A painting of Lord Balfour housed at the University of Cambridge’s Trinity College was slashed by protest group Palestine Action.
The painting of Lord Balfour was made in 1914 by Philip Alexius de László inside Trinity College. The Palestine Action group specifically targeted the Lord Balfour painting, describing his declaration as the beginning of “ethnic cleansing of Palestine by promising the land away—which the British never had the right to do.”
Probably the only type of destruction of art as protest I condone. The piece:
- Is not very old or culturally/historically important
- Directly depicts someone at the root of this conflict
- Was deliberately targeted and the reasons layed out
Trying to destroy unrelated art work is just wasteful of our shared human heritage. Attacking symbols of oppression however is perfectly valid in my opinion and is to me perfectly reasonable escalation when peaceful protests obviously do not bring the changes needed.
I put this on the same level as African Americans attacking statues of confederate generals and other proponents of slavery to hammer home their point.
Probably the only type of destruction of art as protest I condone. The piece:
Is not very old or culturally/historically important
Directly depicts someone at the root of this conflict
Was deliberately targeted and the reasons layed outAbout where I’m at. Normally I get immensely irritated by ‘protesters’ who go and vandalize unrelated and historically important artwork, but this isn’t particularly objectionable.
I mean, correct me if I’m wrong, but this is the first story I’ve seen of protestors actually destroying the painting itself, they’re usually splashing paint on the protective cover, not on the painting itself. I’ve never seen one where the actual art was destroyed before now. Is that what you’re talking about? Or am I missing a bunch of stories where unrelated artwork was destroyed by protestors (usually climate protesters)?
My youngest son tore up one of his brothers drawings because he had to get a bath first last night but it doesn’t seem to be reported on anywhere so I can’t fault you for not knowing about it.
These damn gen alphas and their civil disobedience
Well they didn’t need to bother protecting the portrait because it wasn’t culturally relevant and no one would particularly care if it was accidentally damaged or aged.
I so wanted to be annoyed yet again by annoying people, but …. Huh, the artwork they destroyed is relevant to their cause, as is destroying it. I’m still not ok with destruction as a form of protest, but there’s a reasonable line of logic
Mood. I’m a curmudgeon and was looking forward at shaking my cane at some vandals, but here they are putting thought into things.
Agreed, except that I would call this peaceful protest. Vandalism isn’t violence. Violence is against a person. As long as no person was relying on this painting for their meals or shelter or whatever - and they definitely weren’t - then no person was harmed.
No no no, you don’t understand. Violence is everything that disturbs those in power!
Mediocre art being damaged in one of the centers of power is violence.
Tens of thousands of people somewhere else dying is just a minor inconvenience.
so vandalism is in fact violence if you rely on the object? Like your car, your house, your bike…
Depends really, it’s all deeply contextual. A landlord kicking a family out because they can’t make rent is violence. Cops destroying an encampment of the unhoused is violence. Those people are hurt by those actions, even if not immediately.
It’s not about reliance exactly, but about harm to people. Any action that can reasonably be assumed to harm a person is violent. Pulling a lever isn’t violent, unless it’s the trigger of a gun aimed at someone. Then a series of predictable physical processes unfold that lead to serious harm.
Breaking a plank of wood isn’t violence, even if it belongs to someone else. That’s just property destruction. But if someone was standing on that plank of wood and they fall to their death, you killed them.
Another important detail to consider is that these pieces are really only worthwhile for their historical value. I would argue that this response is more significant than the original production of the painting.
If anything, the value of this painting will increase due to the added historical value of this event.
actually later on this will add more historical value to it.
Definitely. Historic or not, don’t put bad people on pedestals. E.g. there’s a reason why you don’t see statues of Hitler in Germany.
But you do have statues of Bismarck for instance. Who also “set in motion” the holocaust, as much as this guy the current situation in Gaza.
Both did things that some 50 to 100 years later ended in death of innocent people.
So did Charlemagne. Wait he actually committed genocide himself in the war against the Saxons. It’s not what they’re remembered for, though.
I just want to point out that most of the other time you hear about “attacks” on art the piece is perfectly fine. They’ll attack pieces shielded by glass. It makes a statement and does no damage (maybe a little mess to clean up). Like the recent Mona Lisa “attack” you can’t miss that it’s covered by glass as you’re spending 30m getting closer. It wasn’t a mistake that no damage was done.
