You're viewing a single thread.
Good for them to actually vandalise something relevant to the protest this time.
Yes, it’s my favorite form of protest: easily ignorable, and sparking no conversation.
The worst part about Vincent Van Soup is that people still talk about it two years later. Or maybe the worst part is that it still prompts people to ask “Is climate change really so dire that they were justified?” and have very long conversations about it.
Terrible!
I prefer Orange Paint. Nobody will remember Orange Paint by tomorrow, and that’s what I call a good protest.
The worst part about Vincent Van Soup is that people still talk about it two years later.
Yeah, talking about what shitheads those people were, not about any meaningful action on the actual issue.
Is the orange paint a good protest? I don't think so. But at least it actually is a protest. The action being taken is actually related to the message they want to convey.
Throwing soup at a painting is not protesting or activism. It's just vandalism while wearing a t-shirt.
I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"
Really, you're comparing morality the well deserved comeuppance for petty vandalism to the systematic oppression of an entire race? Wow ... that's fucking disgusting, you should be ashamed.
But no point in further arguing with that level of delusion. Have a day.
Throwing soup on a FRAME is hardly vandalism, especially considering no real damage was done.
Crazily enough though, we still talk about it. No one will remember this orange paint.
Its nice of you to so succinctly prove their point.
"the oppressor doesn't get to tell the oppressed how to protest"
Only tangentially related here but the principle remains
No one cares for some paint in an embassy.
don't criticize fellow opposition members.
This was the policy in Hong Kong.
I sure as hell will.
Same. Idiots make it less, not more likely to see actual change.
If I went out and smeared yogurt in the face of every kid in a stroller to call attention to the cause, please stop me.
They ran out of priceless art, I guess. Too bad, I was hoping they'd ruin something else for generations to come. Maybe next time they can knee-cap Hank Green. That'll really show those nasty capitalists.
Yeah, those priceless pieces of glass in front of the art won't be available for generations to come. Now people will have to look at the pieces of art behind those priceless pieces of glass. Those bastards!
You see your honour, he was wearning a bulletproof vest, so me shooting him totally wasn't attempted murder, he was save all along!
More like "you see your honor, he was behind a 10-foot-thick wall of lead, so me shooting him totally wasn't attempted murder, he was safe all along!"
"The painting itself was unharmed, but the 17th-century frame sustained some damage after the soup acted as paint stripper on the delicate surface."
So climate activists' official position is to target the frames of these paintings, as they see them as important enough to piss people off but not important enough to preserve?
Time to lock originals away from the public forever.
Way to solve one of the most pressing issues of our day. Just great work, man. The planet really isn't that important when compared to some 17th century art. That's where we really need to focus our preservation and conservation efforts!
That's where we're going to focus the problem solving, when that's how you choose to stir shit up. We're going to focus on preventing climate activists from destroying shit, and we're going to talk about how to punish them.
Either way, the actual honourable judge wasn't impressed by that argument, weren't they?
You making my example more ridiculous just proofs my point even more.
Oh well, we all know that honourable judges always make morally good decisions, don't we?
Yes exactly! The judiciary is infallible and so that's exactly why the SCOTUS is the least fallible institution there is.
Yeah they should totally do something more effective, like protest voting in elections