#Aileen Getty

[cabiba]

[patema-introverted]

[sepdet]

By the way...

Sometimes, a rich person who inherited money from the founder of a decades-defunct oil company, who has used a lot of it to support AIDS research and aid for the homeless for decades, and has supported climate change activism for years— someone who is quite frank about the source of her money and big oil's existential threat to the planet — is not, in fact, playing at psyops, but slacktivism.

Also? Don't believe every half-assed, unsourced conspiracy theory TikTok vid.

Look her up. She ain't perfect, any more than the kids who thought throwing tomato soup at a beloved but (thankfully) glass-covered work of art would get their point across, but I feel like some of us have gotten so carried away with All Millionaires Are Evil that we've come up with a money-based version of Original Sin.

[mstopportunity]

Okay so TL;DR, because I had my opinion changed by a friend (and this article).

I’m sure you, like me, have seen the info going around that Just Stop Oil is primarily funded by an Oil Heiress(tm), and isn’t that something to think about(tm) (hinthint nudge nudge their a psyop, or at least being used as one). That because The Soup Thing is so nonsense, it’s more likely to generate bad press and negative opinions than anything good.

In short, no! Non-violent protest, including civil disobedience like this and non-normative (non-standard, so most things that aren’t just a sit in or smth) actually help move what is considered ‘radical’ further to the extreme, making previously ‘extreme’ groups seem more moderate. This actually increases support for less extreme groups supporting such causes.

Oh, and it helps drum up publicity, because idk about you guys, but I’d never heard of JSO before The Soup Thing. Maybe some of their money is being donated by an Oil Heiress. Maybe she's old and wants to launder her reputation/karma before she dies. Maybe she really does think these kids’ll be a psyop. Maybe whatever negative assumptions we have about her are totally true. JSO is still getting results. People aren’t less favourable to climate activism. They’ve gotten themselves a lot of publicity with this.

Tomato Soup is JSO’s first radio hit, now lets see if they’ve got an album to back it up or if they’re a one-hit wonder.

[cryptidcaptain]

If I see one more stupid take on the stop oil van gogh protest im gonna lose it so in bullet points:

The painting is fine. It was behind glass. The person who threw the soup knew it was behind glass beforehand.

The UK is entering a cost of living crisis unlike any we've seen before (with the possible exception of Thatcher's Britain back in the 80s), and many people cannot afford to heat their homes. While oil and energy companies report record profits.

The point of this exercise was to demonstrate how much more people would care about even the thought of a painting being destroyed, compared to the reality of the lives that WILL be destroyed over the winter. When they can't yknow. Afford to eat or heat their homes.

No, they are not funded by Big Oil. Just Stop Oil DOES receive funding from the climate emergency fund which WAS started by Aileen Getty, yes. But she has zero active investments in the oil industry, and HAS spent a large amount of money sponsoring climate groups. Think of her as the Abigail Disney of oil.

The source of that conspiracy theory is a tiktok video and its mostly being reported in the telegraph which. Kinda says everything.

For people saying stuff like "but it had nothing to do with oil! Why don't you egg the houses of execs <3 Why don't you riot 😊 Why don't you kill oil execs uwu OK why don't you? I mean jesus be realistic. The rioting may come yet but this was a PUBLICITY STUNT. To raise awareness for their organisation.

If you are not from the UK/are from the UK and not familiar with the new protest laws, please refrain on commenting at all about method of protest.

The bill is as follows:

" [to] Widen the range of conditions that the police can impose on public assemblies to match existing police powers to impose conditions on public processions."

" [to] Broaden the range of circumstances in which police may impose conditions on a protest."

" [to] Amend the offence relating to the breaching of conditions"

" [to] Restate the common law offence of public nuisance in statute."

Meaning, any people doing ANYTHING the police don't like (up to and including holding BLANK SIGNS which happened after the queen died) can now result in arrest and forced dispersal (ie police violence). (There are more lines to the bill ive just chosen the ones relevant to this situation, but they're all on the gov website)

(Side note): I actually just read the page on gov.uk which I went on to copy the law and jesus christ they outright blame BLM protests for this. Like explicitly.