I do agree in this case it’s fairly justified. This man doesn’t deserve to be remembered fondly.
Based. Take those genocidal maniacs off the wall.
Or leave it: I think it’s improved this way: a terrible man, a mediocre painting, in context with the ongoing genocide he put into motion. It invites the viewer to wonder what kind of legacy the rich folk who paid for these paintings have.
Hope they put it in the Genocide museum, not on the wall of a university as some hero
I would say its new torn status would make it a perfect fit for said museum
They can go into the same pile as all those Confederate statues and flags.
I don’t know much about Balfour. Was he a genocidal maniac?
He was the one who promised the Zionist movement their own state in Palestine (which at the time was in the hands of the Ottomans).
On top of that he was a racist and antisemite.
Also don’t forget how the Brits promised to the Arabs, just a bit earlier, how they would support the funding of independent states if the Arabs were to rebel against the Ottomans.
I think a statue should be erected to him, but a tarred and feathered one.
So…no?
the problem is people were already there. Getting their “own state” meant, and still does, forcibly removing the people already there, usually by death.
Poland was given a lot of territory in the west and the Soviet Union took a lot of territory from the east, without mass killings. And yes there were people in all of those regions.
In fact a lot of borders changed after WW2, and the only (or one of very few) place this devolved into a decades long murder fest is the middle east.
Ah. That makes sense. So basically like all contemporary governments in the Americas and Australia and…
Well. Most places except the imperial powers I suppose. Even then, idk! Seems kind of shady.
He specifically created the problems we are dealing with in the Middle East. He figured that you could displace a group of people and let the heat stay away from Europe. Basically modern Israel was created as a terrorism target so that western powers didn’t have to deal with it. Also notable that he was a territorial governor is the area as part of the former British empire.
Take a look at everyone clutching their pearls over this painting and think about what doesn’t upset them
Oh no, a painting! So much more important and relatable than children dying. That happens all the time.
/s
Edit: I’m agreeing with the above point, folks. Lives are more important than paintings. We need a lot more outrage about people dying and less about property damage.
Has this prevented any kids from dying? Or is it in addition to children dying? Can people be upset at two (or even… three!) things at the same time?
I agree with your point, but want to highlight that at no point did I suggest people can’t be upset about multiple things. No offense intended toward you personally (or anyone really), but your response now seems to be the standard reaction to shut down anyone pointing out the disparity in media/public reaction between things like people dying or being repressed and material goods being vandalized or destroyed. It’s getting better, but the theme of reporting tended to be that property damage is a tragic loss of irreplaceable treasure, while genocide was more akin to “some people went to sleep and didn’t wake up again, maybe they should have complied”.
Of course people can be upset by multiple things. When the magnitude of upset over precious but ultimately replaceable things being destroyed is greater than that for irreplaceable people being destroyed, then we have a problem.
At least that’s my take and I’m anything but infallible.
I get your point, but on the other hand, I understood your first comment as “There’s children dying, so you’re not allowed to be upset by anything lesser than that”, which is also used to shut down dissent.
Anyways, thanks for the Level-headed answer, have a good one!
Totally understandable, there’s always a risk that a quick, snappy comment conveys the wrong meaning. My wording definitely could have been better, but I’m leaving it for posterity so future generations might learn to do better.
And thanks to you too! Good conversation.
to shut down anyone pointing out the disparity in media/public reaction between things like people dying or being repressed and material goods being vandalized or destroyed
The OP is even linking to artnet because this does not seem to be a major story outside of this. I probably would have never heard about this had I not read it on lemmy. I listen to NPR on my way to work, I regularly hear about the horrors the people in Gaza are facing. So I’m not sure this characterization is fair.
But this bastard in the picture is one of the reasons of this current mess happening.
Did he intend for children to die or was he trying to give Jews a country to call their own?
Other reasons are Chinese inventing gunpowder, and Netanjahu ordering to kill children, but not all those reasons are contributing equally…
The Israeli army is retreating in fear. Now it’s a painting, next time they might smash a vase!
The thing is that the is plain useless. Nobody is going to have a change of heart because somebody slashed a painting. If anything I think it can have a slight effect on the opposite direction.
It’s also very interesting, some people defending this action and upset about Israels invasion seem very chill about Russia’s invasion…
You’re getting down voted, but you’re absolutely right. Zionists will use this as another excuse to ignore the movement, while it does nothing to help the Palestinian people.
