Activists throw soup at Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa in the Louvre in climate protest

[Fuzz]

Protesters have hurled soup at the bullet-proof glass protecting Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa in Paris, demanding the right to "healthy and sustainable food".

 

Two women threw red and orange soup onto the glass protecting the smiling lady to gasps from the crowd in the French capital's Louvre museum, an AFP video journalist reported.

"What is more important? Art or the right to healthy and sustainable food," they asked, standing in front of the painting and speaking in turn.

"Your agricultural system is sick. Our farmers are dying at work."

A group called Riposte Alimentaire — "Food counterattack" — has since claimed responsibility for the stunt in a statement sent to AFP.

The group said the soup throwing marked the "start of a campaign of civil resistance with the clear demand ... of the social security of sustainable food".

The action comes as French farmers have been protesting for days to demand better pay, taxes and regulations.

Prime Minister Gabriel Attal on Friday announced several measures, but road blockages have continued in different parts of the country.

The protest action follows a series of such stunts by climate activists against world-famous paintings to demand more action to phase out fossil fuels and protect the planet.

It was not the first attack on the Mona Lisa.

A 36-year-old man threw a custard pie at her in May 2022, because artists were not focusing enough on "the planet", but the thick glass casing ensured she came to no harm.

She has been behind the glass since a rock was thrown at her in December 1956, damaging the left elbow.

In 2005, the glass was made bulletproof. The case was scratched in 2009 when a woman threw an empty teacup at the painting.

[El Presidente]

Cheap theatrics. 

I respect all parties right to protest. However there is a line. 

You have done little or nothing in your life? however you target a piece of art 1519? ish" 

The class lines are drawn? If so, then let the cards fall as they may lay. 

[Ford2112]

🥱 

[99call]

5 hours ago, El Presidente said:

Cheap theatrics. 

I respect all parties right to protest. However there is a line. 

You have done little or nothing in your life? however you target a piece of art 1519? ish" 

The class lines are drawn? If so, then let the cards fall as they may lay. 

One of the funny things about this, is that the from the public's perspective, and in the aligned institutions,  all the professional sympathy goes to the Paintings conservators. The paintings are often behind low reflect glass, and it's the Frame conservators that actually have all the hard work and damaged to repair...and because it's not the glamour role, they don't even get so much as a thank you.  

When it comes to protest like this, those against protest always want it to be in a form that causes zero disruption, which obviously completely misses the point. I'm torn, yes I find stuff like this a bit sad, and a little petty, but exactly the same conversations would have been taking place about The Suffragettes who won women the right to vote. Yes, it's unpleasant when we have our feathers ruffled, but without feathers getting ruffled many aspects to fare and free society we enjoy today would never have happened. 

[El Presidente]

2 hours ago, 99call said:

One of the funny things about this, is that the from the public's perspective, and in the aligned institutions,  all the professional sympathy goes to the Paintings conservators. The paintings are often behind low reflect glass, and it's the Frame conservators that actually have all the hard work and damaged to repair...and because it's not the glamour role, they don't even get so much as a thank you.  

When it comes to protest like this, those against protest always want it to be in a form that causes zero disruption, which obviously completely misses the point. I'm torn, yes I find stuff like this a bit sad, and a little petty, but exactly the same conversations would have been taking place about The Suffragettes who won women the right to vote. Yes, it's unpleasant when we have our feathers ruffled, but without feathers getting ruffled many aspects to fare and free society we enjoy today would never have happened. 

Stefan...one if the funny things about this...never covered in The Guardian...is who cleaned it up?

I assume it wasn't the gallery director or curator. Someone on minimum gallery wage doing the best they can not needing to put up with this crap? The painting is well protected. The shit on the floor, wall?

They couldn't give a rats arse.

[99call]

1 hour ago, El Presidente said:

Stefan...one if the funny things about this...never covered in The Guardian...is who cleaned it up?

I assume it wasn't the gallery director or curator. Someone on minimum gallery wage doing the best they can not needing to put up with this crap? The painting is well protected. The shit on the floor, wall?

They couldn't give a rats arse.

Knowing the industry, it would have been conservators that would have cleaned the whole area (regardless of the fact it didn't get on the works itself) but I get your angle. Imagine a forensic murder scene, but with art grads. PHD educated folk mopping up soup in tyvek suits, like it's Novichok

I hear your frustration, and I share it, but whether it's invading a snooker frame or cricket match, the point is to puncture the world of those who think everything is good as it is. These people annoy me, but I get that, that's the point. Some might say, "Oh yes, I believe in freedom of speech, but can't you do it in this abandoned carpark 40 miles out of the city." That's just nonsense. 

If these people really wanted to deface and destroy a priceless piece of art, they could do it easily. I'm not defending them, but we can at least be glad of the fact that, they seem to want to cause a sensation, but seemingly no major lasting damage. 

I would much rather have things this way, than the Big Brother state that people like Suella Bravaman sought to impose. Trying to radicalise and the police against the people. 

There needs to be a halfway house. If governments were serious about change, they could open up dialogue with these protesters, empower them, then drown them in the paper work and complexities of what governance actually takes, and how it's not as simple as 'change now'. It's easy to handcuff yourself to a railing, but if someone said "Ok, can you come to this meeting tomorrow, we've got 7 hrs of meeting with local business and constituents on green agendas." It would be an eye opener for them, and make them realise...it's not as easy as it looks. 

My overall feeling remains however, without people like the Suffragettes or the Chartists society wouldn't move forward or develop. Yes, they may disrupt the normal chug of everyday life, but we can't rely solely on big business to look after our best interests.

[El Presidente]

3 hours ago, 99call said:

One of the funny things about this, is that the from the public's perspective, and in the aligned institutions,  all the professional sympathy goes to the Paintings conservators. The paintings are often behind low reflect glass, and it's the Frame conservators that actually have all the hard work and damaged to repair...and because it's not the glamour role, they don't even get so much as a thank you.  

When it comes to protest like this, those against protest always want it to be in a form that causes zero disruption, which obviously completely misses the point. I'm torn, yes I find stuff like this a bit sad, and a little petty, but exactly the same conversations would have been taking place about The Suffragettes who won women the right to vote. Yes, it's unpleasant when we have our feathers ruffled, but without feathers getting ruffled many aspects to fare and free society we enjoy today would never have happened. 

I am not looking for anything too brutal.

Maybe simply tazered and then stapled by the wrist next to the exhibit 🤔

Whether it is gluing your hands to a road during peak hour or stopping people from trying to make a coin, I think consensus is changing. Pollies are counting the votes and the majority have had a gutful. 

[99call]

49 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

majority have had a gutful

What would be the answer for you Rob? Do you think it's possible for protesters to actually have an impact, without disruption. If protestors didn't exist would positive change occur? I'm not being an arse, I'm genuinely interested if you think their is a mechanism.

For example, the 18 people who got sabered and trampled to death in the Peterloo Massacre (in my own fair home town). If they weren't brave enough to put their lives on the line, if we imagine they never did that protest, how long do you think it would have been before women got the vote?

[El Presidente]

I don't smoke a cigar in front of non smokers out of respect. 

I don't interfere in others going about their daily lives whether I agree with their point of view or otherwise. 

Protest away. Write letters in the left or right wing press, sing songs, hold rallies in parks, run a tik tok campaign.  However you have no right to interrupt peoples lives who have no interest in your platform. 

If you do, expect blowback be it judicial or physical.

There is frustration on all sides. They have had a good run.

[99call]

57 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

Protest away. Write letters in the left or right wing press, sing songs, hold rallies in parks, run a tik tok campaign.  However you have no right to interrupt peoples lives who have no interest in your platform. 

I guess that really expresses the limitations of any halfway house being struck. You've expressed a list of things that are easily ignored. When it comes to interrupting "peoples lives who have no interest in your platform". I think that's a really interesting one, and and has some similarity with the Marin Niemöller Poem "First they came...". By that I mean I may not share allegiance with someone's specific stand on something, but I protect their right to do it. Should a cause arise whereby I wanted change and felt the need to protest, I would want the freedom to do so. 

I sympathise with the builder, caught up in traffic, losing money because of a road blockade. It doesn't strike me as the correct or fair form of protest. But allowing the powers that be the ease to simply ignore you, doesn't either.

Ideally, if for instance they have a problem with a company like Shell etc, I would much prefer some sort of hacking operation, that exposed corruption or national scandal. As much as you say the majority have had enough of protest, I would say the majority have also had enough of greasy corporate corruption. I think exposing it is the best form of protest. 

