• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    275 months ago

    I’m constantly surprised that the endless unmonitored miles of oil pipelines don’t ever bombed.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        105 months ago

        “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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      65 months ago

      That actively works against the cause because it would do so much harm to the local ecosystems

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        105 months ago

        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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        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.