New Banksy mural appears at Royal Courts of Justice
The artwork, which shows a judge hitting a protester with a gavel, was confirmed by the elusive street artist.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgrq0r0y878oOpen linkView original on piefed.blahaj.zone979
Comments77
That’s a good piece of art
Just dropped this in another thread, best copy I've found of just the mural:
Not showing for me somehow
Man, what talent
Thnx!
I had to open in external because of some cloudflare validation
Wow you can really see the details
Yeah I was gonna say, that's a fucking awesome piece! What do they do in situations like this? Paint over it?
Update:
Yeah I saw in the article that they covered it up and posted guards. Kind of ironic if they end up removing the section of wall and making a ton of money selling it.
"Look, Banksy thinks we're committing atrocities! We're gonna be rich!!"
The whole point of Banksy is most of his public work cannot be resold.
To a degree, people will cut out chunks of wall to sell a banksy.
Usually it's just fenced off and people can still see it. Makes me think some one was upset with it.
It is just delicious how their knee-jerk reaction of "lets hide it" reveals so much about their mindset and how much that mural hits the target as critique of the true role of their profession in present day Britain.
They reacted as the guilty do, not the innocent.
They always go for a cover up
Update:
Yeah they plan on painting over it. They covered it up and put two policemen to guard it to make sure nobody looks at it.
That's not dystopian or anything.
The UK is about just as fucked up as the United States is right now in a lot of ways, their leader is just don't say stupid shit constantly. They have basically made it illegal to protest, not just on the Gaza on a lot of stuff, environmental, global warming, and the judges just took away the defenses protesters were using, not allowing them to say why they were doing it. And they are hitting him with these huge sentences is not like it's months in jail we're talking years or more.
Just to give you an idea of where they are at there was another recent case where a woman that took some abortion pills that she got from the doctor as per their laws was charged under some like 19th century law with some huge felony charge. She got not guilty but not for lack of trying on the prosecutor's part.
And they're not even ruled by the conservative parties. This is the good outcome!
I'm absolutely baffled at Labour. The Tories were a complete clown show, and it should have been trivial to put up some serious opposition against them, but they never did. Only when the Tories really burned out, did Labour win, and they're immediately giving us Tories-light. The same shit, just toned down 20%.
When does the UK start voting for better parties? Replace the Tories with LibDem and Labour with the Greens. If I lived in England, I'd be upset I couldn't vote for SNP. Every other party is better than these two.
And they got into power because everyone was going "oh shit, we don't want another Trump", then just run full steam ahead into issues that will piss off their base. Someone who hasn't been kept up to date could be excused for thinking the party restricted trans people and arresting peace protesters en masse was the more conservative party.
Let me tell you about the tale of Neoliberalism and the center "left". Our story begins in the 1980s, but it really takes of in the early 2000s. At the time a bloke named Tony was ruling the UK as prime minister and he had a fine Atze ruling Germany, whose name was Gerhard...
Together they dismantled social security, raised taxes on their people, and lowered taxes on their rich friends. They sold much of their realm to their rich friends, at a staggering discount. They said this would be best for the people and the global markets would demand, but also reward as such...
Lmfao, cope harder. Despite everything it's not even close right now. Worry about your own impending Fourth Reich while the UK still has its citizens actually engaged in political activism. We'll be fine.
Guess we finally found who we're not allowed to criticise.
Close:
Banksy’s art sells for millions so it would be unwise to paint over it
It's on the ministry of Justice building, which and this is true is worth a lot more than the painting, even if it was not a sharply critical piece against the ministry of Justice. They absolutely are going to paint over it.
Well the good news is he will probably paint it again
I wonder if it's a one-off statement or they have plans for a response. Being on a government building kind of prompts this result, which may be part of the intention.
Getting it painted over is also poetic in itself.
Truly.
You don’t like us silencing protesters let’s also silence you depicting that 😂
Well they could cut out the painting and replace the brick work using the proceeds from selling it.
The West is dismantling every shibboleth, every sacred cow, in service to genocidal Zionism.
There's a lot of West in the West.
That said, you're exactly right for certain Western countries such as Britain, America and Germany.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Educational_Ranking_by_Religious_Group/_-/_2001.png
This was removed for "trolling," but I wasn't trolling and stated objective fact.
