155

If you ever wanted to read about fake druids vs. environmental activists, now's your chance.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] EndlessApollo@lemmy.world 39 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Not paint, literally orange corn flour that'll wash off with the first rain. Stop spreading disinformation for big oil pls. Idk why they went for this instead of classical art, but acting like this is some terrible evil crime is exactly what oil companies want you to think, they want you to root against people protesting climate change, no matter how tiny their vandalism is in the grand scheme of things

[-] illi@lemm.ee 11 points 3 weeks ago

I can root for people protesting climate change and think this was incredibly idiotic.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

The article says it came out of a spray can. So how am I spreading misinformation?

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago

What is it the activists wanted people to think? Did they consider their actions might lead people to turn against them instead of against the oil companies?

[-] corus_kt@lemmy.world 21 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I get that the stunts will draw attention to the environmental issues the activists are protesting for, but surely not pissing off the public would be beneficial in spreading a message to them?

The uninvolved public would just remember the attempted defacings, and not care about the damage being temporary or minimal.

[-] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah, I agree with the sentiment, but I feel like the methods are pointless and even might have a reverse effect. Doing this does nothing really to help the cause, imo. Any minimal publicity it gets, I feel, just invigorates the right leaning conservatives to have more fuel to hate "the left" and "liberals". I just don't see any benefit to these types of stunts.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CluckN@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

Man big oil has it easy with all these slacktivists shitting in public and calling it a protest.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

One hopes the powder doesn't cause any lasting damage to a priceless piece of human cultural heritage.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

That is my worry. Even if it gets washed off by rain, it can get into cracks.

load more comments (15 replies)
[-] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 weeks ago

I think this action lacked some supportive commentary, a spoken idea why they did it and what does it mean. It comes of as an attention bait without a clear message. It's also too random to associate it with climate activism without a context.

After hearing about that I thought what would become our Stonehenge if we fail miserably (Statue of Liberty, like in Planet of the Apes?), or if we get back into a new Stone Age making this circular monument both the past and the future of humankind. I would not probably care that much if they actually damage it a bit if that's for creating a powerful symbol, adding to it's (contemporary) significance instead of taking from it. But that's too much to ask, it seems, all we can do is orange paint.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

As always, while I support their claimed ideals, I can only see them as petty vandals who care more about attention seeking than their cause. They certainly won’t get any of my time or attention. If you’re against Big Oil, protest Big Oil and half the population will agree. If you’re intentionally seeking my outrage with unrelated crap, you got it: rot in jail

[-] Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

They do it because the stuff you're asking for doesn't work that well, but this does (that said they do still engage in those actions as far as I'm aware). Activism is about making noise, there aren't many tools beyond that and they've worked for all sorts of issues in the past.

The point is that JSO doesn't exist in a vacuum.

https://wagingnonviolence.org/2023/12/the-method-behind-just-stop-oil-annoying-madness/

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kaffiene@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

It's orange power which washed off with water

load more comments (24 replies)
[-] Sorgan71@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Just stop oil is funded by the oil industry to make environmentalists look like morons.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Rishi Sunak condemned the action, saying: “This is a disgraceful act of vandalism to one of the UK’s and the world’s oldest and most important monuments.”

A senior druid and pagan priest, King Arthur Pendragon, said he “totally” disapproved of the Just Stop Oil protest and that the group’s actions “alienate any sympathy” for their cause.

Pendragon, who is standing as an independent parliamentary candidate for the area, said: “Stonehenge is a living, working temple at times of celebration and pilgrimage such as the summer solstice and, as a well-known protester myself, I totally disapprove of such behaviour as demonstrated by these people, who do nothing to enhance and everything to alienate any sympathy anyone has or had for their cause.”

The priest has previously been involved in several protests at the monument and lost a legal challenge over a £15 car parking charge at the site in 2017, claiming the fee breached his human rights.

Mike and Julie, who did not wish to give their surnames and had come from the west coast of the US to visit Stonehenge, said it was a shame the path around the stones was closed after the incident.

In a statement, JSO said it was time for “megalithic action” and called for the next UK government to agree a plan to stop the extraction and burning of oil, gas and coal by 2030.


The original article contains 645 words, the summary contains 230 words. Saved 64%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Those stones will be suuuper useful to us after we died because our global ecosystem collapsed.

