this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
363 points (100.0% liked)

World News

44508 readers
3448 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Three individuals targeted National Gallery paintings an hour after Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland were jailed for similar attack in 2022

Climate activists have thrown tomato soup over two Sunflowers paintings by Vincent van Gogh, just an hour after two others were jailed for a similar protest action in 2022.

Three supporters of Just Stop Oil walked into the National Gallery in London, where an exhibition of Van Gogh’s collected works is on display, at 2.30pm on Friday afternoon, and threw Heinz soup over Sunflowers 1889 and Sunflowers 1888.

The latter was the same work targeted by Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland in 2022. That pair are now among 25 supporters of Just Stop Oil in jail for climate protests.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 149 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (9 children)

So if throwing paint at a entierly replaceable cover for a dusty old painting is too far gone to be acceptable, what action can we take to stop oil production? Like. It needs to stop. To continue producing fossil fuels is a death cult. It needs to stop, like, a decade ago. I ask genuinely, how is this too far, and what is an acceptable response to an existential threat?

edit: On the off chance someone reads this so long after the post, I just want to point out that nobody actually engaged with my question here.

[–] [email protected] 76 points 5 months ago (2 children)

So if throwing paint at a entierly replaceable cover for a dusty old painting is too far gone to be acceptable, what action can we take to stop oil production?

God, I wish someone could actually trace the train of events that would lead to reduced oil production from this other than some bizarre notion that throwing soup at a priceless artifact of human heritage will Energize The Masses(tm) or suddenly convince people who think climate change is a hoax or overblown that it's actually a serious problem.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 5 months ago (10 children)

Imagine if these activists spent more time going after companies benefiting from fossil fuel production rather than throwing soup in museums...

[–] [email protected] 65 points 5 months ago (14 children)

They've done that too, and have encountered media blackouts.

As nice as it would be if they could simply fix the climate problem with the disruption a handful of protests cause, they can't, and need to draw public attention to the problem.

These demonstrations open up the conversation in threads like this - you agree there's a problem, you agree these protests don't fix the problem, so let's talk about what will.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Seems to me that it would be pretty difficult to encounter a media blackout to do this sort of thing at, for example, global climate summits, oil company shareholder meetings, etc.

But I'm not seeing much soup being thrown there.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 5 months ago (1 children)

In Germany, protestors repeatedly shut oil pipelines off and locked themselves to the valves to prevent their reopening, blocking oil flow for several hours every time. I consume a lot of news, both mainstream and in my leftist bubble. That story barely registered anywhere.

The exact same protestors threw mashed potatoes at a Van Gogh. They were the main headline for over a week.

Hell, some guy set himself on fire a few years ago and it was in the news for half a day.

The media blackout is real, but it's not a huge conspiracy. It's just that the media reports on what gets them clicks, and nothing generates clicks like outrage. That's why so much reporting also conveniently forgets to mention that the paintings are protected by plexiglass and nothing ever got damaged. But all the controversy gets people talking, and some people will inevitably question what drives people to do something like that. That is the real objective. If they wanted to be popular, they'd to greenwashed recycling videos on YouTube instead, or whatever else is hip with the neoliberal peddlers of personal responsibility at the moment.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And how will this get corporations to stop drilling for and selling and taking advantage of fossil fuels? How do you get from throwing soup to that?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (7 children)

You stop the problem from being buried under the fact that everyone is struggling to get by, or distracted by whatever the fuck the likes of the Kardashians are up to. You bring it to the forefront and prompt conversations like these - conversations where someone might realise that to stay the course on this one is to roll down the road to the apocalypse, and maybe they'd like to do something about that.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

By 'media blackout' they mean 'it was a blip on the radar like this is, but this is NOW and thus relevant and important'

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The people who talk about 'media blackouts' also seem to forget that everyone has an internet-connected video camera in their pockets.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (11 children)

What are you even trying to say here? That any bastard with a camera and something to show will magically be seen, or that everyone with a smartphone is going to be aware of everything that affects them? Because neither of those things is remotely close to the way the world works.

