Sales of orange paint are skyrocketing


It is n't paint. Its Tango.


> Its Tango. So it was at least 2 people.


Hmmmm the soup thickens....


Is it the proper time for me to finally say “how the turntables”???


I wish I’d said that!


Hello Tony, I think we might use a video replay here




Great username!! I mean until you forget about it…and one day used Reddit to send a message to a recently bereaved friend..


You know when you've been tangoed


I thought these people where just hardcore Max Verstappen fans.


No /u/GoblinBrain420 no, this is so not right.


Folks working as professional pressure washers are cleaning up.


Clearly McLaren and Red Bull fans.


Hope it's not lead based.


Oil based ironically


*So…Big Orange Paint is really the one behind all of this!!!!*


They should do Hermes next.


Let's keep it up. Maybe discount some paint lol


You just know Balenciaga’s new show room will look like this.


Not now they’ve cut ties with ~~Kanye~~ Ye 😂


Balenciaga have always been mental, Ye was actually a bit more subdued then some of their other stuff.


Balenciaga is a social experiemnt in how much shit they can get away with and charge rich toffs before being found out. They literally have ripped clothes and shoes that look like they've been nicked off a homeless person for £000s


Balenciaga are like my mum in a restaurant. You just don’t know what they are going to do next.


Would love to take your mum to a restaurant one day, sounds interesting!


You'll never guess what happens next! (No. 6 will shock you)


You couldn't describe anyone wearing Balenciaga as a toff, very different demographic


Fashionista yuppies


Zoolander predicated it


You can Deralict my balls


Wait until you learn about Vetements.


Those guys legit stole the trashy stoner/petty crim look of my youth 👌👌


yeah i was gonna say, Vetements was the real social experiment. demna is a top tier grifter


how is he a grifter? its pretty open trolling and people just keep giving him their money. its just marketing working on his target demographic. it doesnt need to make sense to everyone else.


demna is pretty smart and his clothes are pretty neat to look at and read the history behind imo


When I was a skater punk kid, some rich kid literally bought the ripped up jeans off my friends ass for a few hundred dollars. We got them at a thrift shop during a quarter sale. Money means different things to different people. When your job is to sit back and skim money from people who work, and you make a 6-7 digit income doing that, what's a few grand? But the real perks of wealth are better healthcare, better schools, better housing, better opportunities to trade working class chumps like investments, better food that isn't poison and being above the law. What's really sad tho is one of our friends from back then fried his brain on robotussin tripping and head damage from smashing his board on his head diving into walls. If it sounds like he was an idiot back then, you should see him now that he's been brainwashed by some alt right group. Figures the dumbest person I knew growing up turned out to be the only friend who became a Republican..... I don't stay in touch with him, needless to say. It's a strange society we have going here.


You wont see genuine wealth wearing Balenciaga. Just people who think they have wealth


Balenciaga is aimed at the nouveau rich who have a desperate need to show off. Toffs don't touch it.


You just know balenciaga would do this themselves just to be edgy and dig at the extremists. “Can’t get me if I get myself first and make you look stupid”


I guarantee that some edgelord millionaire is going to get a wrap for his Ferrari that looks like it's had orange paint splashed on it, now. EDIT: to the 20-odd people who've replied "Akshualy you can't do that with Ferraris" yes, you can. They sued deadmau5 because he [changed the badges](https://www.stites.com/resources/trademarkology/deadmau5-gets-in-trademark-catfight-with-ferrari), not because he wrapped the car.


Keep an eye on Elon's Twitter.


Mark Z 'bout to take the orange paint challenge "for his kids" in 3...2...1


Knowing Elon, he just stole this idea and won't give credit for it, for sure.


It’s all Elons Twitter now


I’ll pass


Ferrari probably going to be the first to sue him


*Deadmau5 entered chat*


Color name? Rebel orange?


Banksy’s art is getting increasingly halfhearted.


