GRcade

I don't think anyone has to believe that this was an all-time great protest action. I don't! I think XR and its related groups can be quite silly a lot of the time!

But objectively speaking, this was an incredibly mild protest. They didn't hurt anyone or damage anything. So it's very frustrating to see people saying "I can't condone this, they're going too far!" - it's like, if this is too far, then what would you think about the kind of protests we actually need? The kind of mass protests that could put actual pressure on politicians or oil company CEOs would be far more disruptive.

I wish we could all agree that protests are necessary and good, and also that this specific protest was just a bit pants. I mean... soup? On a painting (glass, I know)? Had it been crude oil, then at least it would have made sense. Still stupid and still a magnet for misleading headlines that get people angry at the wrong thing, but better.

Moggy wrote:

Yubel wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Squinty wrote:

Ironhide wrote:While I agree with the message behind the protests, I think the acts of petty vandalism actively do damage to their cause by turning the general population against them.

I agree. You want to make people sympathetic to your cause. They aren't doing this.

People really care that much about some glass?

A Van Gogh painting - one of the most famous paintings in history - has nothing to do with this protest, surely. I don't care what their intentions are, that doesn't give you license to commit acts of vandalism.

EDIT: and additionally, even if the painting wasn't damaged, this is still anti-social behaviour worth condemning. We should be better than this.

The painting wasn't damaged.

Should've said "even though the painting wasn't damaged" as I didn't mean to suggest it was, just poor word choice on my part.

Moggy wrote:You say "we" should be better than this. Who is "we"? I know you don't mean me and you personally, but do you really think all of humanity thinks/acts the same way?

'We' as in anyone unable to condemn both those who are actively contributing toward our extinction and those who would throw soup at a painting in a gallery. In a scenario where absolutely everyone falls into either category - whether that be knowingly accelerating the demise of the natural world or thinking that the ends justify the means, regardless of criminality - then we'd all be in the wrong, one way or the other.

Moggy wrote:Personally I wouldn't do anything like this, but it's not exactly a major crime that soup was poured on glass.

I'm pretty sure that, even if its not strictly a crime, any sane person would agree that this was an utterly dysfunctional move on their part.

Moggy wrote:It offends me far less than the way certain people refer to refugees.

As exemplified at the start of the post here, sometimes certain word choices manage to slip past regardless of intent. If you're looking for an antagonist to be conquered rather than a misunderstanding and subsequently misunderstood individual, try looking elsewhere. Or better yet, take your false interpretation of me and make haste in tearing me to shreds rather than slowly wearing me down over it.

Yubel wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Yubel wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Squinty wrote:

Ironhide wrote:While I agree with the message behind the protests, I think the acts of petty vandalism actively do damage to their cause by turning the general population against them.

I agree. You want to make people sympathetic to your cause. They aren't doing this.

People really care that much about some glass?

A Van Gogh painting - one of the most famous paintings in history - has nothing to do with this protest, surely. I don't care what their intentions are, that doesn't give you license to commit acts of vandalism.

EDIT: and additionally, even if the painting wasn't damaged, this is still anti-social behaviour worth condemning. We should be better than this.

The painting wasn't damaged.

Should've said "even though the painting wasn't damaged" as I didn't mean to suggest it was, just poor word choice on my part.

Moggy wrote:You say "we" should be better than this. Who is "we"? I know you don't mean me and you personally, but do you really think all of humanity thinks/acts the same way?

'We' as in anyone unable to condemn both those who are actively contributing toward our extinction and those who would throw soup at a painting in a gallery. In a scenario where absolutely everyone falls into either category - whether that be knowingly accelerating the demise of the natural world or thinking that the ends justify the means, regardless of criminality - then we'd all be in the wrong, one way or the other.

Moggy wrote:Personally I wouldn't do anything like this, but it's not exactly a major crime that soup was poured on glass.

I'm pretty sure that, even if its not strictly a crime, any sane person would agree that this was an utterly dysfunctional move on their part.

Moggy wrote:It offends me far less than the way certain people refer to refugees.

As exemplified at the start of the post here, sometimes certain word choices manage to slip past regardless of intent. If you're looking for an antagonist to be conquered rather than a misunderstanding and subsequently misunderstood individual, try looking elsewhere. Or better yet, take your false interpretation of me and make haste in tearing me to shreds rather than slowly wearing me down over it.

How would you suggest people protest then? Please correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to be suggesting that any protest action should not be criminal? That idea is insane to me and makes no sense.

Yubel wrote:'We' as in anyone unable to condemn both those who are actively contributing toward our extinction and those who would throw soup at a painting in a gallery. In a scenario where absolutely everyone falls into either category - whether that be knowingly accelerating the demise of the natural world or thinking that the ends justify the means, regardless of criminality - then we'd all be in the wrong, one way or the other.

There's a rather big difference between those who are contributing towards our extinction and a couple of protesters who throw soup at a painting (that's behind glass).

There is no scenario where everyone thinks either "let's destroy the world" or "let's do anything to stop it".