Yeah. I think so many people just have this “it’s for a good reason”, and don’t consider if it’s useful if even positive for them.
Might have have a better impact to force them through social movement to remove the painting. Achieving that would have been a much stronger message.
Still I think most downvotes come from people that don’t like I’ve brought up Russia’s invasion as something negative.
If they punched a baby, instead, which is actually better than what’s going Gaza, would it be wrong for people to be upset about them taking it out on something that has nothing to do with the criminals they are protesting?
It’s a dumb thing they did and they are a piece of shit. But what Israel is doing is Gaza is infinitely worse. It completely reasonable and easy to hold these two positions at the same time.
Uh… Balfour definitely has something to do with Israel.
Are you arguing that this painting is to blame for this?
The person it glorifies sure seems to be
I’m trying to imagine what it’s like not able comprehend what’s going on.
No amount of destroyed paintings won’t make me care more about Palestine
This has the same energy as destroying confederate general statues. Good on them.
There was a news article a day or two ago about a pensioner vandalising a statue of Thatcher. I feel the same way about this act as I did that - good on the perpetrator.
Unless a work of art is housed somewhere meant to cause reflection on all the actions a person took in their full context which includes making clear the problematic acts of the subject, they shouldn’t be somewhere clearly meant to commemorate them. And if they are, then they’re fair game.
… the artist …
Hang on a tick. Is that my old cheese? My good-time boy?! Or is he but a simple human man?
Impossible, Jackeeeee d’tonaah is not that old. He is still in the spry of youth!
Its all in the toothpick
The very same, my dear boy!
The comments are full of people who value one shitty painting more than they value human life.
Or people who can’t see any causal pathway between slashing the painting and lives being saved.
It’s a form of protest. Protest against against Britains continued support for genocide and in this case even the root cause of the current situation. It’s great symbolism and nothing of value was lost.
Yeah some of us don’t see “protest” as a way of saving lives. How does that work, in your opinion?
It doesn’t. What are you doing instead that is saving those lives then?
Just like that one black preacher babbling about his dreams, right?
See, climate activists? This means something. Now please stop throwing tomato soup at Van Goge and Da Vinci.
Little known fact, Van Gogh actually founded BP.
deleted by creator
The Balfour declaration was just a letter
The British did not ‘give’ the Jews anything.
Hating Jews since the beginning of time is fairly sick. Thinking this will improve anything and being historically ignorant is just plain stupid.
i think the person who did this not hating the jews since the beginning of time and maybe the person did not hate anyone at all. how about focus on the actual eventlike the ongoing genocide by the israelimilitary instead of playing the victim card
how about focus on the actual eventlike the ongoing genocide by the israelimilitary instead of
some dead guy from a century earlier in time?
Why aren’t we discussing the Israeli military as the responsible party?
Because this dead guy is historically significant to the conflict, as his actions led to the present situation. Understanding history helps us shape the future.
Perhaps she hates herself for the penalty of her actions to be imposed, but let’s not be Pollyanna about this, we both know why this “demonstation” happened.
Why?
Because they both know a secret 🤫
deleted by creator
It was “just a letter” written on behalf of the British state giving their full support for the creation of Israel in what was, at the time, British-occupied Ottoman land that the British had already promised to return to the Palestinian people.
So yes, the British literally give the land - which was not theirs in any legitimate form - to a group other than the native population.
They then provided (and continue to provide) financial, political and military support for decades, while Palestine was progressively colonised.
That’s how you get negative attention
If this attracts negative attention, Imagine the one commiting genocide could attract.
Corporate media decides whether the attention is negative or positive.
For myself, I don’t approve of vandalism but I fully understand their rage
I know right! At first it infuriates you, then you find out it was the guy who started this Palestine mess, and that it was a directly targeted attack.
Not blocking some road, gluing your hands to something, or throwing stuff at art behind glass and generally doing something that actually has any relation to your cause.
Wow lets destroy history thats a great idea maybe it will help us repeat it. Fucking morons
Apparently you didn’t read the article, the guy had a direct role in the destruction of Palestine
I did read the article and because he had a direct role in the destruction thats all the more reason not to deface it. Its a reason to hang it in a gallery with a little plaque explaining what he did then when people see that artwork and read the plaque they will understand maybe they didnt understand before maybe this is news to them maybe they are learning and forming a more informed opinion maybe it will inspire them to do something. Or we can deface it remove it hide it away and that discussion about what he did why he did it will be lost forever.