There use to be this dude kidult that would graffiti or spray paint like this all over luxury shops as sometime of protest art


Had to scroll comments looking for anyone who knew of Kidult. I feel like they watched his videos and decided to follow in his footsteps. I have to say, if I saw this with my own eyes, I would've thought kidults style got a little messy lol. I just don't know how this is helping the protesters message. Anyone walking by would have no clue it's for a protest.




Maybe hell step in, show em how it's really done


When you open Paint and just screw around with the bucket.


The real victim is that small potted tree next the the Bugatti door :(


Looks to be a laurus nobilis. Evergreen and pretty goddamn hardy. Doubt it’ll even notice


At this time of year, at this time of day?!


And in this part of the country, localised entirely within Berkeley Square


Can I see it?




Seymour! The house is on fire!


No, Mother, it's just laurus nobilis!


Well, Seymour, you are an odd fellow, but I must say... you steam a good ham.


This man natures.


> laurus nobilis int this a type of wine? i drank a bottle yesterday called this im pretty sure.


You couldn't kill it if you chopped it up and bleached the roots, I've tried.


The real victim is that ~~small potted tree~~ *carbon offset* next to the Bugatti door :( There FTFY


I’m waiting for this Oil protest to be revealed as a big Balenciaga campaign


Out walks Kanye, I set it up I deserve a new contract.


I watched Emily in Paris enough times to know this is probably true!


Serious question: The third pic (Bentley) has 'certified carbon neutral retailer' in the window. Isn't it disingenous for a car retailer -- that produces products that generally contribute to climate issues -- to claim they are carbon neutral just because of a corporate compliance to an ISO standard (ISO 14001)? Does the standard not take into account the products themselves?


Emissions for companies are generally split into what's called Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. Scope 1 is stuff from ordinary business activities, so for a shipping company it would be emissions from its ships, for a logistics firm it's emissions from all its lorries. Scope 2 is emissions from energy generation, so if you get your power from a fossil fuel utility for instance. Scope 3 is up or downstream emissions from products or services. For a car manufacturer this is the emissions from all the cars they make. I don't know the details of this scheme in particular but its possible that Bentley is 'neutral' on Scope 1 and 2 because it uses all renewables and offsets other emissions but Scope 3 isn't counted by the scheme.


Or maybe they just went the typical route of buying carbon offsets to claim that they’re neutral.


Does that work as it's advertised though? Like if you offset the gasses you have emmited, is it as if you've emitted no gasses or is it still damaging for the ecosystem? I'm just wondering because I read a lot about offsetting one's footprint but never thought about what that really means.


It doesn't work. For one, the price is by far to cheap (about 5$ per ton of CO2 compared to 150$ + it should cost). The projects that a paid for with the money are also not generally effective or would've happened anyway. Planting a few trees simply doesn't cut it.


This. A carbon tax is a much more direct means of internalizing the currently externalized environmental cost of production and the product itself. But we'd rather not incur those costs and instead just write a check, tell ourselves we've made amends and carry on business as usual.


It has become more and more controversial, generally doesn't really work/bad corporate strategy. Some airlines have even stopped offering offsetting.


John Oliver made a good video about it. The crux of the issue is that most carbon offsets that these companies purchase ostensibly help the environment, but do not actually offset carbon emissions in any meaningful way.


This guy emits


Pretty much all carbon accounting is massively misleading and full of omissions at best because emissions happen in other parts of the chain they choose to not count. For example countries generally don't count the carbon footprint of oil and gas they export. It's being used somewhere else after all. Similarly imported goods including the emissions from shipping is not included because that should be done by the country producing the stuff. So a rich oil exporter that import most of it stuff from half way across the planet can say with a straight face that their economy is carbon neutral, because all the activity they generate should be on someone else's balance sheet the way the system is set up.


Yes, its extremely disingenuous. Almost like its designed to be disingenuous. There's all kinds of scamming that they do...from deciding what counts or doesn't count...to making pledges and commitments that won't become due until 2050 and then calling themselves carbon neutral. Its almost entirely greenwashing. Ikea for instance sells some solar panels and they were counting these towards their own carbon emission reductions.