I BELIEVE i saw a story not that long ago about someone arrested under this bill being held without trial for like, months but I can't remember the details

In short people in the UK now have to get increasingly creative with how we protest, so as to avoid significant sentences. The two in this case were arrested for trespass instead of under this bill, which carries a significantly more minor penalty.

Shift your goddamn focus away from stupid conspiracies for a second and pay attention to what is happening in REALITY.

(If any of you make comments or send me stuff about this without at least attempting to fact check yourself beforehand im not responding, and deleting.)

[ruffboijuliaburnsides]

‘Just Stop Oil’ is funded by Getty Oil heiress Aileen Getty. They also accept donations in crypto, which as we all know is great for the environment. /s So yeah as much as I dislike celebs that constantly use private jets I don’t trust that group even a little bit.

yeaaaaah super helping the environment there, I'm sure. 🙄Definitely has good intentions and isn't just trying to protect her fuckin inheritance by making legitimate protesters look bad.

[falcemartello]

Aileen Getty, l’ereditiera del petrolio che finanzia Just Stop Oil (e non solo)

Come riportato dal quotidiano francese, Aileen Getty si dice “orgogliosa” di finanziare il Fondo per l’emergenza climatica, organizzazione che ha co-fondato nel 2019 e ha distribuito oltre 4 milioni di dollari a movimenti come Extinction Rebellion e Just Stop Oil. Consapevole che i suoi legami con l’industria petrolifera possono essere discutibili, già tre anni fa l’ereditiera liquidò così la questione: “Sto cercando di capirlo da sola. Voglio fare ciò che è giusto”.

Stando sempre a quanto ricostruito da Le Monde, la figura di Aileen Getty è rimasta a lungo in disparte rispetto al resto della sua famiglia, al contrario sempre al centro dell’attenzione mediatica. “Ha vissuto a lungo all’ombra degli uomini della sua famiglia. Se suo fratello minore, Mark, è noto per aver co-fondato l’agenzia fotografica Getty Images, è stato il suo primogenito, John Paul Getty III, a fare notizia nel 1973, rapito all’età di 16 anni dalla mafia calabrese. Il loro nonno, noto per esser tirchio, si rifiutò di pagare il riscatto di 17 milioni di dollari. I rapitori dovranno così rivedere le proprie pretese ma non mancheranno di far recapitare a un quotidiano italiano un orecchio mozzato dall’adolescente per forzare la mano per il pagamento del riscatto”.

Il nonno di Aileen, fondatore della Getty Oil Company, è stato più volte descritto come l’uomo più ricco del mondo negli anni Sessanta. I figli J. Paul Getty, otto anni dopo la morte del patriarca – avvenuta nel 1976 – voltarono pagina vendendo Getty Oil. Secondo la rivista Forbes, nel 2015 la loro ricchezza ammontava a 5,4 miliardi di dollari. Questo li rendeva, all’epoca, la 56esima famiglia americana più ricca.

Alessandro Della Guglia

[wild-at-mind]

So like everyone I thought that Just Stop Oil throwing the soup on the Van Gogh Sunflowers was a really bad idea, an insult to an important and beautiful piece of art, and the connection to the cause was confusing at best. But now I’m seeing people talking about JSO being funded by an oil heiress named Aileen Getty. The word psyop was flying around, something something false flag protest to make oil companies look better (??) so I had to get to the bottom of it. (I mean, I did a small amount of reading.)

If you google her name two results that explicitly mention her connection to JSO in the headline come up, Jerusalum Post and...Fox News. So of course I went with Jerusalum Post as the more credible option of the two. The article states that the rumour about the protest being fake somehow came from ‘a TikTok user by the name of Mars’, so that’s fun, and it explains who Aileen Getty is. She is indeed the heir to a vast oil fortune (Getty Oil, which no longer exists). JSO isn’t the only UK environmental movement she has put funds into. In fact it strikes me that you could spin this a different way, you could say that Aileen Getty perhaps feels that funding environmental groups is a way of undoing some of the damage her family had done to the planet. Like, I’m not saying that, I don’t know her, it’s just a way of telling things differently. It’s all in the way things are told.

