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.”

  • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    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.

    • Tja@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      9 months ago

      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?

      • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        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.

        • Tja@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          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!

          • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            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.

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          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.