They’re going full in on EVs by 2030. So while disingenuous now they’re one of the few luxury manufacturers pushing all their chips into the middle of the table to be fully carbon neutral by 2030. .


\>They’re going full in on EVs by 2030. Because they have to comply with legislation that their markets are enacting.


My only thought, and this is a massive long stretch… Bentley is owned by the VW Audi Group (VAG), given the VAG as a whole brand with Bentley only being a very small part… could they still be carbon neutral? Aston Martin did something similar a few years ago, they rebranded a Toyota to reduce their average emissions down.


I’d imagine a lot of the heavy lifting in that is being done by those bullshit “carbon offsets”?


It’s also disingenuous that the just stop oil is literally a smear campaign against activism funded by oil heiress Aileen Getty.


Also what's the point of throwing paint at these dealerships when the cars that are bought are barely gonna get driven plus I doubt some 60 year old billionaire has the strength and courage to drive a bugatti at 400kmh


Won't somebody please think of the poor luxury car companies


Theyl be on the brink of ruin trying to pay for the clean up


[Nobody cares more about the environment than me](https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/yduutp/environmental_protestors_have_just_vandalised_the/itugxkl/) but the people I feel sorry for are *not* the hundreds of millions of people who WILL die as a result of a climate catastrophe but [whomever is going to be paid](https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/yduutp/environmental_protestors_have_just_vandalised_the/ituddo9/) to spend [2 hours cleaning this up](https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/yduutp/environmental_protestors_have_just_vandalised_the/ituj03d/). What we *should* be doing instead of drawing attention to this impeding catastrophe is more empty symbolic gestures like passive aggressively huffing at our neigbors for putting the wrong kind of plastic in the recycling and "putting down our phone's".




It literally took decades and the ceo to die of cancer or someshit before Lead was banned in oil. Imagine cO2 which is way less dangerous than lead. We’ll need ten millennia for companies to actually phase out pollution But these people think riding the bus is enough to counter act what corporations are still doing to this day…


imo this is a much more effective piece of activism then the art gallery one.


Luxury car companies do actually tend to operate at the brink of insolvency, it’s why they tend to change owners so frequently.


And then release an SUV model, using the higher volume of sales to prop them up. See: Porsche Cayenne Lamborghini Urus Bentley Bentayga Aston Martin DBX Ferrari Purosangue (2023?) Lotus Eletre (2024?)


Sort of but not really - what props them up is economies of scale from their absolutely gargantuan OEM owners / cross holders VW (Porsche - even post IPO given their VW “cooperation”, Lambo, Bentley), Geely (Lotus) and Stellantis (Ferrari - although given Ferraris basically have negative depreciation it’s a different animal). The single independent name in that list, Aston Martin, has been through multiple ownerships and restructurings, and just pumped in another ~£550m of equity. Notwithstanding decent(ish) DBX sales and Mercedes support.


Porsche/VW is a more complicated situation though. Porsche’s parent is VW AG, but VW AG’s controlling stake is owned by Porsche SE… So while you could say VW owns Porsche, you could also say Porsche owns VW. https://www.volkswagenag.com/content/onkomm/brands/corporate/world/presence/en/InvestorRelations/shares/shareholder-structure.html# >Current voting rights distribution* (as at December 31, 2021) >53.3% Porsche Automobil Holding SE, Stuttgart >20.0% State of Lower Saxony, Hanover >17.0% Qatar Holding >9.7% Free Float


Yes but if anything that adds to the point - Porsche (SE / the family) control VW and will want to make sure VW properly supports Porsche. And the CEO for both VW and Porsche is the same, and he is a Porsche guy as well.


Rather they'd do this than to do it to paintings.


The point was not to destroy paintings (which they didn’t, they were behind glass), the point was to garner attention by making a big, harmless stunt. Now everyone is watching the other stuff they’re doing, as seen above


Plus they stated the message was that Van Gogh’s art wasn’t valuable/appreciated until he had passed. So let’s not do the same with our planet. That gave a good message to me


Yeah makes sense


As far as rationales go, that's decent.