You seem to think in quite a binary way. But nothing is that simple, people just don't fit neatly into two categories on these sorts of issues.

I don't think I've ever actually seen "false equivalence" in a textbook but that definitely seems like a textbook definition of false equivalence.

I've seen Van Gogh's Sunflowers (the one in London, there are 3 others) and in my opinion, it's shite. Although when I saw it I was surprised that it wasn't behind glass.
However the act of protest is just that, a protest, designed to attract attention to the issues with oil.
I noticed a lot of fancy cameras taking photographs of the protesters so no doubt the hacks were forewarned and in attendance.
It's got the message across and raised awareness.

Precisely. Peaceful protesting does not get its own thread on GRcade.

twitter.com/rebelsanimal/status/1581249206647369728

What is the salary of the person who has to clean this up? Completely self-defeating.

speedboatchase wrote:

twitter.com/rebelsanimal/status/1581249206647369728

What is the salary of the person who has to clean this up? Completely self-defeating.

Yeah this doesn't hurt farmers or super markets really it hurts the member of staff who is paid minimum wage to take rubbish off people all day, who has probably already been abused for not putting stuff through the till quick enough or insulted for not selling someone underage stuff or any of the other rubbish you have to put up with in retail, who is now called to clean up blooming milk going all over the place.

I get the impression all of these 'protesters" are really just spoiled rich kids.

speedboatchase wrote:

twitter.com/rebelsanimal/status/1581249206647369728

What is the salary of the person who has to clean this up? Completely self-defeating.

How anyone can think this is a genuine protest group is strawberry floating beyond me.

speedboatchase wrote:

twitter.com/rebelsanimal/status/1581249206647369728

What is the salary of the person who has to clean this up? Completely self-defeating.

This one is total bullshit.

Stugene wrote:

speedboatchase wrote:

twitter.com/rebelsanimal/status/1581249206647369728

What is the salary of the person who has to clean this up? Completely self-defeating.

How anyone can think this is a genuine protest group is strawberry floating beyond me.

Some people really are just strawberry floating morons. I have wondered previously though if PETA is actually working for the meat lobby given how detrimental they are to the animal welfare movement.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63272648

Home Secretary to crack down on 'disruptive' protests with new bill

The home secretary has unveiled plans for a major crackdown on disruptive protests carried out by environmental groups such as Extinction Rebellion.

Suella Braverman says the new Public Order Bill will stop demonstrators holding the public "to ransom".

Ministers will be empowered to block protests causing "serious disruption" to key infrastructure and goods.

Tada! There it is folks! Big shout out to the intelligence community for making this happen. There is no strawberry floating way that this is somehow a coincidence.

Watch as this is used to break up things like pickets and legitimate protest. It includes sections about people locking themselves onto things - like people do with ancient forests to prevent them being cut down. But who needs forests right? We can just cut all the forests down!

Stugene wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63272648

Home Secretary to crack down on 'disruptive' protests with new bill

The home secretary has unveiled plans for a major crackdown on disruptive protests carried out by environmental groups such as Extinction Rebellion.

Suella Braverman says the new Public Order Bill will stop demonstrators holding the public "to ransom".

Ministers will be empowered to block protests causing "serious disruption" to key infrastructure and goods.

Tada! There it is folks! Big shout out to the intelligence community for making this happen. There is no strawberry floating way that this is somehow a coincidence.

Watch as this is used to break up things like pickets and legitimate protest. It includes sections about people locking themselves onto things - like people do with ancient forests to prevent them being cut down. But who needs forests right? We can just cut all the forests down!

You think the intelligence community told people to pour milk on the floor in M&S as part of a plot to crackdown on picket lines?

Stugene wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63272648

Home Secretary to crack down on 'disruptive' protests with new bill

The home secretary has unveiled plans for a major crackdown on disruptive protests carried out by environmental groups such as Extinction Rebellion.

Suella Braverman says the new Public Order Bill will stop demonstrators holding the public "to ransom".

Ministers will be empowered to block protests causing "serious disruption" to key infrastructure and goods.

Tada! There it is folks! Big shout out to the intelligence community for making this happen. There is no strawberry floating way that this is somehow a coincidence.

Watch as this is used to break up things like pickets and legitimate protest. It includes sections about people locking themselves onto things - like people do with ancient forests to prevent them being cut down. But who needs forests right? We can just cut all the forests down!

I just hope this backfires and more protests happen, in fact not protests, I'd even support full on riots, this is totalitarian bullshit and people mustn't allow it to go unchallenged, strawberry float this government, strawberry float the police.

It wont stop XR. The whole purpose of most of their protests is to end up arrested and convicted and fill up the judicial system. The brave people who are volunteering for these roles are already prepared for this to happen to them and there's nothing the government can do to stop these protests. Other than deal with the demands.

speedboatchase wrote:

twitter.com/rebelsanimal/status/1581249206647369728

What is the salary of the person who has to clean this up? Completely self-defeating.

No use crying over it

very good