It was hanging in a gallery out of respect for him. Thanks to activists, you just learned what a shitty person he was. Mission accomplished.
I was awars of who he was before some idiot vandalised it. What did the plaque next to him say?
or maybe they read it and think that nonetheless. I read the article and found this action shitty.
lol, the amount of downvotes for an opinion expressed says more than a thousand words about the state of this platform/community. Not that I give a shit, but still funny :D
It’s always cute when someone gets so butthurt about meaningless internet points that they have to make a post to point out how “little” they care.
I hope this comment helps you finally find friends to do things with, maybe not just on social networks. I for one continue to give a fuck, believe it or not lol :P
I welcome the downvotes it means im doing a good job i get just as many downvotes here as i do on far right platforms. They want to dislike what i have to say let em they had the choice to engage in productive discause they didnt want to and expressed their hate. It truly does refelct upon them more than anything.
Do you cry about confederate statutes too?
Yes because I wanted to shit on them before they got toppled.
But hey, while we’re on the topic, I wanna give you some perspective on one of the types of people who defends confederate statues. Buckle up, it’s a long personal read.
Growing up a white Jew in Texas, we were taught about the civil war and about how it started over lots of things, but our teachers were pretty open that it was about slavery. We got taught about brother fighting brother and that we lost and that slavery is bad, yadda yadda (I say it so blasé because that’s kinda how it was treated). As young students, we’d be really upset by these concepts and the teachers would reassure us that all this was a long time ago and everything’s all better now and that racism is dead. Then they’d take us to see a fun little Civil War reenactment.
This Civil War reenactment was this cute thing where we elementary school students would go to a fair and get either an American flag or a Confederate flag and you’re told that you have to cheer for your side. You’re told not to worry if you’re on the winning side or the losing side cuz we’re all here to have a good time! I got a Confederate flag. Of course, I was sad, my side was gonna lose! Overall, it was a pretty fun day, though.
I went home with my losing-side flag, and I used some thumb tacks to put it up on my wall. My Dad said I probably shouldn’t do that and I said that I know they lost but it was a lot of fun. Why wouldn’t my parents want me to have a souvenir from my fun day? So, there it remained on my wall. Just like the posters on the walls of my classrooms. Posters of General Lee, the Confederate flag, the Declaration of Independence… You know, American history things.
You see? It’s ok to have a Confederate flag on my wall, cuz I’m not racist. Racism is dead. Sure, our side lost, but it’s just part of history: things from long ago. That’s why we need to have posters and statues to remind us of these things that happened a long time ago. Statues help you remember things. Like great people, such as George Washington, Davey Crockett, the Minutemen…, Confederate soldiers…, Sam Houston. Obviously, all great people, cuz they had statues and statues are made of great people…
Fast forward to high school and I’m now in a Jewish youth group. We’re a bunch of silly guys and we open every meeting with the pledge of allegiance. The meeting guide we follow, which is nearly a century old, says to honor the colors of America—being such silly guys, we would have everyone check their underwear and would say the pledge to up to three guys with red, white, and blue underwear. When I became the chapter vice president, I decided that our practices were disrespectful and decided to put a flag inside our mobile podium.
So, I took my souvenir Confederate flag, now left hanging for nearly a decade, and I pinned it inside the podium. At our next meeting, we said the pledge to the Confederate flag. The youth group advisors said nothing cuz we were such silly young guys and boys will be boys. Plus, it was just a Confederate flag, exactly like the ones on classroom walls, on our statues, at our theme park.
Not long after this, one of our black Jewish friends joined our youth group. Really, his family were just about the only black people that most of us knew. When he attended our first meeting after I’d added the Confederate flag, he grew livid seeing us say the pledge to such an artifact of hatred. Her lectured us and told us to remove it, but everyone defended our use of the Confederate flag.
Surely, he was joking when he said that it made him uncomfortable, it was no different than the dozens of other Confederate flags around town and in classrooms. We all played along with his, what we thought was pretend, anger. I jokingly said something about the flag being there to represent the colors of the United States; someone else made a joke about our black friends being part of the colors of the United States. I laughed loudly and senselessly repeated this awful and offensive joke to the treasurer to make sure he put it in the meeting minutes so we could laugh again at our next meeting.
