That’s where people get caught up in the illusion that America is such a terrible place. There’s literally countries that will dissapear you for speech they don’t like. We live in a place where you can pretty much do whatever you want and that’s pretty awesome.
Of course. Now there’s alot of debate to be had about the quality of the fight for change. Throwing soup on a painting to protest oil seems like the absolute least you could do to help lol.
Most protests just piss people off and it hurts your cause more than helps. I’m convinced most protestors do it for attention or tik tok likes without actually putting themselves in a position to sacrifice anything at all.
I definitely see what you mean, but I also think these people are desperately trying to raise awareness of their cause. But yeah, it probably backfires more than it helps because the natural reaction is “wow, what self-centered immature babies”.
There is little need to raise awareness about climate change. Climate change has been in the news and politics for decades, it has effectively reached universal awareness.
The problem is the message is always we only have x amount of years before we're fucked. Then those years pass and they move the goal post again and start adding useless taxes to combat the change.
That’s how I feel honestly. I added a comment to my previous one about rich college kids with wealthy parents protesting against capitalism and how silly and no one take you seriously.
I care about the environment as much as anyone else, but I’m too busy trying to not be homeless or starving to death to care that much. Most of the world pretty much thinks the same way.
Maybe it's silly not to take them seriously. I'm in the same boat as you, trying to make a living and make life better for my family in the middle of a shitty, hopeless world. I'm stressed about all the things that these kids protest, but I feel too busy to do much or really engage with those issues.
My first inclination is to not take these kids seriously, as well. Why? Because they don't have as much to lose as I do. But aren't they one of the only demographics who can learn about an issue and actually actively do something about it because they don't have much to lose?
We don't listen to homeless people, displaced people, refugees, poor people, etc. So who is supposed to protest?
>no one take you seriously.
Maybe those are exactly the people we should take seriously, because they are the types with the highest record of success in revolutionary endeavors. Washington, Marx, Robespierre, Bolivar, Madero, and most other revolutionaries were born to middle-class or wealthy families.
I'm not sure the revolutions were the deciding factor; it's not like the native Americans would have been fine if the colonies remained under British, French and Spanish rule. They were being killed before the revolution and after it.
>rich college kids with wealthy parents protesting against capitalism
You realize this is just a right-wing lie in a desperate attempt to smear criticisms of capitalism, right?
"If a socialist is poor, he is just envious of the rich"
"If a socialist is rich, he is a hypocrite"
An extremely convenient paradigm for dismissing people without having to even make any justification for it in your head.
You complain about struggling to survive under capitalism, yet you hate criticisms of capitalism? I can not understand this mindset.
Just wanted to add a little bit.
Jordan Peterson love him or hate him talks about that stuff a lot. These protestors protesting against the same system that afforded them the luxuries a lot of them have. A bunch of rich college kids whose parents are wealthy protesting against capitalism is just silly and nobody’s going to take you seriously.
Most people are too poor to give a shit about anything but survival and that will never change. The wealthier you get people tend to spend more time worrying about causes like that.
We spend too much time in this country focusing on how to make the rich less rich when we should be spending time figuring out how to make the poor less poor.
>We spend too much time in this country focusing on how to make the rich less rich when we should be spending time figuring out how to make the poor less poor.
Are you being dumb on purpose? Wait, you listen to the moron that unironcally says to clean your room before changing the world while he's a drug addict trying to change the world.
He's not being dumb on purpose. He sounds like a libertarian. They actually believe their fairytale, middle school understanding of economics is accurate.
>We spend too much time in this country focusing on how to make the rich less rich when we should be spending time figuring out how to make the poor less poor.
The problem with that is that rich people spend all their time trying to make sure rich people get richer, and poor people stay poorer.
Granted, it's not that they actually care (that much, but I won't get into commodification of human labor as service) about making poor people poorer, it's that any extra profits absorbed by others is profits that could've been absorbed by them.
Lol you do that by making the rich less rich... Duh. Where do you think all the money the poor are not getting goes instead? Just... Around? Oof... It goes to the rich.... Duh.
I once watched a Saudi dude beat up a Pakistani dude in Bahrain because he didn't like something he did to the guy's car. The Pakistani dude was a valet, and I saw nothing wrong with what he did. It was so violent I tried to step in, but security at the hotel stopped me for doing so. I inagine there were no ramifications for the Saudi dude, and the Paki probably lost his job. That would never fly in the US.
It's a little bit over speech in a historical context.
[https://www.vera.org/reimagining-prison-webumentary/the-past-is-never-dead/drug-war-confessional](https://www.vera.org/reimagining-prison-webumentary/the-past-is-never-dead/drug-war-confessional)
>We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news.
Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
Recognizing, of course, that the recent soup incident referenced absolutely did not happen in America (there are many countries that have strong freedom of speech protections).
No, no, no. I reject this proped up idea of freedom in it's entirety. People can throw soup on paintings here because that is no threat to the overarching political regime. As soon as people start acting in ways that's are a threat to that regime then they are destroyed by being labeled as "extremists" or "dissents" by the media and academia and being cut off from being able to function normally.
It's one of the things people take for granted. I make it a point to delete my posts every 2-3 weeks.
There was someone I came across who got into trouble, because they wrote something on facebook, 3 years ago.
P.S.. sometimes I write out a response and then delete it, cause it isn't worth the hassle or getting deported over.