For example "Lead by Donkeys" doing this ingenious take down of all the Brexit liars. 

[El Presidente]

13 minutes ago, 99call said:

Ideally, if for instance they have a problem with a company like Shell etc, I would much prefer some sort of hacking operation, that exposed corruption or national scandal. As much as you say the majority have had enough of protest, I would say the majority have also had enough of greasy corporate corruption. I think exposing it is the best form of protest. 

Great stuff!  Hack shell! No one is arguing about corporate sleaze! Go birko! Expose corruption!

Block our CBD bridge in peak hour however, and go to jail for a couple of months with convictions recorded. 

We have nongs who are going around letting the tyres down of SUV’s at night in the name of saving the planet.

One nanna or teen is going to have their skull cracked before long. I am not sure there would be much of an outcry.

Leave shit you do not own alone. Don’t threaten people’s right to move and make a living. Pretty much outside of that, go bonkers.

We have just had a weekend of significant protests regarding Australia Day. Most of the protesters were fine. Same people each year, same arguments. Outside of cutting down a statue (hopefully perpetrator will be jailed), protesters made noise and didn’t interfere with the vast majority celebrating. There was a slight punch up at the cricket where protesters yelled “Shame! Shame! Shame! at spectators going into the Gabba” No drama, they were clipped on the ear by the public and everyone moved on.

Protesting is a right. Outside of withdrawing your labour and the resultant effect on the chain, denying others the ability to move and work is not.

[99call]

12 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

denying others the ability to move and work is not.

We can agree on that.  

I think one thing which is an escalating factor, especially in the UK, is that increasingly its a right-wing media shut out, with even the BBC having tory stodges installed all the way through it. The only reason I say this, is that if people can't feel as if they are being heard, they resort to increasingly stupid and militant means. 

 

[El Presidente]

Stefan

I couldn't care if they are green activists or farmers seeking a better return. 

We don't really have a middle ground TV media in this country. We have ABC (Left) and Sky/Fox (Right). They both ride their horses pretty hard. 

However, in terms of today's youth, they are not watching either and probably never have. They have their own digital/streaming platforms. 

I think they get their opinions/causes across really well. They may be pissed that they are in the minority or that things aren't moving fast enough...but that isn't a case of not having a medium to express their opinion. They have to convince the punter...which are the very ones they are antagonising. 

 

[99call]

7 hours ago, El Presidente said:

However, in terms of today's youth, they are not watching either and probably never have. They have their own digital/streaming platforms. 

I think they get their opinions/causes across really well. They may be pissed that they are in the minority or that things aren't moving fast enough...but that isn't a case of not having a medium to express their opinion. They have to convince the punter...which are the very ones they are antagonising. 

I think much like broadsheets, social media platforms are just echo chambers, or people watching stuff that makes them feel good. 

As someone that's centre left, I don't read the Guardian or the Observer as they largely make a mockery of everything I stand for, and only succeed in making left-wing positions harder to fight. 

I care about the BBC though, I want the BBC to be impartial, as I felt it was growing up. I want people to be delivered un-edited fact, and for them to digest it as they wish. 

I agree with you that you have to convince the punter, but what do you do when you have a vicious cycle like we did with the red wall voters and Brexit. 

On one hand you had hard evidence that levels of education in these areas were extremely poor, and political education near non-existent. The right wing had the left over a very clever barrel, i.e. the suggestion that the red wall voting in favour of Brexit or anti-immigration was either due to them being thick or racist, was a position that they didn't want to swallow, even if it was true. It was impossible for Remain to fight this angle, and largely why they lost. 

I think politicians like to have the electorate easily led, and creating educational backwaters doesn't happen by accident, it's policy.  

I think the ability to reach 'white van man' (the key demographic), and 'convince that punter' is nigh on impossible. (Rupert) Murdoch has that zipped up, and has done for about 60yrs. It's all based on fear. 

I've gone of on a tangent. My main point was, how do you puncture into your oppositions echo chamber, and don't just languish in your own. 

[Chibearsv]

8 hours ago, 99call said:

if people can't feel as if they are being heard, they resort to increasingly stupid and militant means.