You were aware of the JSO protesters shutting down the oil pipeline? If and that's a big "if" so, do you think the average schmuck is? No. But chances are that they're aware of the stunts like the soup.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (4 children)

I feel like we’re kind of entering an era where direct action and ecology-motivated terrorism are going to start becoming a thing. And I’m honestly not sure that would be a bad thing.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Peaceful protests have not worked, disruptive protests have been widely villified and the protestors jailed for very long sentences. If you are facing 2-3 years for holding up a banner or throwing some paint seems like criminal damage of a fossil fuel facility isn't likely to net more years. As many have said in the past governments ignore peaceful protests at their peril, because once its clear that doesn't work they become not peaceful.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Well, clearly not throwing crap at paintings. Now I want to see these guys arrested and thrown in jail.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Right? Go throw soup at Darren Woods or one of the oil execs, not at a painting

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

Remember when famous assholes used to get pies in the face? What happened to that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tHGmSh7f-0

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (14 children)

Then we wouldn’t be talking about stopping oil production right now.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Then they wouldn't get their five minutes of fame, though. And even worse, they couldn't even claim their five minutes of fame was some self-righteous moment that they should be lionized for. A fate worse than death, basically.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I see shit like this and I think about people like Erin Brockovich and Karen Silkwood...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Sounds a lot like boring work that has no grand trumpets or asspats at the end of the rainbow, or that requires specialized skills and education. Can't we just draw some attention to ourselves, cry out "Climate change!" and call it a day?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Then they would be in cages already.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

I brought up Karen Silkwood and Erin Brockovich elsewhere. They were not put in cages. They were just willing to do some very hard work rather than just stunts.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago

It's weird that there are people in this thread that think defacing the protective barrier of a painting is too far, but advocating for harming or killing oil industry executives is not because the painting didn't do anything to cause our climate emergency. By that argument, defacing a building with grafitti can't work, blocking traffic would put more pollution in the air, blowing up a pipeline would kill innocent people and animals.

Nothing is good enough for them except the status quo. They'd rather a museum burned down in a riot than plexiglass get covered in soup because riots are okay (but once that happens, the pearls will be clutched again.)

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago

Go fuck with the billionaires and lawmakers at their homes, offices, doctor's appointments, at the store, while they're out for coffee, etc. Fuck with the people actually causing the problem

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

Oh, I dunno, any action that's actually related to the industry? Throwing crap at classic art as a means to bring attention to a cause completely unrelated to classic art is retarded.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (6 children)

What's your plan to keep society functioning with the immediate end of fossil fuels?

[–] [email protected] 27 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

That wasn't my question. But if you must know, if the choice is between "maintaining the current standard of living" and "stop risking the habitability of the one place known that can support life", I choose the latter. Everytime. And it's crazy to choose the former.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

But what about The Economy®™?!? We can't possibly have Apple only make 10s of billions of dollars in profit instead of 100s of billions of dollars because we made the price of goods destroying our planet more expensive!

If we start to make the cost of goods proportional to the associated environmental destruction, I won't be able to buy the 12th pair of Nikes for my shoe collection. I might have to wear my clothes more than once, and GASP, take public transit places.

Like sure, our grandkids may get to grow up in a world looking like something out of Mad Max, but at least I wouldn't have to suffer any inconveniences to my lifestyle.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago (13 children)

Kinda dumb of you to assume the only option to stop oil is an immediate cessation of all usage

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Why does it have to be an immediate end and not a phase out? Right now, we're not even phasing out.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

When someone calls for ending something last decade it required immediate action now.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (17 children)

Pretty uncharitable interpretation of something posted by someone who I would guess you have a common goal with.

People that give a fuck about "priceless art" or whatever are so silly. Lmao.

I'm not saying to not continue posting articles like this, but I do think that maybe your time would be better spent arguing with people who don't believe in climate change instead of arguing with people who do believe in climate change.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

Society functioning in the way it's currently functioning is the cause of the problem. It's gonna stop because we change how we do things, or it'll get stopped in a way we have no control over, which is worse across every possible metric.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)