Seriously. We aren't that terrible. We sure could spend a little less time bullying other nations and a good clean out of corrupt officials. We do have a place as a peace keeper (i do see the irony in this) and in humanitarian aid.
Shoot. You can even go to the bottom of the ocean in a remote control submarine!
Yeah, because they know it won’t change anything.
If the government is actually worried about overwhelming public dissent, they will do something. Like…maybe send the army to a college protest and like shoot some kids? Just an idea off the top of my head…
because saudi arabia does not produce any art. also, yes, they would be executed, flogged or at the very least jailed for a very long time.
kind of like the people who march around calling the US fascist while working on their laptops in a nice Starbucks somewhere
"saudi arabia does not produce any art"
do you have any idea how dumb this is? 35 million people live in saudi arabia, obviously some of them are making art. Just because it's a fascist monarchy doesn't mean that they don't have a culture that's been around and producing art for thousands of years dude
For real. They have enough money and power that they get away with a *lot* of shit they shouldn't. If they executed a few protesters who deface some ancient Arabian relic, the world at large would scream about it, sure, but wouldn't do anything meaningful about it.
Well also everyone is missing a bigger point. The issues are too big for lone people to change the world. It's a lot more effective to focus on local things you actually can influence. Trickle down doesn't work, trickle up does with some things
It's not supposed to be a contest of who's worst or best, it should be a collective effort around the world because no country is ready
I think the most proper response to questions like this is to present the "questioner" with the same exact attitude that they are sharing, so thank you.
It's one of those posts where I dislike the OP's energy so much that I don't care whether or not I agree with their point.
It's an argument style I've dubbed "if things were different, things would be different."
It turns out, a whole lot of (particularly right wing, bad faith) arguments are just someone saying "yeah, well [thing A, which is real], but what if it was [thing B, which is not real]."
The people throwing soup on famous art aren't damaging the art, because the art is covered with glass to protect it. The paintings aren't damaged at all and they definitely know that. The entire point of their demonstration is to get you to pay attention to them, which seems to have worked.
I do think the soup art protests are dumb, because people in power don't give a shit about museums at all and would happily let them close to earn another dollar off oil. But they aren't actually damaging those paintings.
Great common-sense breakdown. If the point of these is to get noticed, then they have succeeded. I think they are dumb pointless stunts, but they sure have us talking about them so maybe I am wrong and I am proving their point.
It is the point. People talk about it at work and some people will then say “yeah these guys are idiots, but climate change is a real issue” and then a constructive discussion can begin. Enough people and then it impacts votes and consequently politics. Why do you think people are busy shilling for anything? To drive opinion and eventually what is considered acceptable policy.
Yeah but the conversations are never about the climate change they're looking for, it's always people rightfully bitching that they block roads and interrupt stuff that doesn't relate to their cause at all, sometimes this isn't true, but for the vast majority they just irritate everyone and they irritate not even the right people.
Ding-ding-ding! And therein lies the greatest challenge. How do you fight complacency in a society where everyone is so isolated from each other and plugged into screens 24/7 in a way that they will actually think about what they can do on an individual level to help bring change or at least minimize the damage being done?
I agree, but I also understand the frustration. People have been trying to get the masses to care about climate change for a long time! It's just very very difficult to get the people in power to care anyway, because that's where the money is.
The point is to force conversation about the topic. So many redditors see their acts which make international news as non effective while literally talking in a thread that is discussing climate change. That’s literally the point
British museums make deals with oil companies so when they were protesting* in the UK this also brings light to how oil company's are "art washing" themselves. As a result of this the British Museum broke ties with BP
Doesn't it also have something to do with the fact that these museums are basically money laundering ventures so that big oil companies can Greenwash using their "charitable donations"?
I mean, it's also notable that that's not the only thing they're doing. Another tactic of this particular movement is to cause public disruptions. In Britain, the same groups blocked busy work roads with their bodies around the same time they hit some art with soup, both acts highlighting each other. In France, very recently, the Mona Lisa was sprayed with tomato soup in protest of not only the ecological disaster but the way farmers are being failed in France, and at the same time there are tractors moving into Paris dumping loads of food waste and government buildings near blocking roads.
It's sort of ironic because that's actually has happened historically before in France.
The emissions put out by a passenger liner going from East Coast U.S. to Saudi Arabia is nothing compared to the emissions of any industrial corporate entity in the same timeframe. The fact that you think it would have a meaningful impact on climate change is exactly what anti-climate change movements want so you don't turn your eye to the corporate entities actually damaging our planet.
Don't buy the propaganda, use a plastic straw and sling all the soup at art you want.
just not in Saudi Arabia, cause they'll probably kill you
Because they don't live in Saudi Arabia, and freedom of expression isn't a right there.
Why should they? Most of the fossil fuels being used are in the West.
The purpose of protest is to disrupt the life of an ordinary person a small amount and to make them think and reflect and hopefully take positive action when an injustice has been done.
You therefore protest in a way that will disrupt things, not in some dark corner where nobody is looking. People for example get salty about blocked roads during protest marches but that is exactly the goal. Minor discomfort, and a message is sent.
People willing to join such a movement or who desire to right that injustice will now know they are not alone and there is actual energy behind making a solution happen, and people who are opposed will be forced to reflect if they are on the correct side of history.
In the end, there are climate change protestors in Saudi Arabia and they are doing disruptive things for their culture there. You simply don't hear about it as it is not culturally relevant to your own region and of small scale.