You might say, well the group is very ineffective and the Van Gogh protest was such a bad idea and makes JSO look so bad that it has to be a psyop! I do not agree that it has to be, and will try and explain why. Basically these kinds of groups are set up to be leaderless, because they believe leadership creates positions that can be abused (true). There are founding members and funders etc, though if you asked a random person at a protest about funding and where it comes from they would probably say ‘I have no idea’ and ‘wait, what funding?’ and may not be able to name the founding members either. That’s because the core of these movements is the smaller groups, who come together regionally and nationally for actions and groups individually provide their own funding for, say, hall hire or flyer printing. (I assume the funding from people like Aileen Getty goes on national things like the network that keeps track of people who have been arrested, and makes sure they are supported.) Within these leaderless groups, everyone is actively encouraged to plan and carry out their own actions, as long as they follow the group’s guidelines of what they support. (These tend to be extremely broad and open.) The thinking behind it is to empower individuals, and this is in a political climate where we’ve had the same party in power for 12 years and no individual seems to matter any more- I get why. However if you’ve ever met A Person, you will know that empowering people to represent your group while basically doing whatever they want is likely to lead to a lot of really bad, misguided protest ideas. For example, I may or may not have been a moderator on a facebook group for the local chapter of [environmental movement] at around the time some guy put a protest banner on the cenotaph war memorial in London during the service on Rembrance Sunday. I can sort of figure out how he came up with this idea- we are in a very serious climate situation, and what is the most sacred thing to people that would therefore cause the most notice if I target it? A war memorial. He was also ex-army and it seemed from interviews that he felt drawn to do this for that reason, not that anyone on the right cared. The nationwide backlash was so severe that people were specifically searching up their nearest chapter of this group on facebook so they could send them long, abusive private messages, which I got to see because I was the moderator. It was clear that the general public thought his protest was awful and offensive, and I would guess that if this protestor had asked every activist in the country affiliated with this group if he should go ahead with his cenotaph protest, the answer would have been a resounding ‘no!’. But because of the ethos of this kind of group, he was tacitly encouraged to go ahead. He was not encouraged to think through the implications of a potentially controversial action on everyone else under the broader banner of this group. With the Van Gogh thing I can kind of see how it happened as well. There had been criticism pre-pandemic of climate activism groups doing things like disrupting (electric) trains in poorer neighbourhoods of London. (Why? Same reasons as above, they didn’t think it through and there was no encouragement to run the action past any kind of vetting.) So recently environmental groups have been trying to focus more on where the power is: the financial sector of London etc. In this case I can imagine it was something similar: ‘who values fine art and valuable paintings? The rich!’ and no other thought was given. Of course Sunflowers is a much beloved, very beautiful painting and not at all the kind of painting only ultrawealthy art buyers would care about, so it was a very poor choice if that was the thinking. But I expect they went for it for the biggest emotional impact, and once again were not encouraged to think about the wider impact of their actions. Not only does everyone hate JSO even more now, people are making conspiratorial TikToks about it, the horror. You might be wondering why on earth these groups don’t put more emphasis on thinking about the wider impact of their actions. The truth is, people hate basically every kind of civil disobedience. The amount of ridiculous things people will say about protestors who block a road is ridiculous. I remember during the BLM protests after Mike Brown was murdered, it didn’t matter how many times the protestors showed footage of them parting to let ambulances through, right wing