Yeah I mean personally I’ve not had a single one of these protests where I’ve thought “that’s a good message” until they said that statement


I really didn't understood the outrage of that protest. Reddit is very critical of big companies destroying the environment. There is this bill that will help said companies to destroy the said environment, and some activists try to gather attention to the situation. Each of those bills have an impact thousand times worst than if one of those paintings were damaged in any way (they weren't). Reddit users think being mad on reddit is the only right way to combat climate change.


And people are still talking about it, its had more reach than terrorist bombings


Money doesn't trickle down but technology does. https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/05/cars/volkswagen-bugatti-rimac-porsche/index.html


I mean… clearly the environmental activists did think of them. Makes infinitely more sense than vandalizing art.


I'd rather this than museums or obstructing traffic for people that drive cars ten or twenty times cheaper than what's sold in these showrooms, just trying to get to work, or a doctor and so on.


Yeah, this method is better than those which hinder others but I don’t imagine they’ll keep doing it for long as it feels completely ineffective. It’s unlikely anyone will really care if there’s a bit of paint on these windows and the cost to clean it (if they even have to foot the bill) is negligible to those companies.


This is the point holms. People are dying every day. 1/3rd of Pakistan is underwater right now, do you think they would love to only have to wait in traffic a couple hours instead? The climate apocalypse is here and people are too stuck up their arse to do anything or demand leadership does anything. The goal is to make you mad enough to demand leadership do something about it. EDIT not 2/3 but 1/3


Where are you getting 2/3rds from?


He heard it from some dude who was full of shit, and didn't bother to apply any critical thought. The highest numbers put Pakistan at 10-12% flooded by area. By population: 14% of Pakistan's population have been affected by the flooding.


What’s likely to happen is people get mad enough to demand politicians do something to put a stop to the protests and as a result the government will bring in more and more draconian anti-protest laws. They’re probably rubbing their hands in glee at these people giving them an excuse and a reason to get away with doing so.




>The goal is to make you mad enough to demand leadership do something about it. I dont think this is going to play out how you think. People are going to take there anger out on the protestors and theyll be an easy scapegoat for politicians to. All they succeeded in doing is establishing a reputation of being unlikable and pushing people away from there cause.


But they're more likely to demand that leadership to deal with the protesters, rather than what they're protesting.


Not even 1/3... In what world do you think 15% is 1/3??


I mean if you think about it, the cars that these companies produce (As in luxury vehicles) make up a very small amount of the cars over all. These guys should go to Texas and do this to a Ford Dealership.


Why? Museums are taking petrochemical money to sponsor exhibitions, in a vain attempt to clean up the image of the oil companies. That's something which should stop, and the only way of doing that is the public having more knowledge about that sort of thing. I'd rather anti-oil protestors made more of an effort to target museums and galleries taking oil money, than random shops only rich people use. Also, the emissions from the cars sold in these showrooms will be absolutely miniscule (to the point of being completely irrelevant) compared to the average car on the road today.


>than random shops only rich people use Cause they are responsible for most emissions around the world and also have influence on govt actions


Average emissions from rich people are exponentially greater than those of poor people is the point they are making. Gross wealth comes at a huge cost to the planet. Protesters making people aware of ALL of these issues is important.




Tbh we should just stop talking about the environment altogether. It really inconveniences my happy thoughts. We don't need action now. We need a comfortable nice drive off a cliff while ignoring those twats in the back screaming at us to stop.


Given how upset it seems to have made you, it sounds like it did, though. Start a conversation. You don’t like when people respond pointing out that you seem a lot more upset about a frame getting tomato sauced, than when millions die in a heatwave, but that is also part of the conversation.


I think there's a valid political point to be made about funding of museums and the obscene value of art that these actions, while unquestionably obnoxious, has absolutely gotten people talking about. I really don't think there's a way of protesting effectively that isn't going to be incredibly annoying to the average person.