Maybe we should set up our own stones for explaining to future generations why we didnt do anything about climate change until it was too late.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 31 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I'm not sure how this helps though. These people can say to future generations, "well, we didn't get people to stop using fossil fuels, but we did damage a 5000-year-old monument that was made long before anyone had the idea of burning fossil fuels to make people aware of a problem they were already aware of but powerless to do anything about."

This isn't going to stop oil companies from drilling for oil.

It reminds me of a friend of mine I used to follow elsewhere on social media. Every day, she would post pictures of 'death row dogs' in nearby shelters that were going to be euthanized. There was fuck all I could do about it. I already have two dogs, from shelters. I don't have room for more and I couldn't afford more. So all it did was make me feel like shit. Then she started posting photos with "too late" messages and I stopped following her.

How does that help?

[-] Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 3 weeks ago

but we did damage a 5000-year-old monument

As far as I could find out, they used orange cornflour that will just wash off the next time it rains. The most amount of damage anyone could seriously bring up was that it could harm/displace the lichen on the henge.

That's not to say that I specifically condone the action, but it's a lot less bad than this article makes it sound. It's the same with the soup attack on one of van Gogh's painting, which had protective glass on it. So far all the JSO actions targeting cultural/historical things (at least the ones that made it to the big news) have been done in a way that makes them sound awful at first hearing, but intentionally did not actually damage the targeted cultural/historical thing.

I think the biases of the journalist/news outlet/etc. are somewhat exposed by which parts they focus on and which they downplay or omit entirely.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago

I hope you're right because this article says they used a spray can.

Also, orange dye can easily get into cracks in the rocks and stay there for a very long time. Especially if it displaces the lichens. That won't make it collapse, so maybe 'damage' is not the right word, but this is potentially long-lasting vandalism which, as far as I can see, will have no effect on the actual problem.

[-] Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I hope you’re right because this article says they used a spray can.

Which brings me back to the last point in my comment.

I also hope I'm right. The two times I looked into it (right after the attack and before writing my comment) both came up with that result. Also it seems that English Heritage came out today saying there was "No visible damage".

As I said, I'm not writing to defend the action, just pointing out that the OP article is, willfully or not, omitting certain aspects that could make JSO look a little bit better.

Edit: Formatting

[-] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

To play devil's advocate against the devil's advocate, I'm not sure "Stonehenge covered with orange corn starch by Just Stop Oil activists" would have communicated the kind of emergency these activists are hoping to convey, so they're clearly counting on the headline grabbing people's attention and triggering their outrage meter. In that way, the journalist might even think they're helping the JSO group.

[-] Carrolade@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

I agree, I think they've been remarkably responsible about avoiding lasting damage. What upsets me is how they're fueling the far-right rage machine with more propaganda ammunition at a time when we are already fighting a fierce and undecided battle to live in a world that isn't run by exclusionary ideological nationalistic idiots.

It's like they cannot understand that some people don't want the world saved, and agree with Hitler when he wrote about the tears of war being the bread of future generations. A sentiment that basically says suffering=good. So, more suffering=better. Will climate change cause suffering? Well, guess what then.

[-] thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago

Many of the recent protests about climate change have been less direct and more about stirring up controversy to force the public to actually think about their decisions.

My hat off to them as so far this style of protest has been working and has resulted in many of us pushing for better climate control.

You're right this isn't going to stop companies, but even if you disagreed with them it puts climate change in your conscious mind. Even if that simply means you'll try to make slightly more climate friendly decisions moving forwards, that's a win.

Personally I don't know if I agree with the technique, but I do feel like it has been working in terms of making people discuss this topic more.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

My hat off to them as so far this style of protest has been working and has resulted in many of us pushing for better climate control.

I don't know that I believe that is because of these protests and not just seeing what's happening to the world. I really do not see pissing people off by painting Stonehenge, especially when it's during a religious festival, helping this cause.

[-] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

If a dog urinates into a river which then floods, would you say the dog's urination caused the flood?

My wife works in environmental advocacy, and I can tell you without a shred of doubt that people's opinions are changing on climate change for a lot of different reasons. This ridiculous nonsense isn't one of them.

load more comments (69 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
155 points (85.7% liked)

World News

37468 readers
3641 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS