To think this is awful? (Just Stop Oil protesters throwing soup over Van Gogh painting)

[TheCatsPyjamas1]

Just read that some Just Stop Oil protesters have thrown soup over a Van Gogh painting in the National Gallery in London. AIBU to think this is unacceptable?

I fully support the message of the group (investing in environmentally responsible energy rather than fossil fuels, and helping to make society more equal for everyone), but I find their protest methods are awful and risk alienating people who would otherwise support them.

They keep on doing crazy things, and seem to be escalating their action each time they protest. I don’t really know when or how it’ll end.

I admire them.

I would rather be a law abiding, right wing thinker, than a hypocritical left wing do gooder, who gets offended about everything and anything and searches for band wagons to jump on. Insecure people with nothing better to do than cause misery to others. You're never happy unless you've got a crusade to chase. Never wanting unity, only division.

The people getting irate about the "waste of food" (come on) or the fact that the glue was made with fossil fuels, as if that's some
big "gotcha!" moment, just prove what huge cognitive dissonance there is around this topic and why the actions needed are actually even more radical than this one.

Another person said that they are hypocrites for doing this because they were "probably driven to school in Range Rovers". It's so intellectually dishonest.

I can see that this particular stunt has really divided people and I might question its value on that basis. But there is no point having art on a dead planet. Van Gogh was a thoughtful person and disliked the degree to which art was commodified. I think he'd have supported this.

Jesus, if we’ve reached the point of hypothesising about what Van Gogh might have thought about it, we’ve really jumped the shark.

So did Erica Roe streaking across Twickenham. Doesn't mean that anything will come of it, any more than anything came of that (yes, I know that she wasn't actually protesting, just drunk).

But even using electric vehicles relies on fossil fuels to charge them up. Electricity.

You can’t just expect trucks and vehicles to stop using oil overnight. Most lorries use diesel. Yes we all want a greener planet but we must have realistic expectations.

Even if the whole of the UK brought electric cars tomorrow, the national grid couldn’t cope with the electricity usage! It would literally collapse with everyone charging them.

As I said previously, many food deliveries have been stopped as a direct result. This means less stock in supermarkets.

Doesn’t the French own the Dartford bridge? Will they take legal action against the protesters on this? Or will they fine the UK government for loss of earnings?

People have a right to PEACEFUL protest.

What these lot get up to is stupid.

I totally agree with you OP, their message, which most people probably agree with, gets lost in their ridiculous behavour!
If they are stupid enough to glue themselves to a busy road then they should be left there to rot, muppets!!
Also those going in to shops and pouring milk everywhere should be charged with criminal damage.

Even if the whole of the UK brought electric cars tomorrow, the national grid couldn’t cope with the electricity usage! It would literally collapse with everyone charging them.

This is absolute nonsense.

Wow people are going to have a lot more disruption than not being able to get from a to b on time 🙄

Electric cars are not going to save the planet. The future cannot involve mass car ownership full stop.

Public transport combined with self-propelled methods (walking/cycling/Chucklemobiles...) will have to suffice for most of the population, with those who need a vehicle at work (I don't merely mean the commute, I mean those who have to go from location to location - tradesmen, home helps, farmers etc.) will need to be provided with one by their employer, or if self-employed will just have to consider it a cost of business as their diesel van is now.

If I needed to get my child to hospital (in a life of death situation) trust me when I say this........ one of those save oil humans would be dying, before my child!!
I'd run straight over them, and deal with the consequences of my actions after!!
I MEAN THAT

True. Except for people who need to get to vital hospital appointments.
I mean, it's only "a to b", unless you have a 9 am chemo appointment, and a 3 hour backlog of traffic. Still, all they need to do is get up around 5.30 am to make sure they get there on time, right? Only a minor inconvenience, and the chemo is going to make them tired anyway, and so having to get up a little earlier won't matter.

Work is only a to b as well. It's the employer's fault anyway, for not allowing all the key workers to work from home.

It's only a little disruption to get from a to b.

(I repeat what I said earlier - not everyone is just popping to Lakeside/Bluewater to go shopping ...)

Are people dense, obtuse or still missing the point? Climate change will disrupt absolutely everything. It already is. .

No, they’re not any of those things. If you need chemo and you’re prevented from attending your appointment, you’re obviously going to pissed off and upset because some numpty is lashed to a bridge which will have zero impact on anything.

Climate change is not disrupting the Dartford Bridge. A bunch of morons are doing that.

I've just had a look through that and the headline is very misleading. You can't just chuck in every single negative impact of oil and call it a "subsidy". The actual figure is a sixth of that.

I'd like to think that a case can be made against oil without the need for sensational headlines.

It is why childish antics of the 'protestors' get them nowhere. You go about it entirely the wrong way

yet you can't tell anyone what the correct way to go about this, you are just out to moan about anything without actually adding anything constructive as a counter.

By now everyone on this thread knows what you think of the protestors you write the same thing on every other post you disagree with.

It ignites conversation. I'm interested though, in what way do you suggest would be an effective protest?

UK is the 6th largest economy in the world - hardly piddling.

Here’s a quote from another website;

The World's population is 7.75 billion. The population of Western Europe is less than 2 billion. Let's cascade that further: that of the UK is less than 70 million.

I'll put that another way: the UK's population is less than 0.9% of the world's total.

Less than 1%... less than 1%, in a country which already is actively looking to decarbonise.

So here's a question for you:

How is vandalising works of art, attacking retail outlets, slashing tyres and glueing oneself to road infrastructure in a country with less than 1% of the World's population, but one which is already actively decarbonising, going to significantly influence opinion across the other >99% of the World's population?

I'll save you the bother of answering: it isn't.

If the UK didn’t exist from tomorrow morning, it would make barely no impact on the worlds carbon footprint.

We are little Britain.

There are massive countries that churn out emissions far bigger than we’ll ever be able to control no matter what token gestures we make.

Four words- China, Russia, USA, India.

I’d have more respect if these terrorist groups went over to these places to ‘protest’.

Do the people who glue themselves to roads realise that the very glue they use contain oils? The very product they are protesting against.

My question stands, what should one do when observing a catastrophe of untold magnitude unfold in front of you? Does anyone actually have an answer or only critisism for those who try.

Would the behaviour of the protesters, be classed as domestic terrorism ?
then if it would, would gitmo be an option ?

just asking as a question