how come the activists never attack modern art? who is paying them to do what they do?

Because no one will really miss modern art when its gone.
>uhh but tis important for art histroical value andd evelopment of art blablabla
No one cares lol

It doesn't have any soul and nobody would care therefore there is no point, evil revels in the destruction of beauty.

>>509577300 (OP)
>how come the activists never attack modern art? who is paying them to do what they do?

They never attack Modern Art because they come from the same political and social class as Modern "Artists". Modern art is a fucking joke, but you probably already know this. I do not consider A.I. generated Art in the same league, since thats definitely the future of Media and we should embrace it, only Shitlibs will denounce this.

>>509577527
This. It's a pseudointellectual wank which, to the degree that it has any political valence at all, already aligns with their ideas

Kek statues of old faggots getting broken down is fun and cool. Statues of indiscernible gobbledygook are not interesting or fun to break.

>>509577300 (OP)
That statue glorifies BBC.

>>509577300 (OP)
how can you destroy something
that is already so
hideously ugly?

>>509577300 (OP)
Modern "art" is souless. You can't destroy something that has no value in the first place.

>>509577300 (OP)
Is that a cock?

>>509577300 (OP)
Looks like a nigger fucked a garloid

Because vandals want to upset and anger people by vandalizing things people like.
If they vandalized that ugly statue abomination then everybody would thank them for it and celebrate the date.
Lol.