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.

  • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    While I think this was a stupid way to go about risking jail time for a noble cause, I would like to remind everybody here of what everybody in the 60s thought about MLK and his peaceful protests:

    There never has nor will there ever be such a thing as “the right way to protest.” The right way to protest means out of sight where it can be conveniently ignored.

    • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Interesting that you think this is stupid, yet you acknowledge that protests are inherently uncomfortable.

      People are talking about Just Stop Oil every time they pull one of these stunts. Sounds like they’re accomplishing their goals will bells on.

      • Brcht@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        They are being noticed, but I’m not sure they do more good than harm:

        Fossil fuel lobbies have long stopped trying to paint oil as good but rather environmentalism as bad, and activists as idiots.

        If you look at old pro-oil propaganda, say 80s-90s it was all about how great life is thank to oil and how bright the future of the oil-based economy was going to be, downplaying climate change and pollution related issues.

        Now they’re just engaging in mud throwing because their position is untenable.

        Going for the shock factor may just fuel their game.

      • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        I mean stupid as in “you might as well do something worth the punishment” or that they might have been better off blocking traffic through a major thoroughfare or something rather than possibly damaging a cultural artifact.

        I agree with the concept, just not this particular executation.

        • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Uh… do you know what their punishment is for this? They usually get carted to the local jail, held for between a few hours and a few days, then released once the media have gone away. The offense is so minor that the punishment is the equivalent of getting lost in a corn maze. Usually, the JSO people are older people who don’t have much going on and so it’s literally no skin off their back if they have to sit in the local jail for a few days. (Also, UK jails are much more humane than US jails, so they don’t really suffer)

          See, I don’t think you do. I’m not trying to No True Scotsman you, but if you agree that protests inherently have to upset people a little bit, you can’t then turn around and say “but don’t upset us like this!”. You don’t get to pick and choose what protests are morally correct or even worth it - that’s the protestor’s job, not yours!

        • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          they said that about suffrage and women’s suffrage too.

          I feel like I’m starting to see way more sympathetic comments than I did a year ago.

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Effective protests are uncomfortable. That doesn’t mean that any random act of vandalism is an effective protest. You’re trying to ask a relationship transitive which is not transitive.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      7 months ago

      I agree except that potential damage to historical pieces makes me extremely upset.

      I would prefer they ACTUALLY riot to that.

      … and, in fact, that would probably be much more effective.

      • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        They tried protesting at oil infrastructure, they stopped multiple oil terminals in the UK being used for weeks and caused shortages in various parts of the UK. Hundreds went to prison and everyone forgot about it after a week.

        They throw soup at glass, 2 people go to a police station for a few days and people are still talking about it months later.

        Unfortunately, they have to exist within the constraints of modern news media, outrage cycles and social media, and that influences their decisions.

        • AlpacaChariot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          People are mostly talking about what a bunch of idiots they are though.

          This lot look like they were cast by the daily mail, they couldn’t be more of a caricature. It is absolutely not effective communication.

          • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Those look like 3 random people to me. I’m not seeing the caricature. For them to not be caricatures, what would you expect them to look like?

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I understand they used to protest for climate action, but now they’re just nutcases making it harder for the rest of us.

          I guess good for them that they got their moment of attention, but not all attention is good attention. Especially over here in the US, it’s hard enough getting half the population to care about the environment, and now they’re just dismiss it as “those nutcases”. This does not help anyone.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      What you’re really saying is that no effective protest will ever be welcomed as acceptable.

      But the way you say it, that there will never be a right way, begs another question: just because legitimate protests will be called wrong, does that mean that all protests are right?

      I don’t think so. This is a random act of destruction. I personally find it disgusting to compare this to MLK’s mass demonstrations.

      • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        My argument is not “if a protest is uncomfortable, then it is effective”.

        It is “how can you in the same comment say ‘this is a stupid way to go about risking jail for a noble cause’ and ‘there never has nor will there ever be such a thing as “the right way to protest”’?”.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Well. If you’re going to bring out that argument regardless of how stupid, destructive, and ineffective the protest is, then I’m afraid your argument turns into that first one.

          I’m going to go shit down the throat of a golden retriever in front of the White House to protest oil. Are you going to block and tackle for me, reminding my critics that effective protests are always uncomfortable? I’m just probing to see if you will just automatically say that or if you are evaluating the situation before saying it.

          • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Sorry, I wasn’t aware that animal abuse is on the same level of inanity as throwing soup at a painting. You’re being insanely disingenuous.

            • scarabic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Oh did I make you uncomfortable? I must be stopping oil.