pundits still insisted that by blocking the road they were stopping ambulances and literally killing people. I didn’t agree with the Insulate Britain protestors blocking the M25 (I felt the message was confused and it was making the public unmanagebly angry), but they were being blamed in the right wing press for literally killing a woman. She was very ill and on the way to hospital, but they were stopped by the protests and very sadly did not make it in time. But the Insulate Britain protestors were letting emergency vehicles through. The fact is, the woman was not in an ambulance, she was in her son’s car. Then you’d have to ask yourself, why wasn’t she in an ambulance? Well, because the NHS is so fucking underfunded and broken that ambulances may take far longer to arrive than is safe. People during the delay often drive the patient themselves instead in desperation to get to the hospital. So then that’s a whole other problem with this fucking country that we need to think about and solve, and the situation is now too complicated for a direct cause and affect. It could have been roadworks, an accident ahead, just traffic, that slowed the car down until it was too late. At any given time, any car on the road could be trying to get a desperately ill patient to hospital because the ambulance took too long. It’s too sad to contemplate. Road blocking is one of the simplest types of civil disobedience, and can be for very short periods, but if you let yourself think ‘well what if?’ about any person in any car who now might be a bit latein a disasterous way, then you could literally make yourself a reason to not do anything to disrupt anything ever. Even the Jerusalem Post had a little snarky remark at the end of its article about how the JSO march would cause more CO2 to be emitted while people sat in traffic waiting for them to pass (even though turning off the engine while sitting still for long periods is becoming common driving knowledge at this point, but let’s not let that get in the way of a good snarky remark). It seems like the instinct to point out how stupid and counterproductive a protest is extends to even conventional types like marches, and I think some activists react to this by just supporting any kind of protest. I know people who would automatically stand behind the Van Gogh thing, not because they thought it was a good idea and they would have done it, but because they know from experience that people will find a reason to hate basically any kind of protest and will accuse you of ridiculously hyperbolic things while involved in one. I was once at an action when a friend who had been there several days was accosted by a member of the public. This woman really laid into her: didn’t she know that when a road was blocked by our group a couple of days ago, a little boy had died? And it was all her [my friend’s] fault? She had literally killed a child? It went on ages and when she left my friend broke down. It was fucking awful. (NB- even the right wing tabloids who love this kind of thing didn’t pick up any story about a little boy dying during these protests so I suspect it was completely made up.) A lot of activists with this kind of group have gone with the idea that they will be hated whatever they do, so they shouldn’t overly consider what the public thinks. I do not share this view, and I long ago became disillusioned with the leaderless movement model, because if someone vaguely affiliated with a group you are also affiliated with does something shitty in the name of the group, no one wants to listen to how it wasn’t something you would have done or whatever- you basically did that thing too. And anyone with your group who speaks to the press or does anything unwise in public will be considered a spokesperson. The general public is not primed for the concept of leaderless movements. It’s like how anyone who performs anti-fascist actions can call themselves Antifa, but the right wing has imagined them into this super organised underground movement that is all connected. The alternative is to not affiliate yourself with any group at all, but that gives you vasltly less ability to join with others and organise, and joining with others is often why people get involved in activism in the first place. It’s tough and a bit of a mess honestly. Tl;dr- the Van Gogh painting thing was probably just a bad idea someone had and I don’t know why people find this so baffling. People have bad ideas CONSTANTLY, especially about activism.

