4 ms·

I mean what do you want em to do, go all FFVII? Seems like the paintings were fine; very strange to see all the triggered in the comments. Guessing it's becaus

I mean what do you want em to do, go all FFVII? Seems like the paintings were fine; very strange to see all the triggered in the comments. Guessing it's because young privileged hippies are an easy target for ire.. but idk it's a common trope: "stop protesting like that, you're making us look bad! You're playing the exact role the bad guys want you to play!" which is funny because those lines are right out of the bad guys' playbook. I'm not saying I know the right way to protest, just saying you're all kinda falling in line exactly the way you're expected to when you say that. And you could argue that fine art is a better target than say petrochemical facilities where you're just going to piss off people trying to make a living: fine art museums are strictly optional/luxury/rich spaces. To those supporting retributive justice against the protesters: weird. But if you're into that kind of thing can't you see the attempt to exact a kind of symbolic retributive justice here? Like, "we can't enjoy nature cause you're blowing it up, so you can't enjoy your precious art safe space."

insanitybit 4y ago
> "stop protesting like that, you're making us look bad! You're playing the exact role the bad guys want you to play!" Well, sorry, but sometimes that might be true. Like, IMO this isn't a case of "you're making us look bad", that would be giving it too much credit in terms of impact. I would say this is effectively neutral - the people who already understand climate change will go "yep, climate change is a huge crisis, this is dumb", and the people who don't will go "wow they're stupid and climate change is fake". Just because "the bad guys" like to delegitimize a form of protest doesn't make the form of protest any more legitimate. Yes, it's out of their playbook, but also this is dumb? > And you could argue that fine art is a better target than say petrochemical facilities where you're just going to piss off people trying to make a living: fine art museums are strictly optional/luxury/rich spaces. Two things. 1. No one is saying "go protest a petrochemical facility". 2. Art museums are not a luxury/ rich space. They're almost always free or very affordable, they're one of the few places I could go to with friends as a young teen in NYC because of that. School field trips to those museums were frequent. This idea that art is just for hanging on the wall during fancy galas is quite silly. Art in your home might be a luxury for the rich, that's totally different. > To those supporting retributive justice against the protesters: weird I'm very against that fwiw. At least to the degree people are talking about - it's pretty insane how people will say these people should be physically attacked over this or whatever. > "we can't enjoy nature cause you're blowing it up, so you can't enjoy your precious art safe space." This is the sort of thing children think of though. Like, you broke my toy so I'm breaking yours, and now we're both sitting here crying? IDK. I think a few things can be true. 1. Climate change is a global crisis and we need to address it 2. Getting more people talking about climate change is a good thing 3. This form of protest is stupid
- WJW 4y ago
  > Getting more people talking about climate change is a good thing While I would normally agree with this sentiment, this way of protesting does more harm than good. Wouldn't you want the "fight climate change" standpoint to be the majority standpoint, instead of being the standpoint associated with idiots who threaten to destroy priceless art?
  - insanitybit 4y ago
    I had 3 points, I believe the 3rd addresses this.
    - WJW 4y ago
      I know, just wanted to expand on how the exact way the 2nd and 3rd points interact :)
JPKab 4y ago
What we want them to do is not act like toddlers throwing a temper tantrum. They aren't accomplishing anything but making people dislike the majority of climate activists who don't engage in such foolish, self-aggrandizing, wanton, and yes, highly narcissistic behavior. Here's a productive activity that the vast majority of climate activists are unwilling to do: Take cold showers. Start a big movement to take cold showers. Hot water heaters use tons of energy. My dad is a climate activist, and uses cold water, keeps his thermostat set to 50 in winter, doesn't use AC in summer. You know, things that are actually uncomfortable and require sacrifice that these narcissists will never do.
- atq2119 4y ago
  Those are all great (and I do some of them), but they aren't really going to move the needle. It is a step above a flag on your social media profile pic, but it's just a step and we all need to climb Mt Everest.
- ok_dad 4y ago
  Individual action on the climate cannot solve climate change. I can live in a tent off the land and it won’t help because not even a small minority of people will be willing to take cold showers, let alone the other things they would have to give up. Things have to change from the top down, corporations have to do more than lip service, sometimes large organizations will have to be put to an end (big oil, big plastics, etc).
nerpderp82 4y ago
Focus on making fun of the protesters, ignore the message. Do nothing.
CamperBob2 4y ago
Like, "we can't enjoy nature cause you're blowing it up, so you can't enjoy your precious art safe space." Why provoke reactionism? When has that ever helped? Here in the US, it's not hard to imagine the footage of these "protests" showing up in campaign ads sponsored by the party that's least responsive to ecological concerns. In fact, this almost sounds like a false flag action. It's that counterproductive.
_lqaf 4y ago
They are attacking museums that have nothing to do with climate change, instrumentally damaging them for publicity. I can think of all sorts of ways to do more of this. Protest meat by disrupting homeless shelters. Or protest racism by attacking the Red Cross. Do you believe those are ethically defensible actions? I think we both know the reason museums are targets is that they know most museum employees are sympathetic to the cause and unlikely to get violent. Try the same stunt in a refinery and I don't think you'll glue your hand to the wall twice. It is opportunistic and shitty, and I also believe counterproductive. > "we can't enjoy nature cause you're blowing it up, so you can't enjoy your precious art safe space." What I hear is, "I'm a selfish, naive attention seeker who needs a decent spell in jail to think about my choices."
YurgenJurgensen 4y ago
AVALANCHE would at least have a clear idea of how their actions would lead to their goals in a way that isn't just "raising awareness". And I expect the general public would actually care less about the lives of some oil company executives than some famous paintings.
0x_rs 4y ago
This post reads like satire, no wonder you made a new account to post it and used some interesting words in it. Regardless, "fine art museums" are "strictly optional" and "luxury" places? That's just something I can't wrap my head around and I wonder why a dozen people agreed with it enough to upvote. I believe ruining a valuable art piece that can be appreciated by every person alike is punishable by at least some laws, so they should face the consequences of their actions (despite this occurrence not damaging the piece, unlike others in the past weeks). Why some people are calling for "retributive justisce" is just how some others are claiming this could be a false flag attempt: it is so truly inane and harmful to the cause that there is little logical explanation to it as a genuine form of protest.
gambiting 4y ago
>>fine art museums are strictly optional/luxury/rich spaces.| Your school never took you to museums? Theatres? Exhibitions? Or is art limited only to rich people where you live?

