I think it’s a bit unfair they call it just “paint” when it was merely cornstarch that would wash off by itself.
There’s a huge difference in the degree of vandalism if it’s something that wash off by itself.
How and what will these crazy activists vandalize next? Shining a flashlight at the pyramids?!
TO RAISE AWARENESS, WE WILL BE TURNING OFF THE SUN TONIGHT AT (checks weather.gov) 8:02PM
Media uses language like this on purpose, most of their copy comes from single-sources and everyone on every news station is repeating the same rhetoric. They did this with the soup/painting incident as well, making it seem like the protestors ruined priceless artifacts instead of spilling harmless food products on a sheet of plexiglass.
It’s possible. And I think it’s likely. That the activists wanted this exact news cycle, where they falsely report that there is damage, gaining widespread coverage, and drawing attention their way, only for people to later learn that it was temporary and grow to respect the act.
Possibly. I’d imagine the vast majority of people don’t see the followup that there wasn’t damage, here, or the Mona Lisa, or the other events. The goal was outrage coverage for sure, and without causing damage so anyone who actually cares is fine with it. The media will just call it paint, and now that the potential for damage is clear they’ll stop talking about it.
That is what I was hoping to hear.
And I still say doing a stunt that even makes it look like you’ve done some real damage to Stonehenge right in the middle of a religious festival does not make you look like the good guys. People in another thread said it spread awareness. Who isn’t aware? I’m fully aware of climate change and there’s fuck all I can do about it.
But at least it was not permanent vandalism.
- Who isn’t aware?
Like half of the world is in denial.
How would you spread awareness that translates to action?
Denial is not lack of awareness.
I don’t know exactly how I would spread awareness, but I know exactly how I wouldn’t: Making people think I damaged a beloved ancient monument during a religious festival… a religious festival, as someone else pointed out, for people who venerate nature.
How about, as an idea, paint bombing Shell Oil headquarters?
and there’s fuck all I can do about it.
Sounds like maybe you are lacking some awareness around this issue.
Lots of things but the easiest would be to find local orgs that have already developed political strategies relevant to your local political context and work with them. They can fill you in on the rest.
Climate change won’t be addressed until there is a much larger movement that can flex serious political power. Think civil rights movement—that’s the kind of organizing we need.
Maybe do some labor and figure it out yourself instead of trying to pawn that off on everybody else???
If you’d been paying attention, you’d know it wasn’t permanent from the get go.
I was paying attention. That doesn’t mean I don’t wait for experts to say that it really isn’t permanent.
Unless you are assuming the environmental protesters were geologists and familiar with whether or not things like getting into cracks would make a difference at Stonehenge. I don’t see a reason to make such an assumption.
They said it was orange corn flour all along, and they have a history of not actually damaging anything but using the appearance of “damage” to make a point. Corn flour is a very simple, inert substance. You’re actually demonstrating the hypocrisy that this group is trying to highlight - more concern over something like corn flour damaging these rocks than the damage done by millions of barrels of crude oil extracted every day. Where’s your outrage over acid/micro plastic in rain that falls on these stone every week? There will be new species of moss that grow on these rocks, or pollen that blows on them from invasive species, possibly damaging them as the climate heats up - are you worried about that? Why can folks summon outrage over something inert that touched a famous rock, but not for destruction of the actual biosphere? If Stonehenge is that fragile, why are people allowed anywhere near it? You’re more than welcome to disagree with them, but if you spend more energy complaining about Just Stop Oil than you do complaining about actual oil companies, you’re actually just supporting the oil companies.
Clearly, a good portion of the population isn’t aware of how serious the situation is, it’s still an election issue.
If the right level of awareness was reached, having any kind of oil money around you would be a political death sentence. Instead, Trump has public bribe meetings with oil execs and his base grows because of it.
Ok, now please explain, since no one else will, why pissing people off is a good way to achieve that.
Have you ever convinced anyone of something by pissing them off?
Why are you more angry about a stunt that did no damage than you are about actual ecological damage done by oil companies for profit?
They said the same about woman and gay rights movements. You can’t make noise, block traffic or even talk about it without pissing people off.
