> Shouldn’t it attract more attention from prosecution?
It 'should' - but it won't.
Look at how the legal system has treated whistleblowers who go against the MIC and fossil fuels - Assange, Snowden, Donziger, Winner, etc. High profile cases where the whole world was watching.
They're not handing out fines to fossil fuel companies for lying to the planet as they set it alight. Instead, they're handing out harsher and harsher sentences to the activists trying to bring attention to the issue. A lovely 54yo woman was sentenced to 4k in damages, a 3k fine, 60 days in jail and 24 months of supervised release for putting RINSABLE PAINT on the CASE of Degas' Little Dancer. Not even NPR would state that it was rinsable paint - how often do you hear oil companies advertising on them?
Why would you have any faith in that system to protect us from murderous corporations? The trend for these things is dramatically in the wrong direction, and it was bad when companies were allowed to fund and aid literal Nazis without repercussion.
Is there a source for/further information about this? I can't find it mentioned anywhere (including on the Declare Emergency website), and it seems difficult to square it with the gallery's claim that it cost $4,000 to repair the damage.
People who deface art in museums should have their citizenship stripped and be banished for life, at a bare minimum. The JUST STOP OIL billionaire woman's a heavy investor in the Chinese lithium sector.
A glass case was smeared with water rinsable paint.
You wouldn't know it from the hysterics from mainstream media, the gallery Director, or the Judge, but absolutely no damage was done to Degas' piece. This was intentionally harmless.
> The JUST STOP OIL billionaire woman's a heavy investor in the Chinese lithium sector.
This wasn't a Just Stop Oil thing. It was the 'Declare Emergency' group. Your statement is a complete non sequitur.
Let's have the war, fossil fuel, polluters and banking criminals "stripped of citizenship and banished for life" before throwing fits about those who "deface art" by putting easily washable paint on their cases. Yaknow? Priorities.
Personally, I would rather lose every Degas, Picasso, Modigliani, Botticelli, Rodin, and Van Gogh piece; than keep losing species at the rate we are.
Fossil fuels, the military, polluters and big agri are committing far, far far worse crimes than damaging art, and our justice system protects them. Our politicians need them to win elections. Our media run cover for their crimes. Our regulators seem to be mostly former employees. Our own taxes subsidize them to an absurd degree.
If we only knew what we've already lost, we'd do worse than banish these guys..
It 'should' - but it won't.
Look at how the legal system has treated whistleblowers who go against the MIC and fossil fuels - Assange, Snowden, Donziger, Winner, etc. High profile cases where the whole world was watching.
They're not handing out fines to fossil fuel companies for lying to the planet as they set it alight. Instead, they're handing out harsher and harsher sentences to the activists trying to bring attention to the issue. A lovely 54yo woman was sentenced to 4k in damages, a 3k fine, 60 days in jail and 24 months of supervised release for putting RINSABLE PAINT on the CASE of Degas' Little Dancer. Not even NPR would state that it was rinsable paint - how often do you hear oil companies advertising on them?
Why would you have any faith in that system to protect us from murderous corporations? The trend for these things is dramatically in the wrong direction, and it was bad when companies were allowed to fund and aid literal Nazis without repercussion.