> Museums are taking petrochemical money to sponsor exhibitions, in a vain attempt to clean up the image of the oil companies. Does such effort work on the kind of people who A) frequent museums, and B) pay attention to who's sponsoring them? One would wager such efforts do not, and thus, let them continue to throw money at trying to convince people too educated to be lied to, or too tourist to notice and care, that they're a bit less evil than they are.


I don’t think I have ever noticed who did an art show I wasn’t in. Just didn’t know if it was brought to me by Gucci or nespresso or big oil or the sacklers.


The best solution it to protest at Parliament. They are literally the ones setting laws on emissions.


Imagine trying to say goodbye to your dying loved one only for your final moments together to be robbed from you because some dumbasses superglued themselves to the highway.


A real activist would sabatoge the production plant.


Imagine if everyone was as angry about climate change and it’s contributors as people are about these forms of protest


I am, can I go ahead and call these fucking idiots counter-productive now? This is the first thing I’ve heard about just stop oil that *doesn’t* make me suspect they are a false flag op. And that’s sad.


My mum missed chemotherapy because of one of those protests... ...which then lead to my dad taking the back roads every hospital trip (20+ of them) which was a 1-hour trip rather than 30 minutes. So those protestors ended up putting a car on the road for extra 20 hours after they finished. Did not change my dad's attitude to climate change.


Sure, not because the NHS is underfunded due to the tories, its them climate protesters!


Why did your dad make the journey 20+ times because the road was blocked once?






I think it’s a cracking concept for a protest in how it highlights our hypocrisy. Everyone is obviously repulsed when a Van Gogh painting gets souped, but there isn’t close to that revulsion at our planet being irreparably poisoned. *to clarify - I wasn’t taking a position on the stances of the protesters. I’m behind looking after our beautiful world and preserving it for future generations and ecosystems but (the crassest and most infuriating “but”) I’m cognisant of the challenges decarbonising presents. I was admiring the essence of the campaign. The way it draws you into (rightful) outrage then flicks that switch which tells you “why aren’t you this pissed off about your sole life support system descending inexorably to waste?”


Protecting our cultural heritage is an easy task and most people support it. Climate action is a vague and complex idea that will have very different impact on different people. Struggling against complexity is human and normal


That painting had glass over it. It was a symbolic move that didn't damage anything


An important detail that is consistently glossed over


Glossed over on purpose. There's a massive AstroTurf campaign going against all climate action movements.


And most of Reddit eats it up immediately


It doesn't take much work to make a lot of these climate protestors look like out of touch weirdos in fairness.


I suppose they're hoping that the species won't sleepwalk into oblivion muttering "well, it's complicated".


Solving the climate crisis is a complicated task yes, but most people don't need to worry about the complications. They just need to acknowledge that drastic action is needed, and to apply pressure to the groups that can organise that action.


Fun fact, do you know when was the moment of highest coal usage in the history of the world? >!Right now and still going up!<


Fuck cultural heritage. There’s no painting on earth that compares to an unspoiled ecosystem.


Who cares if we all die though. Someone could blow up the Eiffel tower at the end of the day climate change would do that anyway. These are very minimal compared to the stuff we will see in coming years when the real desperation sets in.


Because we understand the trade off of destroying the planet. Up side: I go somewhere warm for a holiday. Downside: I personally increase the global temperature by 0.00000000001 degrees. Do I even have the right number of zeros? And if I've turned my heating down two degrees have I offset that anyway? What if its the first holiday in three years? The downside of destroying a painting is obvious. The upside is... Even harder to grasp than the climate impact of me personally sitting in an airplane for four hours. How do you quantify the beneficial effect of "loads of reddit traffic about climate protests"? All these protestors want is magical solutions. "Ban oil" isn't a solution, it's like curing obesity by criminalising carbohydrate.


You're acting as though nobody has tried to pass legislation to combat climate change.