[doriangray1789]

Her zaman ki gibi konuyu kendi üslubumca anlatacaktım.Farklı bir şey yapalım.Konuyu şematik anlatmak istiyorum.Sorunuz olursa,detaylı cevap veririm. Başlayalım 14 Ekim günü Just Stop Oil adlı gruba üye iki kişi Van Gogh’un Ayçiçekleri tablosuna konserve atarak eylem yaptı.

Eylemin ana teması; Petrol ve gaz üretimine son verilmesi gerektiğini savunmaları. Fakat eylem süresi boyunca herhangi bir devlet, şirket, kurum ismi verilmedi. Öznesi ve faili belirtilmeyen bir eylem yapılmış oldu. Aslında ilk eylemleri değildi. Fakat cam çerçeve ile korunan ve çorba konservesi fırlattıkları tablo Van Gogh’a ait olunca, protestoları dünya gündemine oturdu. Ufak bir araştırma yaptığımda anladım ki Just Stop Oil bir grubun Britanya ayağı. Batılı birçok ülkede farklı isimlerle eylemlerine devam ediyorlar. Yani anlayacağınız neredeyse küresel diyebileceğimiz bir organizasyonun bir ayağını görmüş olduk bu eylemle.

Just Stop Oil grubunu Climate Emergency Fund (İklim Krizi Fonu) finanse ediyor. Climate Emergency Fund (İklim Krizi Fonu) ‘’enerji dönüşümü’’ konusu üzerinde hızla harekete geçilmesi gerektiğini savunuyor.

Climate Emergency Fund (İklim Krizi Fonu) kurucusu kim? Aileen Getty. Aileen Getty kim? ABD’nin en zengin hanedanlarından Getty hanedanının varislerinden biri. Getty hanedanı servetlerini neye borçlu? 1942’de kurdukları Getty Oil petrol şirketine. Climate Emergency Fund sadece Just Stop Oil’i değil, başka çevreci gruplara da fon desteği veriyor. Extinction Rebellion gibi. Petrol devi bir ailenin varisi neden temiz enerji davasına bu kadar finans desteği sağlar?

İklim Krizi fonu'nun wep sitesinde bazı faaliyetler özetlenmiş. Bu faaliyetlere baktığımızda 2019 senesinden sonra 91 örgüte fon desteği verilmiş. 1 milyondan fazla eylemci ile çalışmışlar. 10 milyon insan ile iletişime geçilmiş. 22.000 eylemciye eğitim verilmiş. Medya organlarına 10.000 den fazla özgün içerik üretilmiş. 7 milyon dolar hibe edilmiş. Ve bu rakamları 2022 senesine paralel olacak şekilde artmış olarak hayal edin! İklim Krizi Fonu bağışçılarına baktığımızda Adam McKay’i de görmek mümkün. Kendisi Don’t Look Up filminin senaristi. İklim Krizi Fonu'na en çok destek verenlerden bir diğeri Equation Campaign’in kurucuları.

Equation Campaign’in kurucuları ve Aileen Getty’nin ortak özellikleri, Rockefeller’lere mensup olmaları! 1870’te Standart Oil şirketi kuruldu. Kurucu kişi John D. Rockefeller. Equation Campaign’in kurucuları ise Rebecca Rockefeller Lambert ve kuzeni Peter Gill Case. Burada sorulması gereken bir soru var. Bu pek hayırsever zenginler, neden bu küresel eylem guruplarına böylesine devasa fonlar ayırıyor? Oldukça basit anlatmaya çalışayım; McKinsey isminde bir yönetim danışmanlığı şirketi var.( bu şirketin adını yakın zamanda “Türkiye’yi denetlemesi” içşn tutulan şirket olduğunu duymuşsunuz dur bkz:Bakan damat dönemi )

Bu şirketin kuruluşu ve kurucuları için ayrıca bir bilgisel yazılır. Şirket 2050 senesine dair bir rapor hazırladı. 2050'de sıfır karbon hedefine ulaşabilmenin koşullarını tespit etti. İlgili rapora göre bu hedefe ulaşabilmek için devletlerin, şirketlerin ve kişilerin

enerji ve arazi kullanım sistemlerini değiştirmeleri gerekiyor. Bu değişimin hem rejimsel hem de ekonomik bir takım gereklilikleri var. Ekonomik gerekliliklerinden biri; toplam küresel harcamanın her yıl 3,5 trilyon dolar arması gerek!

[popolitiko]

Photo does not show Judge Aileen Cannon at Trump rally

Social media users are claiming a photo shows Aileen Cannon, the US district court judge assigned to the criminal case against Donald Trump for retaining classified documents, wearing Trump apparel outside one of the former president's rallies.

This is false; there is no evidence the picture, which Getty Images captured in September 2022, shows Cannon.

"This is interesting. Aileen Canon on the left," says one June 9, 2023 tweet sharing the image, which shows two women decked out in face paint, "Team Trump" hats and other merchandise. "This pic gives a good reason why she should recuse or be removed as the Judge."