insanitybit 4y ago

> "stop protesting like that, you're making us look bad! You're playing the exact role the bad guys want you to play!" Well, sorry, but sometimes that might be true. Like, IMO this isn't a case of "you're making us look bad", that would be giving it too much credit in terms of impact. I would say this is effectively neutral - the people who already understand climate change will go "yep, climate change is a huge crisis, this is dumb", and the people who don't will go "wow they're stupid and climate change is fake". Just because "the bad guys" like to delegitimize a form of protest doesn't make the form of protest any more legitimate. Yes, it's out of their playbook, but also this is dumb? > And you could argue that fine art is a better target than say petrochemical facilities where you're just going to piss off people trying to make a living: fine art museums are strictly optional/luxury/rich spaces. Two things. 1. No one is saying "go protest a petrochemical facility". 2. Art museums are not a luxury/ rich space. They're almost always free or very affordable, they're one of the few places I could go to with friends as a young teen in NYC because of that. School field trips to those museums were frequent. This idea that art is just for hanging on the wall during fancy galas is quite silly. Art in your home might be a luxury for the rich, that's totally different. > To those supporting retributive justice against the protesters: weird I'm very against that fwiw. At least to the degree people are talking about - it's pretty insane how people will say these people should be physically attacked over this or whatever. > "we can't enjoy nature cause you're blowing it up, so you can't enjoy your precious art safe space." This is the sort of thing children think of though. Like, you broke my toy so I'm breaking yours, and now we're both sitting here crying? IDK. I think a few things can be true. 1. Climate change is a global crisis and we need to address it 2. Getting more people talking about climate change is a good thing 3. This form of protest is stupid

