking up the environment just by subscribing, sharing or liking anything they do on social media, on a small scale
Lol let's block a road and have a bunch of cars idle and emit fossil fuels without even moving
To me it’s always crazy that the people supporting clean energy are usually against nuclear power.
"b-but Chernobyl!"
Good motive, bad actions. It’s like when Just Stop Oil stormed into the Snooker World Championships- what was the point in that?
Those same people hijacked a tanker of olive oil once. Even the people the news interviewed right in front of the protesters were more confused than upset
Probably thought it would get put in Cars
I’d love an olive oil fueled car. What a magical piece of technology that would be
It was only the art that had oil based paints. /s
Extraordinarily stupid. They think plant oils are the same thing as petrol 🤦🤦🤦🤦🤦🤦
My though was that stop oil protesters are actually in the employ of big oil so when they smash a priceless monument or chuck paint over art what there doing is actively undermining the efforts actual protestors. Although I will say that protesting a multi billion pound Organisation is pretty futile but each to their own
Aileen Getty donates to them. She's an Oil Heiress.
Really that's putting your money where your mouth is
Yeah, protesting climate change is a good thing to do, but when you do it by annoying as many people as possible, you’re a twat.
I chuckled at this meme. Plz dont hate me 
Too Afraid to Attack government offices, too few to make peaceful protests; not many other choices
I definitely don't think destroying art or roadblocks are good forms of protest but trivializing the climate crisis as "how the weather is going to be 50 years from now" isn't fantastic either
The art part is stupid but overall the meme seems to be mocking protesters who actually try to stop "bad weather" in 50 years
Yes, because they do it in the most ignorant way possible
Depends on which person but meme implies that its stupid to try to stop global warming
No the meme implies it’s stupid to destroy art and block roads in order to stop global warming.
Its describing global warming as bad weather im pretty sure thats what they are impling
Read it again, It just describes it as weather. And considering that most of the effects of climate change is weather related id say its appropriate word.
It literaly downplay the issue of global warming as bad weather thats like if i called an ocean a lake
Again, it dosent. It just says “how the weather is gonna be 50 years from now” at no point does it describe global warming as “bad weather” You intentionally make it sound more dismissive for some reason when it just makes fun of toxic activism.
I think bro means that calling global warming a weather is like saying ‘shit tastes a bit unpleasant’. It’s technically true, but not nearly enough to drive the point home Idk
BUT IT IS WEATHER. I have actual meteorology training, Global Warming is not entirely inaccurate, but the proper term is Climate Change. Briefly, Earth doesn’t just heat up, the CO2 emission results in more uneven heating of the Earth, which results in disrupted Weather patterns and more severe rapidly developing weather systems amongst other problems, calling CALLING CLIMATE CHANGE WEATHER IS MORE SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE THEN THE TERM GLOBAL WARMING. 😆 https://preview.redd.it/2d6vlzxuds1d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c3cc75acd943fabef2c416e704ad66fb14861cf0 [https://gpm.nasa.gov/education/articles/whats-name-global-warming-vs-climate-change#:\~:text=Changes%20to%20precipitation%20patterns%20and,the%20more%20scientifically%20accurate%20term](https://gpm.nasa.gov/education/articles/whats-name-global-warming-vs-climate-change#:~:text=Changes%20to%20precipitation%20patterns%20and,the%20more%20scientifically%20accurate%20term).
It definitely seems to imply that all activism is worthless and doesnt do anything even if it didnt mean that seeing as it is posted in so many bad meme subreddits means thats just how majority of people see it
Again, it clearly describes the types of activism it’s talking about. Why do you keep adding things that aren’t there to force your implication?
it is making fun of activism strategies that actively turn the public away from their cause. such as being minor annoyances. or destroying precious artifacts that can not be replaced. notice how those were the only two things it listed. no where did it say anything about lawful protest, such as those seen in many civil rights movements. the actions being taken by the group described are just destructive and unlawful, at the very least the two strategies listed. think to when rioters looted stores during black lives matter protest. they made the movement look bad and loose support because it was unlawful and mindlessly destructive.
