“In an opinion article in The New York Times, columnist Ezra Klein wrote that “[a] truer title would be ‘Why to Blow Up a Pipeline’”, characterizing Malm’s answer as “[because] nothing else has worked”. Stating that Malm was “less convincing” about “whether blowing up pipelines would work here, and now”, Klein argued that there would likely be political consequences to sabotage, including imprisonment of climate activists as well as political repression.[13]”
Well a lot of them run through more or less suburban areas. So doing it there would have lower environmental impact while greatly raising awareness of how many pipelines run through populated places.
That is a short term problem for trying to fight a long term catastrophe.
I would prefer to not cause a mess, and further harm natural spaces, but as you can see. Not only are passive demonstrations not effective, they have severe jail time. So at this point, i see it as the most logical step
And as these sentences get handed down and there are more political prisoners and martyrs, more people will start to think that way.
Current eco activists tend to be very conscientious and considered about what they’re doing. As it gets more popular, you’ll get people joining who are considerably less measured in their actions, and the likelihood of drastic actions increases.
Separately on Thursday, three airports were granted high court injunctions against fossil fuel and environmental activists protesting at their sites. Leeds Bradford airport, London Luton airport and Newcastle international airport were given injunctions banning protesters from trespassing or causing a nuisance.
I do. I however approach it with a pragmatic strategy. Blocking traffic doesn’t work. It doesn’t change minds, it doesn’t change policy. It prevents hourly workers from getting paid.
I agree with every thing you have said, except the execution. It hurts poor people and doesn’t change policy.
Those who make peaceful protests impossible make violent rebellion inevitable.
Right? If it’s years in prison either way, they’re about to find out what real eco terrorism looks like when protestors are ready to go all in.
I’m constantly surprised that the endless unmonitored miles of oil pipelines don’t ever bombed.
How to Blow Up a Pipeline
“In an opinion article in The New York Times, columnist Ezra Klein wrote that “[a] truer title would be ‘Why to Blow Up a Pipeline’”, characterizing Malm’s answer as “[because] nothing else has worked”. Stating that Malm was “less convincing” about “whether blowing up pipelines would work here, and now”, Klein argued that there would likely be political consequences to sabotage, including imprisonment of climate activists as well as political repression.[13]”
Whelp, Erza Klein can eat the whole of my ass.
That actively works against the cause because it would do so much harm to the local ecosystems
Well a lot of them run through more or less suburban areas. So doing it there would have lower environmental impact while greatly raising awareness of how many pipelines run through populated places.
That is a short term problem for trying to fight a long term catastrophe.
I would prefer to not cause a mess, and further harm natural spaces, but as you can see. Not only are passive demonstrations not effective, they have severe jail time. So at this point, i see it as the most logical step
And as these sentences get handed down and there are more political prisoners and martyrs, more people will start to think that way.
Current eco activists tend to be very conscientious and considered about what they’re doing. As it gets more popular, you’ll get people joining who are considerably less measured in their actions, and the likelihood of drastic actions increases.
Absolutely. From the end of the article:
Getting someone fired for missing work isn’t helping your cause in ANY way.
You want to protect workers? Shitting on people who try to protect the environment isn’t it.
Ban union busting, ban arbitrary firing, set up a worker protections.
Do those things first. Then come complain.
Grow some class consciousness.
I do. I however approach it with a pragmatic strategy. Blocking traffic doesn’t work. It doesn’t change minds, it doesn’t change policy. It prevents hourly workers from getting paid.
I agree with every thing you have said, except the execution. It hurts poor people and doesn’t change policy.
If anything the richest people are the ones driving to work. Cars are expensive.
I can confirm that this is not the case.
Is bicycling and public transit not cheaper than owning a car?
Not in my specific circumstances, no.
Why is that? I assume you’ve costed both of them out?