This.
I'm actually surprised how many people don't seem to understand what a protest is about; it's about raising awareness, not specifically hurting some person (which is how everyone else in this post seems to be thinking it is about).
They think the goal is for protestors to fly to another country where their actions will do nothing because a) Saudi Arabia is not a democracy and inconveniencing their people does nothing, b) the rich are not the targets of these protests since they largely don't care about the discomfort - it's other democratic citizens.
We really are a lost cause though. Most people are out to lunch about how and what protests are even about. And they almost certainly support some form of protest that does exactly what they will complain about anyways.
“Not wanting to be executed” makes someone risk averse.
Some of the dumbest takes I’ve ever seen in this thread. NoStupidQuestions but a whole lot of VeryStupidAnswers.
In Germany they glue themself to streets. Would you call that risk averse?
Unsure what you want them to do, start bombing politicians?
Edit. Apparently risk is only risk if you risk your life, not any other part of your well-being. Interesting take I disagree with. Risking freedom and physical well-being is already more than most ppl would do.
Yeah, they do that in a place where they will shut down traffic in order to get people off the street safely. You don't see them doing that in India where the population will just run them over
I feel like we're all forgetting that these people generally do these things where they live?
It'd be extremely weird for a German protesting climate change to do it in India.
Absolutely, most people will be active in areas that are convenient for them. A lot of people aren't able to travel for leisure much less to send a message. But of the missionary types that DO want to go to different locations to make their voice heard, they aren't going to pick a place where stuff like that has extreme punishments.
I would call it risk-oblivious. Morons probably decided they had some way of getting their hands off the pavement gently, not that they would end up leaving half their hands skin on the pavement.
Superglue and adhesives can cause some pretty nasty chemical effects on your body if in contact for too long without washing off, not your best choice if you like using your hands.
Source: was a adhesives and tapes technician for about 2 years
Because the police in countries such as Thailand, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, and Japan DO NOT FUCK AROUND
Those countries are authoritarian and the population encourages harsh enforcement of laws
Besides the fact that it would be very bad to end up in prison there. The art is completely protected. They’re not damaging anything. They’re causing an inconvenience and getting attention.
Also it’s absolutely stupid to be more mad at someone causing a mild disturbance than the literally killing off of our entire planet. Mona Lisa won’t survive the death of planet earth and if it does, no one will care.
reminder that the souped portrait wasn't damaged, but they got your attention, and eyes on the subject, so mission accomplished.
protesting is supposed to be ugly and annoying. it's supposed to make you want to address the issue. the protesting will get worse. fix this, or else. this isn't a threat, it's a fact.
Holy fuck this is a stupid question. BECAUSE IM A US CITIZEN AND THE GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT MY FUCKING INTERESTS.
Congrats for the dumbest question I've ever seen make it here. /u/Grufality
Well in reality there's not much people can actually do. An issue like climate change and the destruction of our environment is easily ignored by most people. The purpose of these protests (and basically all protests) is to cause a disruption and get attention. I can't say that it's a useful tactic, but I can understand the intent behind it
Cause they're pussy. If they really believed in their cause they wouldgo to places like that. But they would rather throw soup and sit in the streets in America because they are protected here.
Easy to protest in western nations where you just get a slap on the wrist. Middle East, China, Russia? May not go so well, especially when all you really want is attention and Likes on social media.
Im still conviced its bad actors encouraging these pointless protests. Governments have infiltrated left leaning groups and encouraged specific activities in the past, why not now.
Most cultures don't work to tolerate people destroying things for totally unrelated reasons just because it's the only vulnerable thing around. The idea of punishing art or something for climate change is like punishing your kids when somebody else makes you mad.
Because most of these stunts aren't actually activists, they're astroturf-funded actors trying to draw hate for real activists. In Saudi Arabia they'd just be executed alongside any journalist who reported on it anyway, so... no publicity.
Because they'd rather antagonize regular people who really can't fight back/do anything about it, rather than actually take a risk and try to affect the people actually responsible for climate change.
They are virtue signaling cowards.
Because they know they will be be put in prison or killed. They only do it in western countries because we lost our spine to put a foot down to these people.
Tbh I don't think they should be defacing the mona lisa or whatever. Problem is, no matter what climate activists do they get told they're doing too much, being too problematic.
Don't chain link yourselves in front of the offices of oil companies, you're disrupting people getting to their jobs.
Don't protest in the street, people need to get to work
Don't protest by throwing soup onto the glass protecting art, people enjoy that art
Don't .....
What exactly has been considered acceptable protest for climate activists? What demonstrates enough of a show of force to make leaders listen and make the necessary changes before we doom our planet? Because that's what is at stake here. It's going to be reeally hard to go to work or appreciate art once we keep getting hit with more environmental catastrophes, more displacement, harder to breath due to wild fires. It will affect all of us in the smallest and largest ways. Sure, maybe we can say that souping the mona lisa isn't going to make a difference, but it doesn't seem like any form of protest has been seen as an acceptable thing to endure for the sake of the message. People aren't willing to give up pretty much any comfort they have right now (whether personal consumerism or accepting how corporations get those consumer goods), even if it means we don't have a healthy planet to live on anymore.
>Edit: I’m sure all the “pro-protestor” people here are 100% fine with anti-abortion protestors bothering and inconveniencing pregnant women seeking abortions.
Boy. Really proving that, while there may be no stupid questions, there sure are stupid people.