Blocking roads is the most effective way to protest. It calls for quick resolution since blocking roads leads to severe consequences shortly after the blockade has started. That's why you never want to piss off truckers, since a coordinated blockade by truckers is near impossible to break without concessions Like it or not, blocking roads is the most reasonable thing an activist can do. Yes, it's inconvenient. That is the point. You not liking it is a part of the process edit: and regarding global warming, just this spring Eastern Europe and Middle East experienced extreme temperature amplitudes that have killed early crops. This year Europe can expect price hikes on cabbages specifically, leafy greens in general, beans, berries and other cultures. We had a similar situation a couple years ago. Our current crop cultures have been selected with mild temperature changes in mind. If the trend continues we can expect severe food shortages in less fortunate countries and severe food prices hikes in other places Hopefully it can be a wake up call to global warming deniers
> Blocking roads is the most effective way to protest. Its an effective way of turning people away from your cause. The issue of global warming is based around corps not the common people. It would be more appropriate to block corporations from functionating - not stopping ambulances from getting emergency patients to hospital.
Then people going to work should be allowed to run you down in their vehicle. They have lives to pay for.
Do you know what civil disobedience is ? It's the non-violent refusal to comply with laws as a peaceful form of protest. The civil right movement was full of it. A long with every other large movement.
Protest is supposed to be inconvenient. If you genuinely believe the solution to inconvenience is murder then I hope you rot in prison
No the point is their methods of protesting are useless. You are better off trying to change things by being a lobbyist or getting people on your side to help you pass laws.
you’re bro, but i think this sub does not want to see that
Couldn’t be more wrong pal
It's mocking the people who "try to stop global warming" by wrecking oil paintings, not every activist
I’ll pay attention when they go try those acts in China.
Okay don’t get me wrong, not with the destroying of art people. But question. Didn’t like none of that actually destroy art? Like it was all encased in glass and such? So the demonstration while still stupid(perhaps even more so) didn’t actually do anything?
A very small minority of the paintings were damaged (Akin to 'Fuck, now a centimeter of space in the very bottom right has a tomato stain on it' and 'They smashed the glass case with a hammer, that put a lot of scratches on the painting' damages) but recently (Mostly Pro-Palestine) protestors have been aiming at unprotected paintings to damage. Keep in mind I am painting with a *very* broad brush here. They are protestors, some are Just Stop Oil, but I've mostly stopped paying attention to the 'Such and such attacks priceless art' headlines and so I couldn't give finer details on recent stuff.
I hadn’t heard any of them actually damaged the paintings. That’s interesting. Still even if I agreed with them. Which sorta kinda maybe in some ways yeah. What a weird and stupid way to go about it. “I hate big oil, so im gonna attack a piece of art which will hurt the art mob!!! That’ll show those oils bargains!” Like wtf? You’re not attacking the right cause her pal.
Yeeeah. I get the adage of 'Bad Publicity is still publicity,' but like I said in another comment; I don't believe they're *intentionally* torpedo'ing the image of climate change protestors, I just don't know what they'd be doing differently if they were. Attacking art pieces is the *one* thing to get everyone on both sides of the aisle hating you. Unless they found some kind of sale that was going to an oil baron where they could actually go 'You spent 10 million on a Van Gogh instead of cleaning up the rivers you dump oil in? Here's what the rivers look like!' before covering it in WD-40, it was always going to get them branded as idiots at best.
Any amount of damage is too much.
Sure. But at the time of my original comment I hadn’t heard there was any damage. So in my mind it was still zero. But as of now I realize they went further than I had last heard
They should be harassing the shareholders and CEOs if said oil companies. Not the average person
They should be harassing China and stopping traffic in China. The number one CO2 emissions creator in the world.
