Stonehenge not visibly damaged by protest paint. It's clean and ready to rock the solstice
Stonehenge monuments that have stood for thousands of years appear unscathed after climate protesters were arrested for spraying orange paint on them.
I think it's a bit unfair they call it just "paint" when it was merely cornstarch that would wash off by itself.
There's a huge difference in the degree of vandalism if it's something that wash off by itself.
How and what will these crazy activists vandalize next? Shining a flashlight at the pyramids?!
This is by design and most people fell for it entirely. Even the second highest content in this thread is carrying water for big oil.
It's possible. And I think it's likely. That the activists wanted this exact news cycle, where they falsely report that there is damage, gaining widespread coverage, and drawing attention their way, only for people to later learn that it was temporary and grow to respect the act.
Possibly. I'd imagine the vast majority of people don't see the followup that there wasn't damage, here, or the Mona Lisa, or the other events. The goal was outrage coverage for sure, and without causing damage so anyone who actually cares is fine with it. The media will just call it paint, and now that the potential for damage is clear they'll stop talking about it.
Media uses language like this on purpose, most of their copy comes from single-sources and everyone on every news station is repeating the same rhetoric. They did this with the soup/painting incident as well, making it seem like the protestors ruined priceless artifacts instead of spilling harmless food products on a sheet of plexiglass.
Paint washes off also given enough time.
All that hand wringing over what kind of protest should be ok, you guys are exhausting. The kind of protest doesn't make a difference at all. A lot of people will say it's unacceptable no matter what. I'll even admit sometimes a protest misses the mark, but I'm still glad they did it.
The kids are alright
My only opinion is that if the protest dosen't hurt the owner class, then it's not going to do anything anyway.
Any protest is better than complaining or arguing on the internet. I'll let the tactics to the actual people doing their actions. Nothing but encouragement from me 👍
The protest isn't intended to hurt the owner class. The protest is intended to draw attention to the issue. We're talking about it therefore it's an effective form of protest.
Without protests like this we go about our lives worrying about bills and ignore the literal apocalyptic catastrophe we're nose-diving into.
How would your reaction have been if it wasn't a cultural artifact creating by Europeans? Say they did it at Native American site or Aboriginal?
it wasn't, though.
Perhaps if you could name the site, the protestes, the cause and the method we could go "Yeah that would be much/slightly better/worse" but I don't think we'd get much more out of it than that.
If it's as non-destructive as the rest of their protests, then I'd have nothing against it
As a european, i dont give a shit. As a german, they could have blown up the brandenburg gate for all i care
It depends. I think that protest goes to far, if it really damages a building. Since this didn't its all right.
Oh, poor building, poor monuments, poor rocks. If only we have any way to declare our oposition againt bilionaires literally destroying the whole ecosystems, destroying people lives and health. But for fucking sake, the poor, orange painted monument. those damn protesters crossed uncrossable line. I will not support them anymore!
I sure hope no buildings are damaged as society collapses from climate change strain
Any protest that doesn't physically damage buildings owned by the fossil fuel industry aren't going far enough
This comment is advocating for property damage
Just Stop Oil said the paint was made of cornstarch and would dissolve in the rain.
Merriman said experts cleaned the orange powder from the stones because they were concerned about how it might react to water.
Might.
So because it could in the future maybe possibly damage it in some unspecified amount, they cleaned it off to be super sure there will be no damage.
So what fucking damage that really happened in the real world are you talking about?
But Flying Squid said it was irreparably damaged with crack seepage or whatever
Why are you lying about what I said?
Is this an example of positivity and productivity, the things you claimed I lacked?
I wonder when these protests will turn into actual oil executive assassinations like in Ministry for the Future. We're already rushing our way into a heat wave mass death event.
My guess is it's already happening but there's total media blackout policies around it. If one guy gets assassinated, it's going to cause so many copycats.
Never. That would involve real jail time and they are cowards
Well good! It'd be fucking travesty to permanently damage a world heritage
Yes and climate change, also caused by people, is going to more than damage a whole shitload of world heritage.
I wonder if increased heat or any other manner of fucked up weather patterns could damage Stonehenge?