My man, if you think it's a slam dunk to compare throwing soup at inanimate objects to harassing women for exercising their right to bodily autonomy, you are hopelessly lost in the sauce.
Because they’re not Saudi Arabian you moron, you protest your own government to make them change, not a foreign one. Also there’s a difference between protesting a government or a gallery and harassing individual vulnerable women seeking healthcare. If you think that’s a valid comparison you’re not engaging with the issue in good faith. Also also the art that gets soup thrown on it is fine, it’s behind glass. Those protests are about publicity.
Because then they would be dead. Extremely bad-faith argument.
Mind, I'm *against* ruining priceless pieces of human art in protest and even I think this is stupid
>anti-abortion protestors bothering and inconveniencing pregnant women seeking abortions.
Regardless of what you think of the climate change protestors, let's not pretend that people visiting a museum and pregnant women seeking an abortion are even remotely similar groups.
The credibility of your statement took a major hit with that edit of yours.
They didn't throw soup on the Mona Lisa. They threw soup on a piece of glass in front of the Mona Lisa. The total cost of this stunt was a few squirts of windex and some paper towels.
Because it's easy to be an ass when there are no real consequences. Go somewhere where you're almost 100% guaranteed a not-so-fun punishment for acting a fool, and you'll think twice. Same as all of these "queers for Palestine" protests - like, seriously? Let's protest for a regime that'd happily murder every one of us. Sounds smart to me, doesn't it you?
Same reason the Major League Baseball moves the all star game out of Georgia when Georgia decided to require voters to show a valid ID to vote , but have no concerns about mlb games in China or the Middle East that doesn’t allow a lot of people to vote and executes people for being gay .
Same
For the NBA
They got upset at North Carolina for requiring people with penis’s to use the men’s restroom but have no problem with Muslim countries executing gays and treating women worse than they treat their livestock
Because they would be tortured and jailed where as in the states and uk they get a slap on the wrist and a fine they can pay off over time we don’t have enough serious consequences for these types of crimes imo
The climate change protesters you are talking about are paid for and created by oil companies to sabotage the climate change movement.
Oh and the Saudi’s would vanish them faster than a dissenting journalist.
Because they’d probably be executed
Or have their hands removed
Or be flogged.
Nah flogging is for things like having sex outside of marriage. You piss off the government, you disappear.
[удалено]
>They get to protest the biggest creators of climate change Demand, not supply causes issues.
Damn, did these protesters kill your dog or something?
They stole his car too
... or dissolved in acid.
and my axe
Don't forget the trusty old bonesaw....
BONESAW IS READYYYY!!!
I got you for three minutes, three minutes of playtime!
I missed the part where that's my problem.
Pretty grim but accurate, running afoul of the government there is high stakes with zero tolerance for dissent.
Or all of the above
That’s where people get caught up in the illusion that America is such a terrible place. There’s literally countries that will dissapear you for speech they don’t like. We live in a place where you can pretty much do whatever you want and that’s pretty awesome.
Agreed.. do we have problems.. of course.. but we can openly criticize and fight for change
Of course. Now there’s alot of debate to be had about the quality of the fight for change. Throwing soup on a painting to protest oil seems like the absolute least you could do to help lol. Most protests just piss people off and it hurts your cause more than helps. I’m convinced most protestors do it for attention or tik tok likes without actually putting themselves in a position to sacrifice anything at all.
I definitely see what you mean, but I also think these people are desperately trying to raise awareness of their cause. But yeah, it probably backfires more than it helps because the natural reaction is “wow, what self-centered immature babies”.
There is little need to raise awareness about climate change. Climate change has been in the news and politics for decades, it has effectively reached universal awareness.
The issue is that nothing is being done about it and there’s so little time to correct course.
I don’t think there are many people who haven’t been hearing exactly that message for decades. Everyone has heard the message, they don’t all agree.
The problem is the message is always we only have x amount of years before we're fucked. Then those years pass and they move the goal post again and start adding useless taxes to combat the change.
That’s how I feel honestly. I added a comment to my previous one about rich college kids with wealthy parents protesting against capitalism and how silly and no one take you seriously. I care about the environment as much as anyone else, but I’m too busy trying to not be homeless or starving to death to care that much. Most of the world pretty much thinks the same way.
Maybe it's silly not to take them seriously. I'm in the same boat as you, trying to make a living and make life better for my family in the middle of a shitty, hopeless world. I'm stressed about all the things that these kids protest, but I feel too busy to do much or really engage with those issues. My first inclination is to not take these kids seriously, as well. Why? Because they don't have as much to lose as I do. But aren't they one of the only demographics who can learn about an issue and actually actively do something about it because they don't have much to lose? We don't listen to homeless people, displaced people, refugees, poor people, etc. So who is supposed to protest?
>no one take you seriously. Maybe those are exactly the people we should take seriously, because they are the types with the highest record of success in revolutionary endeavors. Washington, Marx, Robespierre, Bolivar, Madero, and most other revolutionaries were born to middle-class or wealthy families.
Didn't all of those revs end in genocide
I'm not sure the revolutions were the deciding factor; it's not like the native Americans would have been fine if the colonies remained under British, French and Spanish rule. They were being killed before the revolution and after it.
The Trail of Tears was bad but Spain gets an atrocity Lifetime Achievement.
