3 ms·
What? These attempts to shoehorn the opposite point into the conversation is rhetorically embarrassing. Both can be bad.
by DiggyJohnson 3y ago
What? These attempts to shoehorn the opposite point into the conversation is rhetorically embarrassing. Both can be bad.
- groestl 3y agoIt's actually the first association for me, when I hear "damage valuable cultural artefacts", so I personally find it quite fitting. And I agree with you, both actions can be (and IMHO are) bad.
- DiggyJohnson 3y agoIn what way this the environment a "cultural artifact"? Especially when compared to a famous painting. I'm sorry but I don't think I can possibly believe that your first association with "valuable cultural artifact" is the environment, assuming English is your first language. The environment influences culture, sure, but environment is not culture.
- groestl 3y ago> assuming English is your first language You're wrongly assuming. It's German, and we have the word "Kulturlandschaft" (cultural landscape). Today, 60% of Europe's landscape is "Kulturlandschaft".
- DanHulton 3y agoThis is the point of the protesters, though. It's not the "opposite point", it's THE point to this story. The Mona Lisa is fine and was always doing to be fine. This is literally just a publicity stunt, nothing more. The environment, however, and the way we farm and how it affects it (and how it affects us), well, the protesters have a point. It's sick and getting sicker every day.