If What the Teamsters Prez Told Tucker Carlson Is True It's No Wonder...
Merry Christmas: A Special Bonus Gift of Christmas Funnies Just for You
Simply ‘Wonderful’: Classic Holiday Film Reminds Generations It’s Okay to Cry at Christmas
A Lump of Coal in Her Stocking! Crypto Influencer Gets BURIED for Not...
Political Pivot? Many Question ‘Young Turk’ Cenk Uygur’s Sudden Willingness to Talk with...
'The View' Panelist Says Problem for Dems Is That Gov't Won't Regulate Social...
Man Vs. History: Bear Grylls Gets DROPPED by Community Notes for Awful Take...
Scott Jennings: Dem Party Must Flush the Fringe and Embrace Common Sense to...
HO HO OH LOL-NO! Leftist Mocked for Whining About the Midwest DAD We...
Bah Humbug! Dems Put Fetterman On The Naughty List
NewsGuard Rates the Headlines Covering Woman Set on Fire by Illegal
CNBC: Biden Administration Withdraws Student Loan Forgiveness Plans
'Mary Was An Earthworm:' J.K. Rowling Absolutely Roasts India Willoughby's Take on Christi...
University Employee Who Told Trump Supporters to Kill Themselves Sent Packing
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand Still Pushing to Publish the Equal Rights Amendment With 'One...
Premium

Vox hot take examines pros and cons (but mostly pros) of vandalizing great works of art in the name of saving the planet

Last week a group of climate change activists with too much soup and free time vandalized a Van Gogh painting at London’s National Gallery. The painting, “Sunflowers,” was hit with tomato soup by activists who then glued themselves to the wall and unfortunately weren’t just left there:

That’s indefensible, right?

Well, not so fast! That’s where the hottest of hot takes from Vox comes in to examine the situation:

“How many Van Goghs is one Earth worth?”

Yeah, these people are not at all lunatics.

Whew!

This seems to be a grand mix of begging the question and non sequiturs:

When I heard that the painting was unharmed, my reaction rapidly shifted from “This is horrifying” to “This might be the best protest ever.” At least, it’s one I’ll be thinking about for a long time to come.

There’s a huge difference between a climate protest that destroys art in the name of saving the planet and a climate protest that threatens the destruction of art but doesn’t actually go through with it. The former treats the art and the cultural value we ascribe to it as incidental in the fight to save the planet, ignoring that a civilization without art is an incredible loss.

The second kind of protest, however, raises all kinds of questions in the absence of actual destruction. What would it have meant if we had lost Sunflowers? Such an act would have generated a period of international collective mourning, a unified sense of loss that no amount of urgency over the climate crisis has been able to equal. But what could the loss of one great painting — the reported $81 million value of which derives not only from its beauty and historical import but from the deeply subjective and often-fraught methods of the art market — mean to a civilization that doesn’t exist? The prospect of that loss, averted, allows us to seriously confront the degree to which we as a society collectively dismiss and downplay climate change.

“What’s art worth if there’s nobody here to enjoy it because they all died from climate change?” There’s logical leaps and then there’s whatever that is.

Now imagine the fury if one of Hunter Biden’s paintings were vandalized.

The weather feels less hot already thanks to lefties trying to destroy works of art, but mostly because it’s almost winter.

Also if these vandal activists weren’t lefties I think the media would be finding this to be problematic:

null

***

Related:

Vox says we should be more worried about not letting kids transition – Twitter says no

Vox on verge of breakthrough discovery about Latino voters

Vox journo totally whitewashes Dems and MSM’s collusion against Mitt Romney in 2012 (and suggests that John Kerry was ‘nice’?)

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement