I noticed a small piece of news today stating that activists supporting Palestinians vandalized a historical painting in England, at the University of Cambridge. The painting, dating back to 1914, depicted former British Prime Minister Lord Arthur Balfour, best remembered for the 1917 Balfour Declaration, in which Britain announced support for the establishment of a "national home" for Jews in Palestine.
Of course, Lord Balfour is no longer alive, and therefore, he holds no significance in today's politics. Thus, the vandalism by activists has no bearing on the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.
However, the destruction of the painting resulted in the loss of an irreplaceable piece of artwork and was therefore a culturally hostile act. Additionally, it demonstrated that the perpetrators were fanatical individuals whose behavior is guided by primitive instincts, similar to that of a toddler throwing a tantrum if they don't get their way.
The analogy is apt in the sense that a rational person does not heed the demands of their child throwing a tantrum on the ground. Similarly, a rational person does not cater to the potential political desires of these fanatical activists but rather dismisses them as childish whims.
The same thought in Finnish:
Vandaalien vaatimukset
Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A white family does not represent real Londoners
Finnish journalist called for British Prime Minister´s head to be placed on London bridge to dry
The activists sought excitement and a boost to their self-esteem in the Stockholm Diamond League
No comments:
Post a Comment
You are free to comment on the blog posts, but I ask you to stay on topic and adhere to respectful language and good manners.