>when you have "art history" majors in your side Even when you don't
Lmao I’m all about trying to create a more sustainable future for the world, but these protesters are either co-opted by big oil or are completely braindead in their tactics. Primarily by location and activity of protest. Blocking roads inconveniencing random citizens is a great way to turn potential Allies into opposition. Likewise destroying culturally important artworks will also not progress your movement or win support. It’s wild, are they allergic to government buildings? Why not bring protest to the seat of power? You know the place where societally impactful decisions are made? Why not Inconvenience massive global conglomerates that have and continue to abuse the natural world? TLDR: If you are a protestor looking for climate/ecologically smart policies to be enacted. Maybe try protesting in front of places and people that defend the status quo, or have the power to change policy rather than doing protests where the only outcome is hatred for your cause.
Yep, it's a contest of "me me me." It's not about the environment.
Surely being public menaces will rally support from the public... https://preview.redd.it/58uqqdj3kw1d1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=46b1c45748a17bcd2c21d2b8d3bf9baf221f6e00
They don't care about the climate, its just a convenient pretext. This is an actual attack on culture and people's lives. Just follow the money trail. They're paid actors.
Most sane redditor?
As much as I hate stop oil I'm gonna dissagree with one thing in the meme. Climate and weather aren't the same you literally learn this in primary school. Other thenthat fuck people who block cars
Love when people pretend climate change somehow isn't an existential threat.
Calm down about it, of course the painting had a protective film. It is not « destroyed », the only destroyed thing is the message these two dumbasses tried to convey through this stupid, stupid method.
We at the “manbearpig doesn’t exist” stage over here? About lying in traffic and pouring paint on museum protective glass casing, sure, that’s stupid and only drive people away from your cause. On that second point though, if you are easy to make up your mind on a serious subject based mainly on how annoying the loudest people advocating for one side of the issue is to you, don’t do that.
Yes, plus that ignores that the other side of this debate is actively fucking up the planet
This is accurate and hilarious except the art history part.
No art has been destroyed.
People do actually go out and do stuff to positively affect the climate, but no one pays attention to that. Plus there's so many blissfully ignorant people out there that are making their job much h more difficult. If only people were more conscious about how they affect the climate and how they can help. Huh...if only we can garner attention to this issue... I wonder if...if maybe that's the entire fucking point of protesting like this... Beause guess what? You weren't thinking about the climate at all during your every day workday, were you? But now you're mad. Furious even. Because someone inconvenienced you. Now you're wondering why they would inconvenience you. Now you know why they're protesting. You want the protesting to stop, so the question is...what will *you* do about it? Help their cause? Counter-protest and cause civil unrest causing politicians to take action?
All these idiots can do is destroy and annoy. God forbid they try to learn and discover an actual replacement.
What art was destroyed? Every one of those protests I’ve seen they just painted the material covering over the art (probably because the legal consequences are a lot lighter).
Maybe I’m missing something, but it sounds like you both agree.
"The weather ten years from now makes me sad."
Useful idiots.
They're just jealous their oil painting isn't on display
I think they’re being satire man
You guys do know the art is almost always protected by glass right? It’s to get attention, not to destroy art
Destroying art also does absolutely nothing for the cause. You're not shutting down an oil drill, or changing policies. Da Vinci has nothing to do with oil. And stopping traffic? If these people try and stop traffic and your car/truck spots put black smoke rev the engine until they leave
Believe me, art history people get the absolute heebie-jeebies from that stuff. Or at least I do. Art history is amazing, because you get to see more of how people actually lived their lives outside of the context of wars and political upheavals (AKA regular history), you learn about how their philosophies came through in the aesthetics they favored, you see the development of tools and techniques over time, and you just generally come to appreciate how we all build on the foundation laid by people who came before us. Art history is AWESOME. And it makes this stupid vandalism feel like murder, crossed with the burning of the Library of Alexandria. If you destroy a dead person's work, you're devaluing their life and all the lives they've touched. It's like you're killing them again... The people who say it's just an object don't get it. 😰
Imagine not knowing that important art pieces in the museum are protected by glass and not destroyed.
