I never said that we were having a deep conversation about it or that it had actually motivated anyone to do anything. I simply stated that you’re talking about it, and you are.
It doesn’t really matter if you’re only talking about it to tell us you’re not talking about it, it doesn’t matter if you’re talking about simply to complain, it doesn’t matter if you don’t think they’re doing a good job of explaining themselves. You’re talking about it. To deny that fact is…odd.
And just to be clear YOU started this thread, you stated right in the OP " I hate gas prices too and I have no love for the oil companies"
But, sure, you’re not talking about it.
Your issue seems to be more that they’re not protesting the way you want them to protest, as noted here:
You’re not ignoring them. You’re giving them attention, you’re bumping this thread. You’ve heard them and you’re telling others what they’ve done. You’re doing exactly what they want you to do.
Also, to repeat what I said earlier, they can only fit so much on a t-shirt. If you want to find out what their stance is on something, they have a website. I assume most of the answers you’re looking for can be found there.
It’s clear that by “it” you meant their message. We are not talking about their message, no one in this thread is, including you. We are talking about their asinine antics. They are not out there throwing soup to get throwing soup talked about, they are throwing soup in the misguided hope that we will talk about their message - in this thread it’s not working.
And I must say, although I personally knew nothing about Just Stop Oil before the soup throwing hit the news, the media attention there was enough to motivate me to read this thread. As a result of which, I have a more favorable opinion of the organization and their publicity tactics, and a greater awareness of what they’re complaining about.
So while this sort of PR stunt may not raise protestors in the estimation of the sort of people who get angry enough about it to start disapproving threads, it appears that even that disapproval can lead to some positive PR impacts just by sufficiently raising the public profile of the protest.
Yesterday, climate change activists interrupted and heckled Ted Cruz on The View. (Poor baby didn’t have a good few days, what with getting booed at Yankee Stadium and all.) Now this, I think, had more practical value than the museum activists–it was in one of the more public forums (a popular talk show) and it called out a Republican politician from an oil-heavy state.
If they wanted to close over this happening, I think that’s on the museum. They could’ve treated it as performance art, lauded the protesters, got more media in etc etc. The frame might be damaged but next time the painting is sold this will probably be a part of its story and it might increase in value.
I don’t particularly care, though. As the protesters say, art is not more important than life or than burning up this planet. What if we have no more real sunflowers? Certainly the frame isn’t more important, or having to close the museum for a few hours.
Damaging the property of big corporation that has lied about emissions and is complicit in the destruction of all life as we know it in pursuit of ever more money for shareholders, big, big meh from me. It’s bad when protests in the streets get out of hand and people take a bat to a small shop that had no hand in the subject of the protest and they loot for personal gain. I wish people wouldn’t do that though sadly it seems a bit of a feature of big, angry protests and mobs. That is not what this is at all and it’s not remotely similar.
I think that museums would do well to take note that most of these groups are not out to destroy the artworks. They should side with the protesters and it will make it better for them, too. It’s pretty easy to do. They got word out that the viscosity of the soup was a plus, but the acidity of the tomato could’ve posed a problem had it touched the canvas. And what do you know: in Germany they subsequently throw mashed potatoes at a Monet.
And while I doubt (but have no idea) that they knew this going into it, but from what I’ve read, the damage to the artwork was negligible. Not that the museum isn’t going to have to get it cleaned, but it’s not that these pieces are going to be permanently stained.
If I’ve learned anything from watching Baumgartner Restoration on youtube, it’s that most of these stains on the surface of a well protected painting aren’t going to require a whole lot of work to clean. It’ll probably just mean removing and replacing the top layer of varnish. That is, at least in part, the reason the varnish is there and the reason they use a varnish that can be removed with a solvent that won’t interact with the paint.
And lest I be accused of not caring about art: I adore van Gogh beyond measure. Visited the van Gogh museum many times, including on acid during Amsterdam museum night. I cry buckets at the end of the Doctor Who episode with van Gogh. His paintings are spellbinding and I hope that people will enjoy them FOREVER, an endless line of humans marvelling at the movement and life he creates on canvas stretching endlessly into the future. If we all die that won’t happen.
