• @will_a113@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    346 months ago

    I think these guys get headlines exactly because they target things that “belong” to all of us. PETA throwing red paint on some rich schmuck wearing furs? That might get a minute of airtime. But (safely) paint Stonehenge, throw baked beans on the Mona Lisa, etc and every news outlet will cover it.

      • @Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        96 months ago

        Exactly my point. Their reason for doing it gets overshadowed by the act, because they are incongruent.

        The act and the message should be essentially one and the same, because people’s attention is already stretched thin by a myriad of things.

        • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          46 months ago

          If you put more focus on the act instead of the reason you don’t have your priorities straight. People should be out in the streets and destroying a shit ton of monuments important to the rich with what’s happening in the world right now.

          • @Telorand@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            26 months ago

            Agreed. The key there is “important to the rich,” not “important to humanity.” Break all the rich people’s toys, make some noise. Go sabotage a SpaceX rocket or something.

            But the fact that I’m focused on the act despite being effectively on their side means a ton of other people who aren’t on their side are too, and I can almost guarantee they can’t see past the act to really grasp the impetus behind it.

            • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              46 months ago

              You think the Louvre and what’s inside isn’t important to rich people? Stonehenge isn’t important to rich people?

              You and me shouldn’t give a fuck that these things get destroyed because if things keep going the way they are there won’t be any humans from the working class to enjoy them anymore in a century, so what’s the point of preserving them in the first place?

              Destroy all that shit so people have to face the fact that our governments and rich people are ready to spend billions to restore a church in Paris while people in the same city are starving.

          • @tobogganablaze@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -16 months ago

            If you put more focus on the act instead of the reason you don’t have your priorities straight.

            So you would be totally fine if people took a shit on your front porch as long as it’s to protest climate change, right? Clearly you wouldn’t get upset about the act if there is a good reason.

            • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              0
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Is my front porch a destination to international visitors on which we spend fortunes in order to preserve it while people are starving? 🤔

      • @RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        66 months ago

        I thought the headline was a bit misleading, because obviously environmental activists wouldn’t “paint” or vandalize something like that.

        Anyone who thinks they are assholes for doing this to a monument should be thinking about what oil companies are doing to less visible areas that are just as important.

    • Irremarkable
      link
      fedilink
      56 months ago

      And it works, and may actually be effective at spreading your cause, the first couple times

      After that, everyone already knows who you are and what you want, so the only thing they think of the next time you come up is “these assholes again?”