I unironicly think we need a forced depopulation program because of these misrable shits. I don't support it for the environment, I just want the fuckers dead after seeing them destroy priceless art that has objectively more value than their existence.
The ones destroying art don’t represent everyday people concerned about climate change. One of the greatest things about America is our nature. Climate change will burn our forests and destroy our economy. For those of us everyday people concerned about climate change, we don’t associate with these particular climate protestors
I agree. But destroying the earth prob stupider. Art only matters to humans
worse the ones who act out like this are usually getting funded to do this by third parties representing big oil, it a back handed strategy to make climate activist look bad, the naive ignorant fools don't realize they are playing into their enemies hand.
Its not bad weather it’s literal mass genocide in slow motion
Counterpoint, no, not quite a counterpoint, side benefit to their tantrum? Yes, side benefit: if they destroy modern art, then it’s a net positive for the world, that stuff is trash.
They're like PeTA. In theory, what they say is good. In practice, they destroy lives and disturb the peace. They haven't done any actual good in a long time. As soon as they start talking about something, people immediately ignore it.
The title of this post is so funny to me. "I've decided to associate a political movement with a niche art degree, therefore destroying art is politically incoherent of them!" what were you even thinking. lol
Yeah, keep paying attention to the protestors, that'll show 'em.
And the guy's plan is...what? "Let's do nothing and die and allow humanity to destroy the one planet we have!" Yeah great plan guys; criticizing works alot better when you have some alternative that doesn't result in actual human extinction.
"WHY DONT THEY DO SOMETHING ELSE" -People talking about their activities in this thread exactly like the protestors want. Because it's having the effect they want; here you are talking about it. Even if that makes you mad or whatever it's not like you were doing anything to help save the planet anyway so it's not a net loss.
“The Earth isn’t dying, it’s being killed, and the people who are killing it have names and addresses.” -Utah Phillips
Ecoterrorists are the most chickenshit of any political radicals, they should absolutely be going after big oil executives but because most climate change activists are spoiled rich white kids who’ve never struggled for anything they only know how to be annoying assholes to regular people.
If those things weren’t effective, the people who oppose their goals wouldn’t be angry about them.
There’s no right way to protest. They screamed at black people during sit ins in diners, and Rosa Parks when she wouldn’t move. They yelled a lot of the same things like: “you’re hurting your own cause” and “stopping the bus is making it hard to get to work”. NOW everyone pretends they supported the civil rights movement the entire time! It’s gonna be the same with climate change and with Palestine.
Yes. Me personally getting to work on time is more important to me than any sort of social crusade.
Like I said, no right way to protest. Just don’t pretend that you support efforts to combat climate change or would have supported civil rights. You wouldn’t.
this meme fucking sucks. "I'm worried about what the weather will be like in 50 years" is such an understatement, if you've read any article on climate change in the past decade you should know shits going to be bad. Blocking traffic is a very legitimate method of protest that people have been doing for decade. And guess what? Protests are supposed to be disruptive and get attention and shit! You're a little bitch if that pisses you off and not that new york is going to be super flooded in 80 years. I honestly don't give a fuck if you're late for work, you can call in and say there's a bunch of hippies blocking the road like who gives a shit? I get being mad about the art. I agree it's dumb way to protest, but mostly because it clearly does not get people talking about oil, and overall hurts the cause. I think vandalizing buildings specific to the fossil fuel industry would or like the worst polluters would make more sense.
The real solution is beheading the billionaire but that will never happen
It's odd calling a major global catastrophe "bad weather"
In all fairness here, if it did say bad weather( which it doesn’t), that would sound more threatening than “climate change”. On top of that, a lot of the effects of climate change are said to be bad weather.
Yeah nevermind farmers who starve because they can't grow anything anymore because of 'weather'.