These moderators are a joke that shouldn't be taken seriously.
Always check the modlogs to see what these clowns are trying to keep from us.
This seems nonsensical to me.
If it were in reference to a particular issue, would that make Banksy a "terrorist?" Maybe it's better to feign uncertainty at the BBC.
Nitpick: it's Parliament who proscribed Palestine Action, not the courts.
It is the courts upholding it though.
It took like two months now that Palestine Action are allowed to get an appeals hearing in November iirc.
Courts could have decided for the proscription to not be applicable until a proper hearing takes place. Instead it was upheld.
Yea the decision to ban it went through so fast it was hard to have a defence, but the appeals are all delayed now they have one.
Cross nitpick: Just because the courts are following Parliament's 'law' in no way negates their complicity in doing wrong.
See Nazi guards following Hitler's rules for reference.
Nazi guards murdered people. I'll condemn the courts for carrying out the law when it involves murdering people.
I don't believe anyone has been convicted yet in these cases (probably many have not even been charged) so the role of the courts so far was to agree to judicial review but to decline an interim block on the order. Parliament is clearly more to blame for this.
Yes, definitely wait til they start killing people. Condemnation will surely work wonders then
So, just to be clear, what are we condemning the courts - which haven't convicted anyone of anything in this - for?
Condemnation certainly doesn't achieve anything when anyone can see you're condemning people for stuff they haven't done. I know that the zeitgeist is vibes-based but we should really be doing better than that.
Yes, because prosecuting people for being political dissidents doing nothing other than holding a sign is always right and just.
Do you want to try again, using the words I wrote rather than the ones you pulled out of the air?
Also UK judges don't use gavels.
(Edited: was gravels)
They prefer city bikes
I don't understand this but I can only assume its in reference to my autocorrect.
A gravel bike is a type of bike for "gravel" conditions, so dirt roads and stuff
Do the courts not get judicial review in the UK?
Judicial review would imply a higher authority.
For the most part, UK's highest legal authority is Parliament.
The Supreme Court, as well as being the final court of appeal, plays an important role in the development of United Kingdom law.
As an appeal court, The Supreme Court cannot consider a case unless a relevant order has been made in a lower court.
It is the final court of appeal for all United Kingdom civil cases, and criminal cases from England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
It hears appeals on arguable points of law of general public importance.
It concentrates on cases of the greatest public and constitutional importance.
It maintains and develops the role of the highest court in the United Kingdom as a leader in the common law world.
How does one confirm a true Banksy from a fake when nobody knows who he actually is? How do you verify the Banksy who confirmed it's legit is legit?
They are posted by their Instagram page: https://www.instagram.com/banksy/
I don't know if all their works are on there though
Kind of funny for someone like Banksy to still have to join somewhere like Instagram.
I get your point, but if you're doing political activism, you need to meet the people where they are
Indeed.
People do know who he is.
Cut it out and send it to the Louvre Museum.
Or to Athens. You know both the birthplace of democracy and the origin of the stolen Elgin marbles.
They are owed an even larger apology due to the rape of democracy that's taken place.
What, because we allowed women, commoners and slaves the vote?
Mainly because of the 'philosopher king' infringement tbh.
There's nothing I love more than hearing British people complain about being forced to do the one job that they have. Miserable sods.
I feel personally attacked. Or if not, I probably will soon.
I wonder if he did like Cut outlines that they could paste up there and then spray over it? Because time certainly would have been an issue at that location. Is incredible detail it seems like it would take forever if not for the outline already being done elsewhere.
It's stencils and than final touches after, the painting probably only took a few minutes at most
Exactly my thought when I saw it... Several stencils that act as layers. Maybe buttressed against the floor to keep it level.
he should have painted Keir Starmer's face on it
According to a cursory search, Banksy's net worth is $50 million. Hmm.
Yes but it's $50m worth of card stock and rattle cans.
I hope that this is just a misunderstood pun?
It's pretty uninspiring artistically but at least he's putting his fame to good use with a message slightly more controversial than 'what if cops were gay' or some of his other stuff. Also a very solid up purely from a graffiti perspective, that's a big piece for a location with that much security.
I think it's more the social commentary.