Being heard and being ignored or told "no" are not the same. How many causes are out there where people "feel" they aren't being heard. I'd say all of them. It's not the hearing that they're interested in, it's that they demand action. Do we want every group that has a cause to receive the action they desire, or else?

[BrightonCorgi]

We only have 10 years to save the planet. We are reminded about this constantly. If you do nothing, you are part of the problem. Only one side cares and others want to see the death of Earth due to climate change.

Who cares about the Mona Lisa if there is no planet to live on just around the corner.

 

(Not my personal opinion, but is a common sentiment held by many.)

[BrightonCorgi]

All this nonsense could end virtually over night. Make knowingly defacing art / historic monuments, or blocking traffic in protest a 5 year federal crime. Throw a few dozen activists in prison when they commit similar acts and this trend will be ancient history.

[Hammer Smokin']

Historically activists have set themselves on fire, starved themselves to death, and many other heinous activities. 

To think making activism a federal crime would remove it overnight is as ill considered as thinking the BLM protests did not create change. 

But You ain't gonna learn what you don't wanna know .

[Fuzz]

Every time one of these protestors do things like this; deface art, glue themselves to the road, disrupt traffic, scale a bridge, etc, it doesn't engender me to their cause. In fact, it makes want to do the exact opposite.

[Hammer Smokin']

But it learned you of their cause. 

Which is their intention. 

For the most part, no one expects the average person to do anything...

[Arabian]

6 hours ago, BrightonCorgi said:

We only have 10 years to save the planet. We are reminded about this constantly. If you do nothing, you are part of the problem. Only one side cares and others want to see the death of Earth due to climate change.

Who cares about the Mona Lisa if there is no planet to live on just around the corner.

 

(Not my personal opinion, but is a common sentiment held by many.)

imagine someone telling you that while smoking a Lusitania...umm, interesting.

[99call]

7 hours ago, Chibearsv said:

Being heard and being ignored or told "no" are not the same

But who is saying 'No' and are they the majority? I'm positive this is not true of America, but in the UK, the mainstream media crucified Jeremy Corbyn (whom I'm not a fan of) but his actual policies polled incredibly favourably on the doorstep in the UK (and still do). We are smothered in this country with the huge foghorn which is Rupert Murdoch, that 'we' hate green agendas, and 'we' hate activists, however...that doesn't actually tally with the emerging real majority. The tories are currently in a desperate spot, with their electorate dying off. They are trying a host of desperate things like voter ID, and changing constituency boundaries to favour their vote. They are finished and they know it. 

We are told day in day out, "the "silent majority this" and "the silent majority that". The silent majority, is actually incredibly loud...and is also actually the minority.

When I say this, it's not in reference to people blocking roads in particular, that has pissed off huge swathes of the country. 

[MrBirdman]

Guys this is not really about climate change. It’s about the agricultural strikes that are going on in France right now. As usual the media chooses the most sensational angle. 

[99call]

5 hours ago, VeguerosMAN said:

Too often these so called protests are politically driven. Just look at BLM. What did they actually achieve other than burning down cities and businesses without any consequences. We don't hear about BLM anymore because they do not fit into our current political narrative

The thing about the culture wars. (In the UK anyway). Largely its fringe issues, that the right-wing try to whip up into hysteria,  like immigrant 'INVASIONS' etc etc

I would suggest there is a difference between:

- How big the story actually is

- How big the press can make it seem

In the UK, the right wing press has numerous groups it likes to punch down upon, and they do it in rotation, when there readership gets bored of each group. it's like a carousel of hate.

1, Benefits claimants 

2, Homeless/The poor

3, Immigrants

4, Single parents

5, Homosexuals, Transexuals

6, Disabled people

The story is never big, but they make is seem massive. As they want their readership 1, pissed off, and  2, scared. 

[99call]

4 hours ago, VeguerosMAN said:

I believe that goes for the left wing media as well.  Media is the enemy of the people in my opinion.

My point was, that often if it's something that's pissing you off,  it's actually your own side serving it up to you over and over, not those you deem to be the opposition. 

Grouping the media as 'the enemy' only does their job for them, and makes you dis-engage. I will agree with you that huge swathes of the media, that is 'client media' and just paid to tell you bollocks at their owner instruction, but there are still decent independent news outlets, who report factually with no spin.