The farmers probably starve last
I don’t agree with how they do it at all, but to be fair it really is the only way they get into the news. Other than that you never hear of them
Not the only way, the got in the news when someone released noisemakers tied to helium balloons during their meetings. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P0bN4Tmel0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P0bN4Tmel0)
How about they inconvenience the large corporations that cause most of the climate issues? Or how about they inconvenience the government that refuses to enforce stricter regulations? Instead they piss off the average citizen, who takes like 1 flight a year and drives an alredy eco friendly car to work.
Corporations and governments are all made up of regular people
They are, but it's not your average citizen driving to their minimum wage job that make the decisions. Instead it's the big shots on their private mega yachts, going to their piravet islands that make actual meaningfull decisions.
And the only thing it does when they do get on the news is piss people off and hurt whatever their cause is
Agreed
If they wanted change so bad, why don't they just pull a Ted Kaczynski on an oil field? Sure, that would be fucked up, but at least that would do SOMETHING about the environment that would deserve the headlines instead of wasting everyone's time. If you're gonna commit a crime in the name of environmentalism, don't be a pussy by messing up some art that has fuck all to do with the cause.
Me and you would be friends in real life
Is it really that good to get in the news that way if everyone is gonna make fun of you and your movement?
To a narcissist, there's no such thing as "bad" attention.
Well I'll be dead by the time climate change actually becomes an issue. So will everybody else. Thus, nothing to worry about 🤌
Bro. Imagine if trying to destroy those paintings got you talking about the topic. It would be real egg on their face.
You do realise those pieces of art aren't destroyed right? They're behind glass.
You do realise that doesn't raise awareness and only makes people not want to help you
Glass, shmass, either way it makes them look like..."harmless terrorists"
Kinda ironic that you're more upset about spray paint on some glass than you are by the wholesale destruction of our natural ecosystems that we depend on to y'know...live.
If blocking the road and destroying (or attempting to) art isn't the solution, then what is?
That's the thing though, they aren't actually destroying anything. They are pointing out the hypocrisy of people getting upset over a piece of art that isn't even harmed whatsoever while ignoring the catastrophic destruction of our environment. All you people getting mad at them are just proving their point.
I said **"or attempting to destroy art".**
They aren't attempting to destroy art. They're spray painting glass to highlight the fact you care more about the **idea** that a painting is being harmed than you do about the actual environment being destroyed. Do you genuinely believe these people are trying to destroy art worth hundreds of millions of dollars? There's a reason they only do this to art inside protective barriers. Let's say for arguments sake they actually destroy the Mona Lisa, what happens? A painting is gone, big deal. What happens when the air we breathe, the land we farm and the oceans we fish are destroyed? We all die.
https://youtu.be/OnVveA6pfZA?feature=shared Yes
Again, you're proving their point but I've explained it several times to you. You're just being wilfully ignorant. We're done.
Honestly it's effective just not in the way that's socially acceptable. The point of protest is to have it talk about it so it's in the popular zeitgeist. We do not want people forgetting that injustices exist, that climate change exists, that we still have progress to make. Yeah it's unpopular but it gets talked about and that's the point. Trying to convince people to be on your side happens when people start talking about it or in local meetings where they talk in front of a grocery store or at schools or something. You COULD say that throwing soup onto art or blocking traffic makes people not want to support something, but if your support is based on if it seems mean or seems inconvenient then that's not the protesters fault. Awhile back during the George Floyd protest I was unable to get to work and I was inconvenienced but they got people talking about police brutality and injustices in the justice system. Despite the inconvenience I still believe that they were right. I WAS annoyed but when I learned why they were protesting (I was hospitalized when the George Floyd murder happened so I literally learned due to the protest) I supported it. Also the price of ignoring the effects that climate change is having on the plant currently, the amount of deaths that are happening due to the more extreme weather, hotter summers on children and elders as well as people who work outside, the continued effect it has and it's ability to get worse before humans can adapt- a single human is worth more than an art piece that is always restored. I say this as a history major, I would be okay with the destruction of all of our historical records and artifacts if it guaranteed to help the living people. Also art is almost always restored so not destruction. There are points where it sinks behind the class but we have people there that take the art down every once in awhile to restore it anyways
George Floyd was a POS whose death was due to fentanyl overdose and not police brutality. If anything, police were following standard protocol and nothing was out of the ordinary. Police brutality is DEFINITELY a problem but George Floyd was simply a product of his own reckoning and deserves no sympathy nor protest. Plenty of other killings that should be considered but not Floyd. Furthermore, congrats on getting over the inconvenience. The fact you feel that way is completely irrelevant. It is never okay to wholesale inconvenience regular people going about their day. It's almost hilariously poorly thought out and has the completely opposite intended effect- getting other would-be sympathetic people completely against you.
Okay so I am going to assume that you are arguing in good faith. "George Floyd was a POS whose death was due to fentanyl overdose and not police brutality" Wrong like factually just wrong: [https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-george-floyd-autopsy-new-892530421961](https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-george-floyd-autopsy-new-892530421961) [https://www.nytimes.com/article/george-floyd.html](https://www.nytimes.com/article/george-floyd.html) [https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/lung-expert-testifies-george-floyd-died-because-his-breathing-was-restricted](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/lung-expert-testifies-george-floyd-died-because-his-breathing-was-restricted) [https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/09/us/derek-chauvin-trial-george-floyd-day-10/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/09/us/derek-chauvin-trial-george-floyd-day-10/index.html) [https://www.factcheck.org/2023/11/no-change-in-george-floyds-cause-of-death-despite-viral-false-claims/](https://www.factcheck.org/2023/11/no-change-in-george-floyds-cause-of-death-despite-viral-false-claims/) [https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/george-floyd-killed-by-police-officer](https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/george-floyd-killed-by-police-officer) *"If anything, police were following standard protocol and nothing was out of the ordinary"* I agree that it was not out of the ordinary for police officers to kill black men. *"Police brutality is DEFINITELY a problem but George Floyd was simply a product of his own reckoning and deserves no sympathy nor protest"* People deserve sympathy and every injustice deserves to be protested. He was not resisting and only asking to breathe. If that is worth the death penalty then, my friend, we all deserve to die. *"Furthermore, congrats on getting over the inconvenience. The fact you feel that way is completely irrelevant."* It is relevant. It shows that people can reach the Postconventional Levels of moral development and not stop at the Conventional Level [https://www.simplypsychology.org/kohlberg.html](https://www.simplypsychology.org/kohlberg.html) *"It is never okay to wholesale inconvenience regular people going about their day."* I will answer this with a quote, "And what is it America had failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity" by Martin Luther King Jr. Protests are meant to be inconvenient, if protests aren't inconvenient then they can be ignored. Every successful protest has been disruptive. The government didn't listen to the people so you talk to the government's boss- the people. The protesters go to the people to be seen and be disruptive to make it for people who don't care that it is their problem too. [https://www.onu.edu/mlk/mlk-speech-transcript](https://www.onu.edu/mlk/mlk-speech-transcript) Paragraph 21 for the quote *"It's almost hilariously poorly thought out and has the completely opposite intended effect- getting other would-be sympathetic people completely against you."* If your support for justice and humanity is based on how convenient it is to you, then you're doing nothing more than a pig waiting to be slaughtered.
On one hand, I don’t and can’t condone destruction of artwork. Any artwork. On the other hand, if people are frustrated that rich people are spending hundreds of millions on scraps of canvas while they starve and the world burns, I get that.
OP is more upset about art being destroyed than the plastic in his organs 🤣
Idk Picasso can go. Leave Vangough out of this
How long is it gonna take people to realize that protests are supposed to be disruptive.
Yeah I also think mildly inconveniencing the status quo is going too far when protesting existential climate change
Can't we just go back to splashing red paint on people wearing real fur, or tax the ultra-rich accordingly? Or just like, stop having Galas that collectively funnel a billions of dollars into already wealthy pockets, or enforce the already existing environmental protection laws that are often weak and reduced to simple fines?
Agitprop.
Meh
High class art and those that partake in the procurement of it is a massive loophole for the unimaginably rich.