4 ms·
They are not attempting to damage cultural artifacts. There have been several of these attacks in Europe by environmentalists and they always select target with
by nabla9 3y ago
They are not attempting to damage cultural artifacts. There have been several of these attacks in Europe by environmentalists and they always select target with protective class.
It's a great way to demonstrate and get attention.
- jruohonen 3y ago> and get attention Attention is what is needed in attention (political) economy, sure, but I do wonder why they've chosen (classical) art specifically? I kind of miss the big witty stunts done by the Yes Men and alike.
- user_7832 3y agoDo you think we’d be discussing this on HN if this was an unheard painting/artist? I’m not commenting on whether or not their actions were correct, but if they wanted publicity it certainly was successful. (Unless I misunderstood your comment)
- jruohonen 3y ago> Do you think we’d be discussing this on HN if this was an unheard painting/artist? Probably not, but one might think that there would be better "targets", artificial as they may still be? Remember the scene in Fight Club?
- stavros 3y agoBut also the focus now isn't their environmental demands, or their political stance, or whatever, but that they potentially damaged a work of art. I don't know how that furthers their cause.
- tourmalinetaco 3y ago> but that they potentially damaged a work of art. How do people not know the Mona Lisa is protected by a sheet of glass, and has been for years?
- cpursley 3y agoIt’s a great way to turn off regular people from whatever movement they’re pitching.
- 15457345234 3y agoI've never seen these people be able to explain why they do what they do in any way that makes sense or is logically consistent so... They may label themselves as environmentalists etc - because they have to label themselves as something if they don't want to just be considered vandals - but I think the answer that's most likely is some type of personality disorder.
- stagas 3y agoIs it in the news? Mission accomplished.
- kevincrane 3y agoKinda feels like the underpants gnomes thing then 1. Get in the news 2. ??? 3. Environment is saved!
- tourmalinetaco 3y agoSure and a few years back some Dutchie protesters got in the news because they were gluing themselves to things. It was hilarious and I have 0 genuine recollection of what they were trying to accomplish, because most of this is ineffective flash-in-the-pan stuff.
- jjtheblunt 3y agoThat’s possibly because their fundamental objective is narcissism, not a benevolent ideology.
- oulipo 3y agonot really actually, it works and it's called the "radical flank" theory
- edgyquant 3y agoI don’t care what excuses you make. I’m absolutely tired of these spoiled kids doing shit like this and continuing to getting away with it. No one can do anything nice without some group of jackass thugs showing up to ruin it by waving pro-hamas flags or screaming about the environment.
- wegfawefgawefg 3y agoshe looks old. like 40s
- rajup 3y agoNot mentally 40 I suppose
- lukan 3y ago"I’m absolutely tired of these spoiled kids doing shit like this" I do not support this style of protest, but their reason is something like: "They are absolutey tired of the spoiled rich (old) people, who continue to fuck up the planet like before and continue to get away with it, with no serious action being done about climate change."
- DiggyJohnson 3y agoRight, and I’m in neither group. That’s where I get confused, I’m on nobody’s team at the moment, and when I read a story like this I always, always, end up on the side of Louvre, or whatever.
- lukan 3y agoI know, that is why I do not support this style of protest. It is venting of frustration, activism for the sake of it - getting the feeling that at least something was done (and being too blind to realize that it is not helping the cause).
- atq2119 3y agoIf that is truly the case, then perhaps you need to reassess whether you are genuinely in neither group. I'm not kidding. This is an asymmetric conflict of the powerless against the powerful. Obviously their methods are going to have to be asymmetric. If you end up siding with the powerful, well, you are taking a side whether you like it or not.
- slothtrop 3y agoAttention is not what the climate crisis lacks. It hasn't lost salience in a decade, people are simultaneously fatigued and concerned, so stunts are redundant. Notwithstanding, negative attention is not necessarily helpful. If it were, PETA or Greenpeace would be seen in a more favorable light and data would suggest that their PR approach makes a net positive difference. There are organizations that take a more data-driven approach, and consequently are both effective and not off-putting to prospective supporters, but they don't get the same media attention. In the internet age, it should be possible to boost without stupid antics. At this point most are sticking to the same outlook they had 10-20 years ago.