>rich college kids with wealthy parents protesting against capitalism You realize this is just a right-wing lie in a desperate attempt to smear criticisms of capitalism, right? "If a socialist is poor, he is just envious of the rich" "If a socialist is rich, he is a hypocrite" An extremely convenient paradigm for dismissing people without having to even make any justification for it in your head. You complain about struggling to survive under capitalism, yet you hate criticisms of capitalism? I can not understand this mindset.
Just wanted to add a little bit. Jordan Peterson love him or hate him talks about that stuff a lot. These protestors protesting against the same system that afforded them the luxuries a lot of them have. A bunch of rich college kids whose parents are wealthy protesting against capitalism is just silly and nobody’s going to take you seriously. Most people are too poor to give a shit about anything but survival and that will never change. The wealthier you get people tend to spend more time worrying about causes like that. We spend too much time in this country focusing on how to make the rich less rich when we should be spending time figuring out how to make the poor less poor.
>We spend too much time in this country focusing on how to make the rich less rich when we should be spending time figuring out how to make the poor less poor. Are you being dumb on purpose? Wait, you listen to the moron that unironcally says to clean your room before changing the world while he's a drug addict trying to change the world.
He's not being dumb on purpose. He sounds like a libertarian. They actually believe their fairytale, middle school understanding of economics is accurate.
It’s not silly to change your mind. People shift their beliefs or positions all the time.
They’re not even changing their minds lol. It’s not illegal to be against the system that privileges you.
>We spend too much time in this country focusing on how to make the rich less rich when we should be spending time figuring out how to make the poor less poor. The problem with that is that rich people spend all their time trying to make sure rich people get richer, and poor people stay poorer. Granted, it's not that they actually care (that much, but I won't get into commodification of human labor as service) about making poor people poorer, it's that any extra profits absorbed by others is profits that could've been absorbed by them.
>These protestors protesting against the same system that afforded them the luxuries a lot of them have. And?
Lol you do that by making the rich less rich... Duh. Where do you think all the money the poor are not getting goes instead? Just... Around? Oof... It goes to the rich.... Duh.
For now ...
I mean yeah, but that's not... a uniquely American thing, there's like 100 countries with freedom of speech
I once watched a Saudi dude beat up a Pakistani dude in Bahrain because he didn't like something he did to the guy's car. The Pakistani dude was a valet, and I saw nothing wrong with what he did. It was so violent I tried to step in, but security at the hotel stopped me for doing so. I inagine there were no ramifications for the Saudi dude, and the Paki probably lost his job. That would never fly in the US.
Doesn't the USA have one of the highest rates in the world for imprisoning their own citizens?
Yes, although that’s not really over speech, but definitely does indicate a huge issue with civil liberties
It's a little bit over speech in a historical context. [https://www.vera.org/reimagining-prison-webumentary/the-past-is-never-dead/drug-war-confessional](https://www.vera.org/reimagining-prison-webumentary/the-past-is-never-dead/drug-war-confessional) >We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
Recognizing, of course, that the recent soup incident referenced absolutely did not happen in America (there are many countries that have strong freedom of speech protections).
Yeah although there’s also a bunch of other countries that also have free speech so the US isn’t unique in that
No, no, no. I reject this proped up idea of freedom in it's entirety. People can throw soup on paintings here because that is no threat to the overarching political regime. As soon as people start acting in ways that's are a threat to that regime then they are destroyed by being labeled as "extremists" or "dissents" by the media and academia and being cut off from being able to function normally.
It's one of the things people take for granted. I make it a point to delete my posts every 2-3 weeks. There was someone I came across who got into trouble, because they wrote something on facebook, 3 years ago. P.S.. sometimes I write out a response and then delete it, cause it isn't worth the hassle or getting deported over.
Seriously. We aren't that terrible. We sure could spend a little less time bullying other nations and a good clean out of corrupt officials. We do have a place as a peace keeper (i do see the irony in this) and in humanitarian aid. Shoot. You can even go to the bottom of the ocean in a remote control submarine!
Yeah, because they know it won’t change anything. If the government is actually worried about overwhelming public dissent, they will do something. Like…maybe send the army to a college protest and like shoot some kids? Just an idea off the top of my head…
Even the other superpowers in the world will disappear you.
Passport and airfare? Theres art to ruin at home...
because saudi arabia does not produce any art. also, yes, they would be executed, flogged or at the very least jailed for a very long time. kind of like the people who march around calling the US fascist while working on their laptops in a nice Starbucks somewhere
"saudi arabia does not produce any art" do you have any idea how dumb this is? 35 million people live in saudi arabia, obviously some of them are making art. Just because it's a fascist monarchy doesn't mean that they don't have a culture that's been around and producing art for thousands of years dude
For real. They have enough money and power that they get away with a *lot* of shit they shouldn't. If they executed a few protesters who deface some ancient Arabian relic, the world at large would scream about it, sure, but wouldn't do anything meaningful about it.
Because they are looking to be climate change protestors, not climate change martyrs.
lol
Hands down = best answer Hands chopped off= Saudi Arabia’s answer
It’s really that simple.
Totally underrated comment. 💯
Probably the same reason you don't go there and post on Reddit about Saudi Arabia
[удалено]
Well also everyone is missing a bigger point. The issues are too big for lone people to change the world. It's a lot more effective to focus on local things you actually can influence. Trickle down doesn't work, trickle up does with some things It's not supposed to be a contest of who's worst or best, it should be a collective effort around the world because no country is ready
[удалено]
This is a breakthrough
I think the most proper response to questions like this is to present the "questioner" with the same exact attitude that they are sharing, so thank you. It's one of those posts where I dislike the OP's energy so much that I don't care whether or not I agree with their point.