"This is interesting. Aileen Canon on the left," says one June 9, 2023 tweet sharing the image, which shows two women decked out in face paint, "Team Trump" hats and other merchandise. "This pic gives a good reason why she should recuse or be removed as the Judge."

Similar posts spread the photo widely across Twitter and other platforms such as Facebook and Instagram after Cannon was assigned to the case against Trump, who faces dozens of felony charges of mishandling US government secrets. Several videos sharing the image on TikTok and Instagram raked in tens of thousands of views.

Cannon, a Trump appointee in 2020, will have enormous sway over how fast the proceedings move. The Florida judge issued a series of rulings favorable to Trump earlier in the investigation, slowing the probe into the classified documents stashed at his Mar-a-Lago resort before a conservative appeals court ultimately ruled that she had overstepped her authority.

But there is no evidence she is the person depicted wearing Trump gear in the photo circulating online.

The original photo

Getty Images photographer Spencer Platt took the original picture (archived here) in the US state of Pennsylvania more than nine months ago. The caption does not identify the duo, but the woman confused for Cannon online has different facial features and hair color than the judge, whose image has been widely published by US media.

[crispytoastyt]

The Attack on Art History

As we are about to end of 2022, the last three months have been very troubling, to say the least when it comes to art history. As an art enthusiast, I love the art of most kinds that are not only made with traditional tools by legendary artists but providing visual elements such as expressions and symbolism.

But then you get these so-called "climate protestors" that pop out of nowhere and vandalize art, and there are billionaires that destroy pieces of history in favor of NFT replicas.

Sometime in October 2022, a group of supposed activists known as Just Stop Oil arrived in disguise, and when nobody was near them, they dumped tomato soup on Van Gogh's "Sunflowers," and glue themselves against the wall near the vandalized painting. They gave a speech on what is more important in life, "Oil or food."

We get that pollution and global warming are major concerns in our lives, but the way they are doing this is not helping their cases as vandalizing art pieces in the museum is illegal everywhere. If they care about the environment, why attempt to destroy historical art at the museum?

Fortunately, the paintings are protected by the glass... though the frames need to be cleaned up or replaced with new frames. But even so, paintings that got vandalized feel like art history is being violated.

You may be asking who organized the attacks upon paintings like Sunflowers? The mastermind behind all this is Aileen Getty or the Oil Witch which I dubbed her.

Aileen Getty is the granddaughter of the oil tycoon J. Paul Getty and had been donating millions and millions of dollars to support activist groups... which then manipulated them to think that oil paintings are one of the sources of global warming.

You might be wondering why would she do that in the first place. The Oil Witch is also using them as scapegoats to make the majority of environmental activists look terrible and less trustworthy.

I am surprised that Getty is not arrested yet for orchestrating the attacks on art history. But if you think that is bad, then the next part of this rant will shock you.

A crypto bro destroyed a historical piece of art and created NFT replicas of what was gone. That's right, the millionaire bought one of the late Frida Kahlo's works just so he can destroy it and turn this thing into collectible NFTs. The moment I read the article, I was really angry, and I cannot believe that crypto bro had the audacity to do that. Kahlo is really rolling down her grave... violently.

And I can't even believe that NFTs are still here. I consider these things as "fake art" because the majority of them are randomly generated images that only be purchased with worthless cryptocurrency. Some may even go to the extreme by hijacking social media accounts so they can promote trash like that. It feels like the infamous sales funnel scheme but much, much worse.

Art needs to be preserved and protected from whatever tries to attack them. It would be a lot better if museums can store the real paintings in a vault while they make replicas to showcase in the gallery. Art is too sacred to be vandalized or destroyed, especially at these damning times...

My final words for this post:

"Fuck the Oil Witch and fuck the Crypto Bros."