Maybe go do this to politicians offices and stuff, rather than bothering every day people. Some of whom have died or been sent to prison because of these “protestors”.




Now this I can get behind


Yes, very sad. Anyway


Good. We should be well past oil by now. Edit: A lot of morons think they understand this topic. Do you know when global warming was theorised? 1896. Do you know when it was observed? 1938. The first electric cars were also Victorian, as were electric trams in cities. These technologies were abandoned due to lobbying and commercial pressures, the same ones that have stood in the way until today. People have made a killing from oil production, refinement and consumption. We are all now paying for their profits. If you think the internal combustion engine's rise and longevity is due to its obvious supremacy over EVs, you have just bought the marketing sold by the oil and vehicle companies for over a century. So, to reiterate my point, it is LONG past time we gave up oil, and yes, when you consider the human suffering and economic damage caused by climate change, there is a moral imperative - "should" is correct. Later, taters.


What would you suggest is the feasible alternative as things stands ? Not being facetious, genuinely interested on your opinion.


Trains, bikes, walkability, electric vehicles, nuclear and renewable energy. We need to overhaul the whole supply chain. The time for slow, incremental change was 20 years ago. We need to act now.


>The time for slow, incremental change was 20 years ago. We need to act now. I'd say the time for slow incremental change was 30 years ago. The time for action was 15 years ago. Now we're stuck in damage control and we can't even manage that.


I don’t think you realise how much of that still requires oil to manufacture.


That's the goal, but what do you mean by "should"? Technology has been advancing at a pace that is hitherto unheard of. And yet we don't yet have the technology to replace fossil fuels across the board. Even if we did, such a switch would take time and cost money. Climate change is an important problem. Probably the defining problem of the century, but it isn't the only problem. We can't divert infinite money to solving it at the expense of every other cause that needs our attention. Not to mention it isn't a simple problem. Money alone is not enough to solve it. And ultimately, it's a fairly recent problem. The issue was only truly established as a real problem (rather that some sort of hypothetical future problem) a few decades ago. Even then, fossil fuel companies put so much effort into obscuring the issue that it took even longer for the problem to be widely understood and accepted by the politicians and the public at large.


What are you on about? I'm sorry but what you're saying is complete and utter tosh. So mechanics and engineers who literally crunch the numbers for this as their JOBS are "morons who think they understand" Advancements in battery and electric motors allowing them for effective use in cars have only come about in the last 10 or 20 years. Fuck me if you have ever worked on a car from the 80s or even the late 90s you'll see how far electrical components have come in only the last 30 years. And NO, that is not because big oil has suppressed research into it. Christ, look at the difference between even your television today, compared to Tele sets of the 80s and 90s. Electrical engineering and components, and our ability to manufacture those components just haven't been there until recently. To suggest we could have had EVs rolling around since the early 1900s is ridiculous. The internal combustion engine might be slowly becoming obsolete now (although even that's a stretch because of the development of biofuels that are carbon neutral) but to suggest we had the technology to create electric cars years ago but it was simply suppressed by big oil is ridiculous. Petrol and diesel engines are fantastic for producing a lot of torque and power and doing it efficiently and simply, because they rely only on strong physical components that are easy to cast/forge en masse, and what are essentially very rudimentary electrics in order to run properly. They're cheap and easy to produce, and can be made very compact. I know it's easy to say "oh well trains have been electric for years" but even then, they're diesel electric, and they are TRAINS, not cars. Train infrastructure is HUGELY different from car infrastructure because they follow tracks that allow them to be powered constantly from a grid without batteries. It's fucking annoying when people who obviously have NO credentials comment on a topic, and even more infuriating when they act like theyre smarter than the people calling them out for being bullshitters.


So many cities in the goddamn 1880s had electric trains running around. It’s absurd really how much so many cities have reverted.


If it’s on the news it’s a successful protest


Global warming? Solved!


Comments in this thread are evidence enough that humanity is doomed. People really are just nasty selfish pieces of work aren't they.