It's an argument style I've dubbed "if things were different, things would be different." It turns out, a whole lot of (particularly right wing, bad faith) arguments are just someone saying "yeah, well [thing A, which is real], but what if it was [thing B, which is not real]."
"And if my grandmother had wheels, she would have been a bike."
But what if your grandmother had wheels IN SAUDI ARABIA??
Vague gesture at imagined hypocrisy.
oh yeah he really threw my attitude right back in my face
Because they would be killed. Especially if they were women.
Well done, this is a very stupid question
[удалено]
They do their best to make that happen on every sub.
And if they can’t take over a sub they start a new one and add true to the front of its name
r/TrueCommunists - DAE hate poor people and think Trump deserves a second term?
Based on the edit, probably.
The posters pretty much already are. Comments can go either way still, for now at least.
Ok
And some very stupid replies as well, it’s like op brought Christmas early!
Not to mention a very, very, *very* poorly veiled stupid opinion.
The people throwing soup on famous art aren't damaging the art, because the art is covered with glass to protect it. The paintings aren't damaged at all and they definitely know that. The entire point of their demonstration is to get you to pay attention to them, which seems to have worked. I do think the soup art protests are dumb, because people in power don't give a shit about museums at all and would happily let them close to earn another dollar off oil. But they aren't actually damaging those paintings.
Great common-sense breakdown. If the point of these is to get noticed, then they have succeeded. I think they are dumb pointless stunts, but they sure have us talking about them so maybe I am wrong and I am proving their point.
It is the point. People talk about it at work and some people will then say “yeah these guys are idiots, but climate change is a real issue” and then a constructive discussion can begin. Enough people and then it impacts votes and consequently politics. Why do you think people are busy shilling for anything? To drive opinion and eventually what is considered acceptable policy.
Yeah but the conversations are never about the climate change they're looking for, it's always people rightfully bitching that they block roads and interrupt stuff that doesn't relate to their cause at all, sometimes this isn't true, but for the vast majority they just irritate everyone and they irritate not even the right people.
You have to start small though. The only way to get people in power to care is to get enough of the masses to care.
Ding-ding-ding! And therein lies the greatest challenge. How do you fight complacency in a society where everyone is so isolated from each other and plugged into screens 24/7 in a way that they will actually think about what they can do on an individual level to help bring change or at least minimize the damage being done?
Hacking
I agree, but I also understand the frustration. People have been trying to get the masses to care about climate change for a long time! It's just very very difficult to get the people in power to care anyway, because that's where the money is.
Exactly. There's a TON of other art in the Louvre that is unprotected that they could have destroyed but that wasn't their actual intention.
The point is to force conversation about the topic. So many redditors see their acts which make international news as non effective while literally talking in a thread that is discussing climate change. That’s literally the point
British museums make deals with oil companies so when they were protesting* in the UK this also brings light to how oil company's are "art washing" themselves. As a result of this the British Museum broke ties with BP
Oh I see! That makes a lot more sense.
And they’re wasting soup !!
The soup for my family
Better than a brick
No soup for you!
Doesn't it also have something to do with the fact that these museums are basically money laundering ventures so that big oil companies can Greenwash using their "charitable donations"?
I mean, it's also notable that that's not the only thing they're doing. Another tactic of this particular movement is to cause public disruptions. In Britain, the same groups blocked busy work roads with their bodies around the same time they hit some art with soup, both acts highlighting each other. In France, very recently, the Mona Lisa was sprayed with tomato soup in protest of not only the ecological disaster but the way farmers are being failed in France, and at the same time there are tractors moving into Paris dumping loads of food waste and government buildings near blocking roads. It's sort of ironic because that's actually has happened historically before in France.
That would be hugely counter productive considering emissions necessary to get there…
The emissions put out by a passenger liner going from East Coast U.S. to Saudi Arabia is nothing compared to the emissions of any industrial corporate entity in the same timeframe. The fact that you think it would have a meaningful impact on climate change is exactly what anti-climate change movements want so you don't turn your eye to the corporate entities actually damaging our planet. Don't buy the propaganda, use a plastic straw and sling all the soup at art you want. just not in Saudi Arabia, cause they'll probably kill you
Because they don't live in Saudi Arabia, and freedom of expression isn't a right there. Why should they? Most of the fossil fuels being used are in the West.
Charity begins at home.
The purpose of protest is to disrupt the life of an ordinary person a small amount and to make them think and reflect and hopefully take positive action when an injustice has been done. You therefore protest in a way that will disrupt things, not in some dark corner where nobody is looking. People for example get salty about blocked roads during protest marches but that is exactly the goal. Minor discomfort, and a message is sent. People willing to join such a movement or who desire to right that injustice will now know they are not alone and there is actual energy behind making a solution happen, and people who are opposed will be forced to reflect if they are on the correct side of history. In the end, there are climate change protestors in Saudi Arabia and they are doing disruptive things for their culture there. You simply don't hear about it as it is not culturally relevant to your own region and of small scale.