Demolising heritage is what IS did in the levant...
They'd better paint the Chinese Wall since that country can change alot more than the west.
Just murk an oil exec or two. I care far more about not risking damaging cultural atifacts than some random I dont know.
That is what I was hoping to hear.
And I still say doing a stunt that even makes it look like you've done some real damage to Stonehenge right in the middle of a religious festival does not make you look like the good guys. People in another thread said it spread awareness. Who isn't aware? I'm fully aware of climate change and there's fuck all I can do about it.
But at least it was not permanent vandalism.
Not only did they decide to do it in the middle of a religious festival, they did it in the middle of a festival that’s part of a religion that worships nature.
Like half of the world is in denial.
How would you spread awareness that translates to action?
Denial is not lack of awareness.
I don't know exactly how I would spread awareness, but I know exactly how I wouldn't: Making people think I damaged a beloved ancient monument during a religious festival... a religious festival, as someone else pointed out, for people who venerate nature.
How about, as an idea, paint bombing Shell Oil headquarters?
Clearly, a good portion of the population isn't aware of how serious the situation is, it's still an election issue.
If the right level of awareness was reached, having any kind of oil money around you would be a political death sentence. Instead, Trump has public bribe meetings with oil execs and his base grows because of it.
Industrial sabotage is whats needed at this point imo.
If you'd been paying attention, you'd know it wasn't permanent from the get go.
I was paying attention. That doesn't mean I don't wait for experts to say that it really isn't permanent.
Unless you are assuming the environmental protesters were geologists and familiar with whether or not things like getting into cracks would make a difference at Stonehenge. I don't see a reason to make such an assumption.
People care more about the old rock placement than the actual air that we breathe today.
This group's activism is so tone-deaf that I'm starting to think this is actually the oil companies pretending to be terrible activists.
No matter what the form of protest, you will think it's tone-deaf because you have been trained to. The oil industry spends a lot of money spamming comments like yours because they know eventually, fools will start parroting it for them.
What's your reasoning? Do you think it's ineffective even though it's made world wide news. Is non destructive play vandalism of old rocks somehow too extreme of a response for the clear destruction of our environment?
It's hard not to be part of the problem, since over consumption habits are difficulty to get rid of when no else is. I won't fault you for that. Protests aren't everyone's thing, whatever.
At the minimum though, you could just not be a mouthpiece for the ones who are causing said problem. Seriously, like if you've ever given a shit about stone hedge before.
No matter what the form of protest, you will think it's tone-deaf because you have been trained to.
MMmmmmmmmmm No. It's actually tone-deaf. And assholish. And idiotic. And stupid. And I hate them Sam I Am.
Seriously, they are more damaging to actual protest movements than Big Oil. I'm seconding the astroturfing theory. Their methods are not just ridiculous, they're offensive on multiple levels, and here's the part where I disagree with my younger more smartical friends: IT DOES NOT HELP IN ANY WAY. "Oh but it gets the message out there!" And what message would that be? If the message is "stupid idiots deface art or humanity for shiggles" then sure, I'd agree. Otherwise it's just more headwinds to fight against, a self-own for - well, we don't really know why other than they think it's great to be filming themselves.
Bold move to say "I'm starting to think" then parrot the most repeated comment on the subject
I get the epic of marking climate change as a general human issue by doing stonehenge. Doing, let's say, the wall street bulls statue or smth in London marking climate change as a capital issue would have been smarter thou
NO you hate protest you're a shill for the man why don't you just drink a big barrel of Big Oil you terrible person you
Edit just to be on the safe side: /s
That's funny I would have knocked that shit down with a bulldozer
I pissed on all them rocks, y'all gon stop flying private jets now? Don't make me get some Taco Bell and come back. These people crack me up, like I give two fucks if they destroy historical artifacts and it's actually going to change my mind about anything.
They sprayed cornstarch on them, both piss and Taco Bell would be far worse. It is just about getting attention to people actually destroying the world, while not destroying anything. It would be cheaper and much easier to buy spray paint than to right cornstarch into a sprayable device.. But that would cause damage, which they didn't want.