Our now revictimized friend shouted at us and then loudly and passionately explained how offensive we were being and why, which was honestly more than we deserved and more patient than I think I could ever be if I were in his position. A number of the guys didn’t get it at all, and I only understood that I’d hurt my friend’s feelings, but I didn’t understand how or why he was hurt so badly. All that I knew was that I did something bad starting with that flag and that I needed to make things right, so I offered to let him burn my flag.
Fortunately, he accepted and we all watched him burn this silly little souvenir. As I watched my childhood memory burn and considered what an extreme measure it took to help my friend feel better, I started to understand that part of the problem for our friend was how casually we were willing to accept offensive imagery. And that our ideas which hurt him because of his race and the jokes that we made as part of it proves that racism was alive and well as living among us. That day, I began to recognize that my entire life since being young to that moment, we’d been surrounded by propaganda which convinced us that the Civil War was not that bad, that the villains were cool guys, and that racism was dead.
So to everyone who says that statues should be left alone and aren’t hurting anyone, you tell them about how they’re such powerful propaganda that it was able to guide a group of Jewish boys to innocently pledge allegiance to a Confederate flag and mercilessly harass a beloved friend as a joke. Those “harmles” mementos are propaganda and they only confuse the young masses who study them in school.
Crush and burn all of the statues and flags and teach the kids the fucking truth. This shit isn’t a game and we need to stop letting people act like it is. Burn them all. Not another child should be indoctrinated by these atrocious symbols. It happened to me and it needs to never happen again.
I believe that we should take the statues and move them into museums dedicated to history. We can’t change what happened before we got here, but we can clean up leftover shit and make the future a better place to live.
In my town there is a huge confederate statue on the courthouse stairs. We had the opportunity to vote to remove it recently and the yes vote made up around 4% of the total.
People were pretty passionate about it. I personally like the statue. I don’t know anything about the man depicted by the statue, but he was a handsome and cool looking fella. The statue is a testament to the time that has passed in this little town that I live in. The earliest photographs of my town feature that statue prominently. I feel like I can connect with all of those people who built my town down through the years when I look at it.
I’m not black. The fact that I find the statue aesthetically pleasing is a minor and tiny little thing. I was among the 4% of people who voted to have it removed because when I put myself in the shoes of a black man entering that courtroom, I can hear that statue say, “Hey boy! Reckon you’ll get a fair trial?”
I enjoyed your story. Thank you.
I believe that we should take the statues and move them into museums dedicated to history. We can’t change what happened before we got here, but we can clean up leftover shit and make the future a better place to live.
Let me share 2 practical real reasons why that’s a bad idea.
-
there are a LOT of these statues and these things are HEAVY. A responsible museum won’t accept this stuff because there’s simply not the room for it.
-
The people that will accept it end up being the last people that should. Like stone mountain Park, which enshrines and worships these racist assholes.
The very real problem is by having and concentrating this “artwork”, you create meeting spaces for white supremacists. Because ask yourself, WHO is going to and wants to experience the confederacy memorials?
“Stop turning museums into the attic for your aunt’s racist junk”
Man, we all just suck. We really do (humanity, that is). I sat here and tried to refute your point (the one about creating shrines for racists) and I just couldn’t do it.
I don’t want to see them destroyed. Whether we like it or not, the civil war was a huge part of our history. I just wish we could get to a point where we all agree that symbols are symbols of their time and no one hurts because of them. I wish we could solve the leftover systemic issues and move forward as a species.
Wish in one hand…
As for the museum thing, their whole point is the preservation of history.
I know that my little local museum would be more than happy to dedicate a corner to the statue and have a guy dressed in grey talking to visitors about Robert E. Lee. They offered to take it if the vote went the other way.
Also, it would look fine at the local confederate cemetery.
Racists are gonna racist. I wish they’d stop, but burning all the swastikas in the world wouldn’t stop them from making a new swastika and gathering over on Nazi hill to talk about racist things.
If you’re interested, here’s a pretty good podcast episode that sat down with Dr. Janale Schmidt, a history professor who ultimately got the Robert e Lee statue melted down.
[It Could Happen Here] Melting Charlottesville’s Robert E Lee Statue #itCouldHappenHere https://podcastaddict.com/it-could-happen-here/episode/171742565 via @PodcastAddict
What I find fascinating about the whole story is she did not start with the goal of melting down the statue. In fact, this whole controversy was kicked off because the city of Charlottesville wanted to move the statue to a less prominent park, rather than having it in the center of the city.
She talks about the journey of the statue and why ultimately they came to the conclusion that destruction was the right decision (including the fact that they observed these statues turning into racist shrines after the initial incident).
The problem is history is complex. Now days people want good/bad instead of the nuance. Lee wasn’t all bad. He didn’t fight for the confederacy. He fought for Virginia. Had Virginia stayed in the Union, he would have led the Union army.
The civil war has become a meme. It really was about the states. It’s why the 14th amendment took powers from the states which gave us more stability. The recent court decision talked about the 14th taking powers from states.
If you get a bit of time, I recommend the behind the bastards episode about Lee. It’s a recent episode so you won’t have to dig.
In his own letters he made it clear that it wasn’t about Virginia. He wanted to be revered in the new country on the way George Washington was to the US.
He wasn’t living in Virginia, he didn’t care about Virginia.
I mean, I could be wrong, but Robert Evans (the host) generally researches his topics thoroughly and I trust him.
-
Every now and then I also think of some of the jokes I made as a kid, especially at the expense of certain minority groups, and I cringe. But I’m glad we can learn from those experiences and grow, unlike others who double down and say you can’t joke about anything nowadays.
Should they stand where they do probably not. Should they be destroy definatly not. Put them in a public government museum next to a plaque describing what awfull fuckers they where. Or skip the museum and just add a plaque explaining this is the awfull shit this cockface stood for every month on a friday afternoon we have an egg throughing contest for his face etc etc.
For example i went to a cynagog/museum u know what they had in said museum a friggin nazi uniform along with a plaque and the story of how it was taken as a trophy when they ripped the fucker limb from limb while the allied forces looked the other direction. That sends a message that tells more history of how awfull the camps must have been that soldiers would look the other direction while some guy gets killed by the mob.
For goodness sake destroying history nomatter how dark will lead to worse places. “Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it”.
For goodness sake destroying history nomatter how dark will lead to worse places. “Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it”.
Maybe you’re right. We should put up status of Hitler in Israel so they can remember that genocide is bad.
If ur putting somthing up its not history is it its a new addition. And idk if israel has any ww2 museums with nazi artifacts why dont u go check it out. While ur in the area u can take a holiday without the kids to palestine as well.
Look, you wanna protest and shit? Go ahead, but if you start vandalizing art in museums you instantly lose my sympathy.
If art of the dude responsible for the genocide makes you lose sympathy for the victims, then maybe it’s time to stop pretending you care at all and just embrace the genocide.
I should’ve worded myself better, I lose sympathy for the person doing the defacing, as in I don’t care about what they have to say and I could care less if they get in trouble for it.
No, everyone understood what you meant just fine.
It’s the sentiment that’s the problem, not the wording.
Fascism has always been primarily aesthetic
How the fuck is that “the dude responsible for the genocide”?
Pretty sure that man is dead. Don’t you think maybe multiple people are responsible? Don’t you think those people are the ones carrying it out?
Dude, it’s literally called Balfour Declaration. This guy is directly responsible for the mess we’re in today.
It’s really interesting, that you ostensibly value art so much, but are obviously almost criminally ignorant of the history behind art. Probably never seen a museum from the inside, but jerking yourself off, what a sophisticated person you are.
I’m pretty sure the standing orders of the Israeli military are more “directly” responsible for this genocide than the Balfour Declaration.
And when were those orders made?
Maybe you should read; pick up a history book instead of wading in here and pretending to know what you’re talking about.
No I get how history works.
I just know that genocide is always blamed on historical factors while it’s happening, and then decades later people wonder “why didn’t we blame the people who were doing it?”
Dude just stop. Nobody gives a fuck about your ignorant shit.
Alright you’re obviously a troll because nobody is this stupid.
If all it takes for you to lose sympathy is damaging some art of a coloniser, they didn’t have your sympathy to begin with.
Apparently you didn’t read the article, the guy had a direct role in the destruction of Palestine
That’s not how the word “direct” works.
Ugh. You insufferable robots moved over here from Reddit? At least you’re being downvoted.
It was in a college, not a museum.
Paintings and statues in public places is a fair game imo.
Sure. But I still think the destruction of art is destruction of history, regardless of how someone feels about it. If you don’t like it in public, then it’s better to take it down and store it somewhere else for preservation purposes if nothing else.
This guy’s paintings have about as much historical value as Hitler pictures and confederate general statues.
Which is to say a lot?
