He paid for it, it’s his art to destroy now.
If you don’t like that, or think I’m being insensitive, then maybe we shouldn’t let rich people buy and hoard art.
If they’re culturally or historically important, why are they in a private collection?
Is it sad to see? Yes, absolutely. But not any more sad than it falling into the hands of a private collector in the first place.

Instead, the artist added, he is trying to spark a discussion over why “destroying the life of people means nothing but destroying art is a huge taboo in the world”.

Well played. If people care more about inanimate objects than someone being tortured by the western powers, their priorities need to be highlighted.

Instead, the artist added, he is trying to spark a discussion over why “destroying the life of people means nothing but destroying art is a huge taboo in the world”.

Let him cook.

Well, yeah, he could destroy the art whenever he wants. He doesn’t have to try at all.