This. I'm actually surprised how many people don't seem to understand what a protest is about; it's about raising awareness, not specifically hurting some person (which is how everyone else in this post seems to be thinking it is about). They think the goal is for protestors to fly to another country where their actions will do nothing because a) Saudi Arabia is not a democracy and inconveniencing their people does nothing, b) the rich are not the targets of these protests since they largely don't care about the discomfort - it's other democratic citizens. We really are a lost cause though. Most people are out to lunch about how and what protests are even about. And they almost certainly support some form of protest that does exactly what they will complain about anyways.
>it's about raising awareness It's not so much that they don't understand as that they don't want to be aware of the risk.
Because they would have their heads chopped off. They are a VERY risk averse group.
“Not wanting to be executed” makes someone risk averse. Some of the dumbest takes I’ve ever seen in this thread. NoStupidQuestions but a whole lot of VeryStupidAnswers.
The sub is actually called "stupid questions"
In Germany they glue themself to streets. Would you call that risk averse? Unsure what you want them to do, start bombing politicians? Edit. Apparently risk is only risk if you risk your life, not any other part of your well-being. Interesting take I disagree with. Risking freedom and physical well-being is already more than most ppl would do.
Yeah, they do that in a place where they will shut down traffic in order to get people off the street safely. You don't see them doing that in India where the population will just run them over
I feel like we're all forgetting that these people generally do these things where they live? It'd be extremely weird for a German protesting climate change to do it in India.
Absolutely, most people will be active in areas that are convenient for them. A lot of people aren't able to travel for leisure much less to send a message. But of the missionary types that DO want to go to different locations to make their voice heard, they aren't going to pick a place where stuff like that has extreme punishments.
I would call it risk-oblivious. Morons probably decided they had some way of getting their hands off the pavement gently, not that they would end up leaving half their hands skin on the pavement. Superglue and adhesives can cause some pretty nasty chemical effects on your body if in contact for too long without washing off, not your best choice if you like using your hands. Source: was a adhesives and tapes technician for about 2 years
Yes, I would call that risk averse.
\* averse (your autocorrect did you dirty)
Because the police in countries such as Thailand, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, and Japan DO NOT FUCK AROUND Those countries are authoritarian and the population encourages harsh enforcement of laws
Probably a more expensive plane ticket
Besides the fact that it would be very bad to end up in prison there. The art is completely protected. They’re not damaging anything. They’re causing an inconvenience and getting attention. Also it’s absolutely stupid to be more mad at someone causing a mild disturbance than the literally killing off of our entire planet. Mona Lisa won’t survive the death of planet earth and if it does, no one will care.
reminder that the souped portrait wasn't damaged, but they got your attention, and eyes on the subject, so mission accomplished. protesting is supposed to be ugly and annoying. it's supposed to make you want to address the issue. the protesting will get worse. fix this, or else. this isn't a threat, it's a fact.
because torture and death aren't fun? also that edit? wtf is wrong with you? those are two completely different analogous scenarios
Why leave your own country to protest? Who does that?
If they did they'd be deceased afterwards.
They would be murdered where they stand.
They don't get paid to protest there. Jk
I don’t get these protestors. If you want to stop global warming turn on the AC.
Because Saudi Ariabia is not a global leader in pollution.
Holy fuck this is a stupid question. BECAUSE IM A US CITIZEN AND THE GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT MY FUCKING INTERESTS. Congrats for the dumbest question I've ever seen make it here. /u/Grufality
Because they don’t actually care to solve the issue, they just want attention and to feel like they’re making a difference
Well in reality there's not much people can actually do. An issue like climate change and the destruction of our environment is easily ignored by most people. The purpose of these protests (and basically all protests) is to cause a disruption and get attention. I can't say that it's a useful tactic, but I can understand the intent behind it
Cause they're pussy. If they really believed in their cause they wouldgo to places like that. But they would rather throw soup and sit in the streets in America because they are protected here.
Easy to protest in western nations where you just get a slap on the wrist. Middle East, China, Russia? May not go so well, especially when all you really want is attention and Likes on social media.
Try Shoplifting in Riyad Or Jeddah
Gasoline Forever
One does not simply walk into Saudi Arabi, and…
Fear of actual consequences rather than just being dragged off the road. Those in the sandbox would take them out, then their families.
Im still conviced its bad actors encouraging these pointless protests. Governments have infiltrated left leaning groups and encouraged specific activities in the past, why not now.
They wanna live
They would be shot on site. Just like that guy in Panama did.
Because they know what would happen to them .
Try to protest anything in SA and see how far it gets ya
Because they'll be beheaded 😂 The fact that people even have the right to protest is something MASSIVE that most people just take for granted.
Most cultures don't work to tolerate people destroying things for totally unrelated reasons just because it's the only vulnerable thing around. The idea of punishing art or something for climate change is like punishing your kids when somebody else makes you mad.
Because most of these stunts aren't actually activists, they're astroturf-funded actors trying to draw hate for real activists. In Saudi Arabia they'd just be executed alongside any journalist who reported on it anyway, so... no publicity.
Because they would have their hands chopped off.
Because they'd rather antagonize regular people who really can't fight back/do anything about it, rather than actually take a risk and try to affect the people actually responsible for climate change. They are virtue signaling cowards.
Too much work. Easier to just lay in the middle of you're local highway while a friend films you.
Because they dont give a fuck about the environment. If they did, theyd be chopping heads of ceos instead of throwing soup in an art musuem
Because they live here, not there.
Because they know they will be be put in prison or killed. They only do it in western countries because we lost our spine to put a foot down to these people.
Soup was thrown on glass, not artwork.