[female-malice]

Gen-Z Climate Aesthetic Influencers:

Oil Heiress Aileen Getty:

[stonerzelda]

Aaa ok. I dont have the mental capacity to handle makkng This post about the whole soup art thing but i do need to say i bought into the whole aileen getty is an oil baroness thing cuz it is Somewhat true like her family is involved with that BUT im. Pretty confident she like. Abdicated from that. Someone sent me a few articles about how shes been kind of trying to right the wrongs her family has done and i pretty much never trust any rich folk that get involved with activism cuz it seems like a cover or whatever but like. Ok maybe it wasnt the most thought out protest move, but they KNEW they weren't going to destroy the painting, its covered in glass. They were trying to bring attention to the cause. A guy self immolated in an attempt to raise climate awareness and we heard crickets. Some people throw soup at a covered painting and we immediately jump on them. After i actually double checked it, i noticed how EVERYTHING trying to paint this in a negative light came from a since deleted titkok and Fox News. Like it was hard to find anything related to it that wasnt just from fox lol....idk man i think we might need to step back for a second okay. If anyones wants the articles i can send them but im not about to get my ass handed to me by randos that may be just as misled as i was until someone involved with the protest spoke with me about it.

[boreal-sea]

Just Stop Oil is not funded by 'big oil'.

Yes, it's true that it received a $500,000 donation from Aileen Getty, the granddaughter of JP Getty (who founded the now-defunct Getty oil company and thereby creating that intergenerational wealth). And we can get into a discussion of wealthy philanthropist types and the inherent performance surrounding a lot of their contributions! But to discredit the entire thing as some psyop or whatever because a rich person grew a conscience and did something to try and combat climate change in a way that contradicts their family name's image is just...cmon dude.

You literally just made a post talking about how you have like 3k followers and your posts are sometimes getting thousands of notes now. Please try to be more conscientious of the things you say in regards to current events. It's all too easy to get into the habit of casually spreading misinformation online just because it sounds like it checks out at first glance.

You are completely fair to call out misinformation - I heard it/saw sources on here and on Twitter and just assumed the people saying it had done due diligence in their research. I am in the wrong for spreading misinformation.

💚🌍💙

To be honest though, I still dislike this style of activism, no matter who funds it.

I feel that all it achieved was making people angry at climate activists instead of angry at the actual perpetrators of climate change like big oil and Nestle etc etc. I feel like although it briefly got people to talk about climate change, most of the discussion has been about the act itself, whether or not the painting was safe, whether or not it's possible to care about art conservation and the climate at the same time, whether this act was meaningful, what kinds of activism are helpful vs hurtful...

And not very much about the environment at all, which was their alleged goal. There's been lots of talking, but I don't think much of it has been helpful for the Earth.

[o-wyrmlight]

I've seen claims going around that the Just Stop Oil activists that tried to throw Heinz tomato soup on Vincent van Gough's Sunflowers painting before super gluing themselves to the wall as a mark of protest is an act of oil companies using extremist environmentalist methods as a means of anti-environmentalist propaganda and.

I would believe it if the only source that I was given wasn't an article that literally... didn't even mention Just Stop Oil having a connection to any oil company to begin with. As a matter of fact, in the article itself, it claims connection to an eco-friendly fuel company.

"From the beginning, Just Stop Oil has also enjoyed substantial funding. As well as ongoing crowdfunding, Dale Vince, the millionaire founder of green energy company Ecotricity, said he gave them £10,000. Vast amounts more came from the US: the Climate Emergency Fund, a philanthropic fund set up by Aileen Getty, gave them “hundreds of thousands”, its director told the Guardian." - The only source I've been given (so far).

So. I don't. Know. Where this claim comes from. ...Actually, that's a lie. It came from this Twitter thread, which makes the claim but links the above article as a source, which doesn't even... mention... any ties to the oil industry and actually seems to contradict such a claim?

I'm. Mmm. Again, I could easily believe it because it definitely seems like something that would happen in a capitalist society, but I don't think thusfar that such is the case here.

Just putting that out there.

[lancecharleson]

OOF

Well that explains quite a lot.

This thread also doubles as a list of charities/orgs run by those who are actually affected the most by the climate crisis, especially indigenous people who have been fighting it for decades.

If you have scratch to spare and want to help, they’re all there. You don’t need to donate to ALL of them, picking one will do just fine, a little help goes a long way!