• powerofm
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    204
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    I think this sends a much stronger message than stone henge

    • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Almost as if when you target the problem it sends a better message than doing some random shit.

    • The_Terrible_Humbaba@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      The fact that most comments here seem to be talking about stone henge says otherwise. If not for what happened to stone henge recently, people might not have paid this much attention to this.

    • Kokesh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      141
      ·
      1 month ago

      Those idiots destroying paintings and monoliths belong behind bars. That won’t convince anyone with even half a brain to think. Just destroys something and makes everyone angry.

      • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        159
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        destroying paintings and monoliths

        But… they didn’t do either of those things. They threw soup at glass, and for the Stonehenge thing they used washable powder paint. They were publicity stunts with no damage done.

        • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          126
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yeah but it’s a lot harder to paint climate activists as the bad guys when you say things like “they souped our glass and powdered our rocks”, so better to just lie, right?

        • tristan@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          35
          ·
          1 month ago

          Going after a painting that’s behind glass is VERY different to going after the stone henge that has no protective layer, and most importantly of all, has nothing to do with the target of their cause

          saying it destroyed the stone henge is a major exaggeration, saying it did no damage is also just as wrong. The English heritage society emphasised that it was only no VISIBLE damage left, however they also said it did cause damage.

          It’s just like how you can’t touch walls in caves because any change in the oils and stuff in our skins can cause long term damage even though there’s no immediate visible damage

          • Krono@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            55
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 month ago

            How do you think those rocks will fare when the average temperature rises a few degrees?

            Do you think the big stones will avoid damage while humans are fighting wars over water?

            Are those precious rocks going to be ok when countries near the equator become uninhabitable, and the UK has to violently defend its borders from millions of climate refugees?

            Do you think it can still be considered a cultural heritage site after all the humans are dead?

            • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              It’s going to be too cold to visit once the Gulf Stream stalls from reduced ocean salinity, and Britain’s climate is more like northern Canada or Alaska.

            • tristan@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              26
              ·
              1 month ago

              I never once said I disagree with their message, but doesn’t mean I need to agree with their methods

              If their message is that oil is bad and that government should be doing more, they should be targeting oil companies, lobbyists, government officials, companies that have excess waste and chemical use (coke im looking at you)… Not heritage listed stuff that’s mostly maintained by volunteers

                • tristan@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  21
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  If their message was anti whaling and they cut down trees as well as sabotaged boats, would you be “well they attack boats too so that’s fine”?

              • Krono@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                27
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                1 month ago

                If you actually agreed with their message, then I don’t think you would take the time to whinge about the safety of the precious rocks.

                • tristan@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  20
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  No, because I don’t agree with their methods… Just like any extremist group might have a good message but doesn’t mean I agree with them bombing oil pipelines or kidnapping people

                  Attacking rocks does nothing to progress their cause… Attacking things in the environment doesn’t even line up with their cause of wanting to protect the environment

                  As long as they stick to actually attacking the companies and groups that actually are the cause of the problems, I would support their methods and as a result, them as a group

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        105
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        Those idiots destroying paintings and monoliths belong behind bars.

        If only you were so vitriolic about the fossil fuel execs destroying the entire planet.

      • mindlesscrollyparrot@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        63
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Destroyed? Let’s talk about that.

        As you know, Stonehenge has been standing in the rain for 3,000 years.

        Following the industrial revolution, fossil fuel emissions made that acid rain. It attacked every cultural artifact standing outdoors for decades.

        I think that the people who did that belong behind bars.