I gave up a while ago. I'm just here for the amusement of seeing the same conversations play out every time. You could probably replace every person in this thread with a bot and nobody would be able to tell the difference.


You really get the most cutting-edge political commentary on this sub. Literally only two comments: > PROTESTERS DUM and > WONT SOMEONE THINK OF TEH POOR CORPORATIONS Change the fucking record you idiots.


And “some poor employee on minimum wage will have to clean it up, this is a crime against ordinary working people :’(“


As someone who has had to clean up paint: Yeah it sucks but I'd rather that than more bathrooms. What people are forgetting is that poor employee on minimum wage would have to do some other annoying shit otherwise *anyway*, it's not like they would just be happily sitting around if this didn't happen...? This isn't significantly worse (unless perhaps the weather is really terrible or they're subjected to some sort of harassment).


It’ll go to a specialist company anyway. There is zero chance a contract cleaner will be tasked with scrubbing off paint with a brush and some fairy liquid.


Throw paint on priceless art 👎 Throw paint on millionaire-mobile 👍👍👍👍👍


Whilst oil companies vandalise the only planet we have


So many of the comments here represent how impotent the UK populace is and why we eternally seem to allow corrupt governments and corporations to trample all over us and the environment. Getting upset over paint on a luxury car showroom, boo fucking hoo, get a grip.


Based as shit


Wouldn’t a ford or toyota dealership be more poignant? Certainly those brand have fucked up the climate more than bugatti and farrari


And then people would ask why the working class car dealerships are being targeted, and say luxury car brands should be attacked instead.


Oh no! Anyway..




These people are idiots and are not winning themselves any public favor. In any successful protest, you need the public on your side, these people are just stirring up public hate, they have no clue, that spray painting buildings, sitting on public roads, and damaging artwork are just making them look like childish vandals.


Andrew Tate fanbois raging rn


I don’t really care these were vandalized and would welcome if they chose their dumb protests at places like these. Pouring out grocery milk however. Break all their toys.


Somebody get these kids a PS5


Stop oil is just a group of loose screwed vandals wanting an excuse to cause chaos and feel empowered. In reality, they are annoying, entitled and extremely uneducated. But yeah, continue to waste food, paint, plastics etc, especially on car dealerships because these cars that get driven a maximum of 500km per year are the real threat. Lmao, get educated and go look at the rare-metal mines in Australia for 'Green Energy' (Wind turbines, EVs, Solar Panels) and tell me how that is any cleaner than a modern oil rig? Also, industrial paint stripper is created with not only contents derived from hydrocarbon production but also other non environmentally friendly chemicals. So good job guys...


Using tons of solvents and detergents to clean that up will certainly be great for the environment. And I bet dozens of people will be like "well, I was going to buy a Ferrari today, but environmentalists vandalized the dealership with paint, so now I'm just going to use my bicycle instead."


It’s a good time to take up work as an emergency paint cleaner


If it were not for this post.. would not know about this, so it achieves very little.


Awwww...they didn't glue themselves to the wall?


The sentiment here that doing this to museums or stopping traffic is bad, but this is good because it effects the rich is odd to me. Surely it’s all good in the grand scheme, or you disagree? Why only support it because it’s happening to a luxury business? Just seems like people supporting fucking over the rich as oppose to caring about oil usage


No, it's not 'all good' because some actions are counter-productive and create resentment for the cause that you are fighting for. Being destructive with one-of-a-kind art work doesn't help. Stopping a motorway is perhaps less bad, but you are causing problems for ordinary people that legitimately need to get to where they are going. *This* gets attention and punches up.


Let's not inconvenience ordinary road users burning fossil fuels because they've got somewhere to be.. let's target the .00000000001% of fossil fuel consumers. This is just about eat the rich.


There are a lot of people who feel like ‘they have to drive’ and are not part of the problem, but they don’t drive luxury cars and dislike the elite so that makes this OK.


Tbh that statement you made pretty much applies to me word for word, but I don’t see how it all the sudden makes it right when they do it to a place I’ll likely never be able to afford