              Don’t hold you opinion so tightly that you start to believe anyone who disagrees with you must be being disingenuous. That’s a little free life advice. Animal abuse and vandalism are both crimes, as is destroying cultural artifacts. So do you want to explain to me in what way they are NOT on the same level?

              If I run a red light wearing a “no oil” t shirt, is that a protest?

          • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            I’m not even going to wait for you to come up with a new angle to come at me with.

            I award you the Useful Idiot Ribbon.

            • scarabic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Disingenuous, useful idiot… any other terms you heard online and don’t understand how to use properly? Words have meanings. They are not mere talismans to wave at someone.

  • PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    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.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      7 months ago

      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™ or suddenly convince people who think climate change is a hoax or overblown that it’s actually a serious problem.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        7 months ago

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

        • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          42
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          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.

          • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            7 months ago

            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.

            • BrightCandle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              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.

            • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Assuming there’s no collateral damage to speak of, I’d argue it would be an act of self-defence for the benefit of all of us. In principle, I’d struggle to find reason to be upset by it.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            7 months ago

            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.

            • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              30
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              7 months ago

              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.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                7 months ago

                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?

                • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  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.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              7 months ago

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

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                7 months ago

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

                • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  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.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            let’s talk about what will.

            Stop throwing soup.

            We’re at the point where idiots throwing soup are called sing more environmental damage than backwoods yahoos rolling coal. Shall we protest soup abuse? Because that’s more likely to help the environment

            • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              People throwing soup to protest climate change are doing more environmental damage than people burning fossil fuels in the dirtiest way possible because that’s their gender identity or whateverthefuck? You’ll need to explain that one for me, champ.

          • Tattorack@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            7 months ago

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

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            We’re not talking about stopping oil production. We’re talking about these nutcases. And when we do get back to the important topic, now it’s harder to get support, harder to stay on topic, environmental concerns are more likely to be dismissed with jokes about throwing soup

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            We’ve literally been talking about it for decades. An Inconvenient Truth won the Oscar in 2006. What has talking about it accomplished?

            • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              That’s not my point. Everytime they deface something, we start talking again about stopping oil production. Sure we talk about it without that push too. But this means we start talking about it more.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                7 months ago

                When has talking about ending reliance on fossil fuels ever stopped? I don’t remember it stopping.

                Most people are aware that the Earth is warming and fossil fuels are the cause. There’s nothing you or I can do about that. It’s the corporations that have to be stopped. I can’t stop them. You can’t stop them. Talking about them won’t stop them and neither will throwing cans of soup.

                In fact, I have no idea what will stop them, but talking sure as fuck won’t.

              • Tattorack@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                Bit we’re not talking about stopping oil production. We’re talking about how stupid and pointless defacing art is.

            • AA5B@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Speaking from across the ocean where we’re really behind …… I’ve seen articles about UK having days entirely powered by renewables. I see a massive transit system. I see double the EV acceptance. I see why desperado commitment to ending production of gasoline cars.

              It may be way too slow but I see a shit load has changed over the years. A lot has been accomplished. Let’s try to speed this up rather than give reactionaries more ammo to delay

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          7 months ago

          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.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              7 months ago

              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?

              • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                Nah - let’s just feel superior by whining about people doing something to defer the apocalypse - both stunts to draw attention, and shutting down oil pipelines directly.

    • webadict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 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.)

    • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 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

      • webadict@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 months ago

        “We do not need allies more devoted to order than to justice,” Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote in the spring of 1964, refusing calls from moderate Black and White leaders to condemn a planned highway “stall-in” to highlight systemic racism in New York City. “I hear a lot of talk these days about our direct action talk alienating former friends,” he added. “I would rather feel they are bringing to the surface latent prejudices that are already there. If our direct action programs alienate our friends … they never were really our friends.”

        “What’s blocking traffic have to do with racism? All it does is make people mad at black people!”

        History rhymes.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      And yet it damaged the frame, prevented people from enjoying a work of art and cost money from a museum that has nothing to do with the cause

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m not sure it’s the acceptability that needs to be discussed here. In what way does this stop oil? The way you phrase your comment seems to presuppose that this is a useful action but some find it unacceptable. You’re skipping right over the main problem with this. Destroying art is not a useful act.

    • Tattorack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      7 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.

  • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    7 months ago

    To everyone in this thread who has nothing but insults for these activists, what are you doing against climate breakdown? Besides sitting on your couch, insulting people who are actually trying to make a difference, facing jail time?

    You are the kind of people who would’ve called the Suffragettes names and said they’re hurting the cause, as well.

    • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Why are you placing climate change at the feet of the poor? Go fuck with billionaires and politicians who are causing this issue. All you’re doing is stomping the person below you because you’re mad at billionaires

    • Tattorack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I don’t own a car. Most of what I do is done via bicycle, with the occasional public transport on the side. I don’t buy a new piece of tech whenever it comes out, or throw tech out unless it’s well and truly broken. I don’t participate in one-day fashion, usually wearing all my clothes till they’re threadbare.

      But these are all consumer side things. They don’t do shit. It’s a wonderful corporate ploy to say that climate change is somehow in our hands. But throwing soup at great art sure as fuck isn’t going to suddenly change that.

      • teolan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        You still heat your house, maybe even cool it down. You still work, probably for some organisation that pollutes a lot.

        And you said it yourself. Consuming less at an individual level doesn’t do shit. Activism does. They’re the ones forcing climate change to be on the agenda.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Solared my house. Converted to LED lights. Invested in insulation. Consistently supported political candidates against fracking in primary races. Voted as liberally as possible in general elections. Bought electric car. Home battery. Systematically reduced power usage throughout the house. Systematically looked for ways to reduce plastic usage.

      But that’s just a start. Next month I’m going to slop soup on a painting and REALLY make a difference.

  • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    7 months ago
    1. It was covered by glass, unclutch your fucking pearls already.

    2. Van Gogh is my favorite painter, and I would still rather have a habitable planet for future generations than have Sunflowers. If you’re more mad about this than you are about what big oil and gas companies are doing, sit down and have a good hard think about where your priorities are. I do not give a shit if you “agree with their message but not their tactics” or if you “think it makes the cause look bad” or whatever other bullshit you want to spew to cover your ass right now. Ultimately, if this caused you to feel a greater sense of righteous anger than the wholesale destruction of our environment for profit does, you are part of the problem. I’d rather side with the people who are trying to make a difference, even if I don’t like how they do it, than side with the people plundering our world for personal gain.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I would still rather have a habitable planet for future generations than have Sunflowers

      What a laughable false dilemma.

      I’d rather side with the people who are trying to make a difference

      Your instinct is laudable. Where your judgment is failing you is that these are not people who are making a difference. Stop straining to make something meaningful out of a random act of vandalism. The tiniest act of actual divestment from oil would be more meaningful than slopping soup at a painting. Take the bus one day a month instead of driving. That’s a difference.

  • BrightCandle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I see a lot of confusion and misinformation in the comments about what Just Stop Oils demands are. Their website makes it very plain and you can read through the details yourself. The press has massively misrepresented the groups demands and goals so its best to read it for yourself. https://juststopoil.org/

    These are the 3 demands they have.

    ✅ Demand 1: No New Oil and Gas Licences – WON!

    🔥 Demand 2: Just Stop Oil by 2030.

    🧡 We need a Fossil Fuel Treaty.

    • Demand 1 they only just won when the UK government changed to Labour who have committed the first item, so all their previous actions were with the goal of not expanding yet further the use of fossil fuels.
    • Demand 2 is to phase the use of fossil fuels out by 2030. The UK has a net zero goal of 2035 so this would bring that goal earlier but many other countries have a 2030 target in the EU.
    • Demand 3 is all about trying to get a world wide treaty signed to stop the use of oil to try and meet the Paris agreement to keep within 1.5C.

    There is no immediate demand to stop or anything so extreme, they are largely what the UK has already agreed to do but is failing to achieve.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      2030 is insanely fast for no oil, it’s also way more aggressive than what the UK is planning. Net 0 emissions is different than no oil. Net 0 emissions means you still use a bunch of oil but claim planting a bunch of trees or an algae farm cancels it out. Net 0 emissions doesn’t mean stop using oil based products like plastic either. No oil is totally a different demand.

      Also UK doesn’t plan on net 0 emissions until 2050, 2035 is just massive reduction in transportation emissions.

    • sfbing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Cool. But the goals are almost beside the point. This action makes people associate goals that I agree with, with being an asshole.

    • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      Because then it’s a violent protest and you won’t hear the end of it from the conservatives. It’s been p much proven that any action is better than no action, and them sitting outside a single persons home would be inefficient and also potentially harassment.

      Also it doesn’t help that reporting around this stuff conveniently misses the parts where all of their actions are easily reversible and non damaging. If anything it shows how corrupt the media empire is

    • geogle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      7 months ago

      That sort of comment could be used to justify an unbelievable amount of vandalism and terror and is just not productive

      • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        7 months ago

        We should value the Earth more than art. If vandalism of paintings bothers people more than the destruction of the Earth then they should reexamine their priorities. No to mention, the vandalism of the art is imagined, the painting is undamaged, but the damage to the planet is real. On top of that, if we do nothing to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions then the damage to the planet will continue to worsen.

  • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    I know Lemmy has mixed feelings here, but I personally applaud these activists for risking prison time to draw attention to a major existential threat.

    I find it quite entertaining to see all the art aficionados coming out so shook by them getting a little bit of soup onto some plexiglass and a picture frame that they probably couldn’t even describe before these incidents. Close your eyes, Is it walnut or cherry? Painted or oil finished? Ornate or simple? 5 or 7 inches wide? Symmetrical or asymmetrical along a horizontal axis?

    These protests, which thus far have involved basically zero actual damage of cultural significance have driven significantly more attention (good and bad) to their cause than anything else that has been done. Their protests are non-violent and generally nondestructive.

    That said, the real crime here is the judge sentencing 2 years in prison for getting some soup on the frame of a painting - I don’t support violent protests, but I’m pretty sure you could just go around and slap oil CEOs in the face for a fraction of the sentence.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      Slapping oil CEOs in the face would be much more relevant, and not be targeting irreplaceable cultural artifacts.

      • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        irreplaceable cultural artifacts

        I mean it won’t be exactly the same, but I’m pretty sure they can buy more of that plexiglass that got soup’d. Calling plexiglass a cultural artifact feels like a bit of a stretch, but I do think it’s replaceable.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Just so we’re on the same page here, would this act have been acceptable to you or unacceptable if the painting had actually been damaged?

          Frame of paintings like that isn’t simply replaceable, by the way, it’s also an artifact that’s generations old. It’s just less important than the painting itself.

          • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Depends on your definition of ‘damage’ - if a drop of soup gets under the plexiglass, I’m not clutching any pearls. If the paintings were completely destroyed, I would not be supportive.

            That said its a moot point because these headline grabbing demonstrations have been nondestructive. Stonehenge is fine. The sunflowers will continue to be sunflowery.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              7 months ago

              Depends on your definition of ‘damage’ - if a drop of soup gets under the plexiglass, I’m not clutching any pearls.

              I would, personally, but history, human heritage, and art are all precious topics to me. You don’t damage 100+ years of history by an artist so groundbreaking that he is a household name to this day just to get your name in the papers.

              If the paintings were completely destroyed, I would not be supportive.

              So your primary reason for remaining supportive of this is that the security systems worked perfectly. You do not approve of destroying priceless artifacts to raise attention to climate change and/or think that it would be counterproductive, also correct?

              • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                You don’t damage 100+ years of history by an artist so groundbreaking that he is a household name to this day just to get your name in the papers.

                They didn’t.

      • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Slapping a CEO in the face is assault. That’s a serious offense in most countries, and it would be extremely easy to get sent to jail for years.

        Throwing soup at a painting that’s behind Plexiglas is, at most, disturbing the peace and vandalizing a museum’s floor.

        • Tattorack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Assault on an oil exec… I don’t see anything morally wrong here. It’s also straight to the point, rather than attacking art.

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’m confused who this is for. Even many who agree with them don’t appreciate vandalism of art and art galleries.

    • Sippy Cup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s to get cameras thrust in their face so they ask when oil executives will face consequences.

      “Is destroying art worse than destroying the whole planet???”

      It’s an idiotic form of protest, it accomplishes nothing but turning the public against you, and forever associating your cause with petty vandalism.

      • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        “Is destroying art worse than destroying the whole planet???”

        It’s a fair question.

        Everyone cares so much about protecting this painting. Why don’t they care as much about protecting the planet? (And the painting isn’t even in any real danger. It’s behind glass.)

        The vandalism is practically thought-provoking performance art in itself. It’s probably one of the best pieces in the gallery.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          The vandalism is practically thought-provoking performance art in itself. It’s probably one of the best pieces in the gallery.

          Jesus fucking Christ.

      • JaggedRobotPubes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        And also everything they do is wrong because all protests are secretly worse than the things being protested.

        Let the planet die like all the reasonable people.

    • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Getting a couple of ounces of soup on a picture frame is hardly the “vandalism of art” people are making it out to be.

  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    “I chose to peacefully disrupt a business-as-usual system that is unjust, dishonest and murderous.”

    Ah, yes, the murderous system of [checks notes] art made generations before you were born.

    • Gigasser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Was it actually damaged? Seems like the only damage done was to the frame.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Damage was only done to the frame on this occasion, yes. Their claim of disrupting an unjust etc etc etc system though hinges on them disrupting the system of… viewing priceless art in a public gallery.

  • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    I keep thinking that these guys have to be right wing plants. Can these people really be this stupid? Doing this shit and blocking roads only makes people your enemy. Go throw paint on billionaire’s houses or at your nearest court house you idiots

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      Point of order, they didn’t block the road. They were up on the sign poles. The police stopped traffic.