Not to mention most of the anger is manufactured by oil execs and then enabled by people with little to no proper reasoning skills.
The message is that people care more about non-damaging vandalism to famous objects than they do about climate change which will cause irreparable damage to many of these same objects, be it through hazardous weather, rising seas, or global conflict.
MLK advanced civil rights by being a nuisance. Gandhi pushed Britain out of India by being a nuisance. I’m sure there are others.
It is in the nature of protest to be disruptive. It has to be. If it isn’t, it gets ignored. Climate change is getting ignored. What would you rather they do, go deface an oil refinery? That’ll just get them arrested and the news suppressed. Big public displays that can’t be hushed are the only way to make sure your message reaches the world. These folks have been considerate enough to make sure that message didn’t permanently damage its canvas. I don’t know what more you could ask from them.
I don’t know… oil companies piss off lots of people when they cause oil spills…and yet they’re rolling in profits day in and day out.
Maybe these protesters are trying imitate how oil companies behave since its works so well for them?
Damage the environment and make money if your an oil CEO. Temporarily color stone henge with zero damage and everyone loses their minds. Kinda backwards if you ask me.
Well good! It’d be fucking travesty to permanently damage a world heritage
Yes and climate change, also caused by people, is going to more than damage a whole shitload of world heritage.
Oh shit, was it that easy to fix climate change? To vandalize heritage sites was all it took?
Ah yes, it’s holding back the massive sweeping wave of change currently going on to fix climate change.
No, don’t be a dumbass. It’s raising awareness, because it’s obvious nobody is giving a shit about this really fucking massive problem that is directly on our doorstep. Painting Stonehenge isn’t going to accomplish anything except be a nuisance, but being a nuisance is how you compel people to get shit done non-violently. MLK and his sit-ins pushed civil rights forward by being a nuisance. Gandhi pushed Britain out of India by being a nuisance. If you accept the status quo, the status quo will remain. You have to get out and make noise and attract a following if you want the folks in charge to pay attention to your existence.
Trust me, you want them painting on Stonehenge for attention. This is the non-violent option. When this is ignored long enough, the non-violent option will be shelved and that’s when people will suddenly start paying attention.
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” - John F. Kennedy, 1962
This group’s activism is so tone-deaf that I’m starting to think this is actually the oil companies pretending to be terrible activists.
No matter what the form of protest, you will think it’s tone-deaf because you have been trained to. The oil industry spends a lot of money spamming comments like yours because they know eventually, fools will start parroting it for them.
What’s your reasoning? Do you think it’s ineffective even though it’s made world wide news. Is non destructive play vandalism of old rocks somehow too extreme of a response for the clear destruction of our environment?
It’s hard not to be part of the problem, since over consumption habits are difficulty to get rid of when no else is. I won’t fault you for that. Protests aren’t everyone’s thing, whatever.
At the minimum though, you could just not be a mouthpiece for the ones who are causing said problem. Seriously, like if you’ve ever given a shit about stone hedge before.
No matter what the form of protest, you will think it’s tone-deaf because you have been trained to.
MMmmmmmmmmm No. It’s actually tone-deaf. And assholish. And idiotic. And stupid. And I hate them Sam I Am.
Seriously, they are more damaging to actual protest movements than Big Oil. I’m seconding the astroturfing theory. Their methods are not just ridiculous, they’re offensive on multiple levels, and here’s the part where I disagree with my younger more smartical friends: IT DOES NOT HELP IN ANY WAY. “Oh but it gets the message out there!” And what message would that be? If the message is “stupid idiots deface art or humanity for shiggles” then sure, I’d agree. Otherwise it’s just more headwinds to fight against, a self-own for - well, we don’t really know why other than they think it’s great to be filming themselves.
The message is that people care more about non-damaging vandalism to famous objects than they do about climate change which will cause irreparable damage to many of these same objects, be it through hazardous weather, rising seas, or global conflict.
I wonder when these protests will turn into actual oil executive assassinations like in Ministry for the Future. We’re already rushing our way into a heat wave mass death event.