My husband is such a fan of Monet we’ve visited Paris twice just for Monet (once the orangerie and the other time the other museum.) I’ve made him 2 shirts in Monet-ish print fabrics and groups of Japanese tourists take pictures of his cuteness gawking at a big Monet in similar shirt. He also supports the throwing of mashed potatoes at a Monet as a form of protest.
I used to own an excellent little VW Polo but fuck them.
“Much of the world” may be working on it, but they aren’t making any progress, according to all the statistics I can find. In fact there is no, repeat NO decrease in fossil fuel burning at all, if you discount the dip caused by Covid. Quite the opposite in fact. Because of the utter direness of the problem, I think anything at all which does anything to shove the gravity of the situation up peoples’ noses is worth doing.
This is lighting-yourself-on-fire gravity we’re discussing. Some things will look like dumb stunts to many. Everything will look like a stunt to people who would never even hold a damn sign on a corner themselves, much less change anything about how they live.
As I said earlier, I don’t believe in the principle of “No bad press”. You have people who’ll respond to news that an actress was found with a trailer full of dead babies with “But now you’re talking about her! Brilliant PR ploy!” but I’m not one of them. If your goal is to spread a message (and inspire action) and the only time it comes up is tangentially while talking about what a dipshit moron you are, that’s not a tick in the success column. If anything, it’s just connecting your message with being a dipshit moron.
Sure. I don’t see that as a win without action or interest in action. Presumably people aren’t gluing themselves to things just so people can shrug and say “huh, their shirt said XYZ…” and then talk about what idiots the glued people are.
So, yes, the “fact of the matter” is that we know their slogan but that’s not any more of a win than knowing their shoe color.
Today, in the conservative media, Cruz is being praised for remaining calm while a bunch of zealots harassed him.
The hecklers reinforced the notion that climate activists are fanatics who would rather silence the opposition than debate the issues. They seemed more interested in compelling his obedience than in converting him to the cause.
I doubt if they changed the way his constituents will vote in the election. They certainly didn’t change the way he will vote in the Senate.
Have you ever seen a climate change denier (of which Cruz is) in a debate or otherwise speaking about climate change?
Here’s a few lines I found by googling “ted cruz climate change” (from here):
I am the son of two mathematicians and computer programmers and scientists. In the debate over global warming, far too often politicians in Washington - and for that matter, a number of scientists receiving large government grants - disregard the science and data and instead push political ideology.
No, this is liberal politicians who want government power over the economy, the energy sector and every aspect of our lives.
CRUZ: So let me ask you a question, Steve. Is there global warming, yes or no?
INSKEEP: According to the scientists, absolutely.
CRUZ: I’m asking you.
INSKEEP: Sure.
CRUZ: OK, you are incorrect, actually. The scientific evidence doesn’t support global warming. For the last 18 years, the satellite data - we have satellites that monitor the atmosphere. The satellites that actually measure the temperature showed no significant warming whatsoever.
INSKEEP: I’ll just note that NASA analyzes that same data differently. But we can go on.
I think throwing a can of soup at some artwork will make a bigger impact than trying to get him to change something that will mean less income for oil companies.
That’s the like of who is going to have to change their mind, anyway. He and his followers will be even less affected by a completely meaningless stunt. Heckling him just cuts out the middleman.
I don’t. Despite all the attention they’re getting, I still don’t know what their message is. So far as I can tell from their messaging, they don’t know what their message is, either, because the fragments of message that are getting out are directly opposed to each other. Whatever their cause is, they’re not helping it.
Our government wants to green light 40 new North Sea oil and gas fields, this is not compatible with protecting UK citizens, our brothers and sisters in the global south, or signalling to the world what action is needed to tackle the Climate and Nature crisis. The Government could pick up and pass the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill (CEEBill), instead they are steamrolling and plan to continue steamrolling new oil and gas.
Demand:
That the UK government makes a statement that it will immediately halt all future licensing and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK.
At this point unless you’re actively avoiding it, you now know what their message is. And, in the end, it was their protests that made that happen. I saw something about one of the protests online somewhere and found this thread. A few people were seemingly confused about what point they were trying to make with the soup. I googled Just Stop Oil, and found their message. Their government wants to open (or allow to be opened) 40 new oil and gas fields and they don’t want that. I passed that info along to you.
And, at this point you’re clearly being disingenuous. Whether you actually know what their message is or you don’t,
we’ve already been through this before.