WJW 4y ago
> Getting more people talking about climate change is a good thing While I would normally agree with this sentiment, this way of protesting does more harm than good. Wouldn't you want the "fight climate change" standpoint to be the majority standpoint, instead of being the standpoint associated with idiots who threaten to destroy priceless art?
- insanitybit 4y ago
  I had 3 points, I believe the 3rd addresses this.
  - WJW 4y ago
    I know, just wanted to expand on how the exact way the 2nd and 3rd points interact :)

JPKab 4y ago

What we want them to do is not act like toddlers throwing a temper tantrum. They aren't accomplishing anything but making people dislike the majority of climate activists who don't engage in such foolish, self-aggrandizing, wanton, and yes, highly narcissistic behavior. Here's a productive activity that the vast majority of climate activists are unwilling to do: Take cold showers. Start a big movement to take cold showers. Hot water heaters use tons of energy. My dad is a climate activist, and uses cold water, keeps his thermostat set to 50 in winter, doesn't use AC in summer. You know, things that are actually uncomfortable and require sacrifice that these narcissists will never do.

atq2119 4y ago
Those are all great (and I do some of them), but they aren't really going to move the needle. It is a step above a flag on your social media profile pic, but it's just a step and we all need to climb Mt Everest.
ok_dad 4y ago
Individual action on the climate cannot solve climate change. I can live in a tent off the land and it won’t help because not even a small minority of people will be willing to take cold showers, let alone the other things they would have to give up. Things have to change from the top down, corporations have to do more than lip service, sometimes large organizations will have to be put to an end (big oil, big plastics, etc).

nerpderp82 4y ago

Focus on making fun of the protesters, ignore the message. Do nothing.

CamperBob2 4y ago

Like, "we can't enjoy nature cause you're blowing it up, so you can't enjoy your precious art safe space." Why provoke reactionism? When has that ever helped? Here in the US, it's not hard to imagine the footage of these "protests" showing up in campaign ads sponsored by the party that's least responsive to ecological concerns. In fact, this almost sounds like a false flag action. It's that counterproductive.

_lqaf 4y ago

They are attacking museums that have nothing to do with climate change, instrumentally damaging them for publicity. I can think of all sorts of ways to do more of this. Protest meat by disrupting homeless shelters. Or protest racism by attacking the Red Cross. Do you believe those are ethically defensible actions? I think we both know the reason museums are targets is that they know most museum employees are sympathetic to the cause and unlikely to get violent. Try the same stunt in a refinery and I don't think you'll glue your hand to the wall twice. It is opportunistic and shitty, and I also believe counterproductive. > "we can't enjoy nature cause you're blowing it up, so you can't enjoy your precious art safe space." What I hear is, "I'm a selfish, naive attention seeker who needs a decent spell in jail to think about my choices."

YurgenJurgensen 4y ago

AVALANCHE would at least have a clear idea of how their actions would lead to their goals in a way that isn't just "raising awareness". And I expect the general public would actually care less about the lives of some oil company executives than some famous paintings.

0x_rs 4y ago

This post reads like satire, no wonder you made a new account to post it and used some interesting words in it. Regardless, "fine art museums" are "strictly optional" and "luxury" places? That's just something I can't wrap my head around and I wonder why a dozen people agreed with it enough to upvote. I believe ruining a valuable art piece that can be appreciated by every person alike is punishable by at least some laws, so they should face the consequences of their actions (despite this occurrence not damaging the piece, unlike others in the past weeks). Why some people are calling for "retributive justisce" is just how some others are claiming this could be a false flag attempt: it is so truly inane and harmful to the cause that there is little logical explanation to it as a genuine form of protest.

gambiting 4y ago

>>fine art museums are strictly optional/luxury/rich spaces.| Your school never took you to museums? Theatres? Exhibitions? Or is art limited only to rich people where you live?