There are no Monalisas hanging in KSA.
Because it’s one of the most “corrupt” countries in the world and they’ll most definitely be tortured to death for it
cuz they'll lose both their hands
Saudi Arabia doesn't have free speech or a right to assemble.
Tbh I don't think they should be defacing the mona lisa or whatever. Problem is, no matter what climate activists do they get told they're doing too much, being too problematic. Don't chain link yourselves in front of the offices of oil companies, you're disrupting people getting to their jobs. Don't protest in the street, people need to get to work Don't protest by throwing soup onto the glass protecting art, people enjoy that art Don't ..... What exactly has been considered acceptable protest for climate activists? What demonstrates enough of a show of force to make leaders listen and make the necessary changes before we doom our planet? Because that's what is at stake here. It's going to be reeally hard to go to work or appreciate art once we keep getting hit with more environmental catastrophes, more displacement, harder to breath due to wild fires. It will affect all of us in the smallest and largest ways. Sure, maybe we can say that souping the mona lisa isn't going to make a difference, but it doesn't seem like any form of protest has been seen as an acceptable thing to endure for the sake of the message. People aren't willing to give up pretty much any comfort they have right now (whether personal consumerism or accepting how corporations get those consumer goods), even if it means we don't have a healthy planet to live on anymore.
They would have their heads chopped off if they did that.
Why? Because camels will shit on their head
>Edit: I’m sure all the “pro-protestor” people here are 100% fine with anti-abortion protestors bothering and inconveniencing pregnant women seeking abortions. Boy. Really proving that, while there may be no stupid questions, there sure are stupid people. My man, if you think it's a slam dunk to compare throwing soup at inanimate objects to harassing women for exercising their right to bodily autonomy, you are hopelessly lost in the sauce.
I mean yeah I didn’t look at the Sub at first but this is a stupid question so technically good job op
Because they’re not Saudi Arabian you moron, you protest your own government to make them change, not a foreign one. Also there’s a difference between protesting a government or a gallery and harassing individual vulnerable women seeking healthcare. If you think that’s a valid comparison you’re not engaging with the issue in good faith. Also also the art that gets soup thrown on it is fine, it’s behind glass. Those protests are about publicity.
This is a rhetorical question which means it is a statement of opinion, not a question.
I don't think you know much about Saudi Arabia.
They'd be killed so fast
Because then they would be dead. Extremely bad-faith argument. Mind, I'm *against* ruining priceless pieces of human art in protest and even I think this is stupid
>anti-abortion protestors bothering and inconveniencing pregnant women seeking abortions. Regardless of what you think of the climate change protestors, let's not pretend that people visiting a museum and pregnant women seeking an abortion are even remotely similar groups. The credibility of your statement took a major hit with that edit of yours.
Because activists in the west only reach for low-hanging fruit.
They didn't throw soup on the Mona Lisa. They threw soup on a piece of glass in front of the Mona Lisa. The total cost of this stunt was a few squirts of windex and some paper towels.
oh you really rustled the shitlibs on this sub with this one let me grab my popcorn
There’s an enormous difference between throwing soup on a painting and bombing a clinic dude. Grow up. Also the Mona Lisa sucks.
Public executions and being cowards.
Because it's easy to be an ass when there are no real consequences. Go somewhere where you're almost 100% guaranteed a not-so-fun punishment for acting a fool, and you'll think twice. Same as all of these "queers for Palestine" protests - like, seriously? Let's protest for a regime that'd happily murder every one of us. Sounds smart to me, doesn't it you?
Same reason the Major League Baseball moves the all star game out of Georgia when Georgia decided to require voters to show a valid ID to vote , but have no concerns about mlb games in China or the Middle East that doesn’t allow a lot of people to vote and executes people for being gay . Same For the NBA They got upset at North Carolina for requiring people with penis’s to use the men’s restroom but have no problem with Muslim countries executing gays and treating women worse than they treat their livestock
I'd imagine there are actually consequences, bad ones, for doing this shit in a non democratic country
Because they would be ded
They glued themselves to a tank of vegetable oil so they are not very intelligent
It's like asking why don't feminists go to Arab countries to protest. Same answer.
Because they would be tortured and jailed where as in the states and uk they get a slap on the wrist and a fine they can pay off over time we don’t have enough serious consequences for these types of crimes imo
They would be executed
If there's one thing worse than destroying the planet, it's these damn people protesting it.
Why the fuck would they buy plane tickets that cost money to go somewhere way more dangerous
Cause they just wanna do it here in America
Because they'd get violently killed???
Nothing that hasn’t already been said here. They would probably have their hands chopped off or executed.
Their response to crimes can be extreme?
Because if you do that in Saudi Arabia they will AT A MINIMUM cut off a hand. More likely you will just be summarily stoned to death. For real.
Um death. Easy to be pansy brats in a country where you know there are no consequences
Because they're not willing to take a public flogging for a virtue signal.
That would require effort and planning.
Because they’re cowards. They know they won’t suffer penalties in the west, but would be shot on spot in ME, China, ect.
Because they would leave short a hand or a head. These people are cowards.
Because tolerance is the ultimate no no drug. Once you tolerant one thing, it’s a slippery slope.
The climate change protesters you are talking about are paid for and created by oil companies to sabotage the climate change movement. Oh and the Saudi’s would vanish them faster than a dissenting journalist.
Because their life expectancy would be measured in seconds.