Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Climate Depot; No doubt Twitter and Facebook will ban the author, Amazon, the New York Times and other reviewers and book sellers any minute now, for saying nice things about inflammatory material which promotes violence and terrorism.
Three Books Offer New Ways to Think About Environmental Disaster
By Tatiana Schlossberg
Jan. 22, 2021
HOW TO BLOW UP A PIPELINE
By Andreas Malm
200 pp. Verso. Paper, $19.95.
In September 2019, millions of people around the world participated in nonviolent demonstrations demanding action on climate change.
“To say that the signals have fallen on the deaf ears of the ruling classes of this world would be an understatement. If these classes ever had any senses, they have lost them all,” writes Malm, a Swedish professor of human ecology and climate change activist, in his compelling but frustrating treatise.
A proportionate and rational response, Malm argues, should be to target fossil fuel infrastructure: Destroy fences around a power plant; occupy pipeline routes, as protesters did for the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines; at coal mines or similar sites, set up climate camps, which Malm believes are effective as laboratories for activism and for shutting things down by putting bodies on the line.
So Malm wants us to fight back (though I should add that there aren’t any actual instructions here about how to blow anything up).
He argues that there should be room for tactics other than strict nonviolence and peaceful demonstrations — indeed, he is a bit contemptuous of those who offer strategic pacifism as a solution — and notes that fetishizing nonviolence in past protest movements sanitizes history, removing agency from the people who fought, sometimes violently, for justice, freedom and equality.
Sure. But the problem with violence, even if it’s meant only to destroy “fossil capital,” is that ultimately it’s impossible to control.
…Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/22/books/review/scorched-earth-emmanuel-kreike-how-to-prepare-for-climate-change-david-pogue-how-to-blow-up-a-pipeline-andreas-malm.html
OK, not a complete endorsement of violence, but in my opinion NYT Tatiana Schlossberg’s review doesn’t exactly read like a categorical rejection of use of violence to deprive people of access to a legal product.
The official book website also makes it very clear what is being advocated;
How to Blow Up a Pipeline
Learning to Fight in a World on Fire
by Andreas Malm
Why resisting climate change means combatting the fossil fuel industry
The science on climate change has been clear for a very long time now. Yet despite decades of appeals, mass street protests, petition campaigns, and peaceful demonstrations, we are still facing a booming fossil fuel industry, rising seas, rising emission levels, and a rising temperature. With the stakes so high, why haven’t we moved beyond peaceful protest?Read more: https://www.versobooks.com/books/3665-how-to-blow-up-a-pipeline
In this lyrical manifesto, noted climate scholar (and saboteur of SUV tires and coal mines) Andreas Malm makes an impassioned call for the climate movement to escalate its tactics in the face of ecological collapse. We need, he argues, to force fossil fuel extraction to stop—with our actions, with our bodies, and by defusing and destroying its tools. We need, in short, to start blowing up some oil pipelines.
Offering a counter-history of how mass popular change has occurred, from the democratic revolutions overthrowing dictators to the movement against apartheid and for women’s suffrage, Malm argues that the strategic acceptance of property destruction and violence has been the only route for revolutionary change. In a braided narrative that moves from the forests of Germany and the streets of London to the deserts of Iraq, Malm offers us an incisive discussion of the politics and ethics of pacifism and violence, democracy and social change, strategy and tactics, and a movement compelled by both the heart and the mind. Here is how we fight in a world on fire.
I never received my reviewers copy, so I haven’t read the book, but I think we get the idea.
Fossil fuel production only exists because people buy fossil fuel products. Oil production could be stopped overnight, by say giving the Green Party a supermajority. Or people could choose of their own free will to stop purchasing gasoline.
The author of this savage call to arms must know there is no chance of convincing ordinary people to give up the comforts of modern civilisation, so he advocates depriving people of said comforts by violence and unlawful destruction of property.
In this sense, the real targets of the violence which is being advocated in this nasty call to arms are ordinary people, who choose of their own free will to purchase the products of our fossil fuel powered civilisation. Ordinary people who would be badly inconvenienced or worse were those products forcefully withdrawn by eco-crazies inspired by this ugly manifesto.
I think Twitter will ban the NYT or Malm shortly after shrimp learn to whistle.
Pathetic excuses for human beings
Too many people believe they know best & advocate astounding plans – like the gem appended below.
I see it has been marked as false.
By who ?
If twitter marks something as “false” one can assume there is likely a strong grain of truth in it.
Thanks lee for informing me about that. I stand corrected on that & offer my apologies to that real USA congress-person who said on national TV (“60Minutes”, January 2019): There’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually and semantically correct than about being morally right.”
So it’s just a coincidence that many states have started easing restrictions this past week?
Malm comes from a very small island with a cloud forest and his ancestors evolved away from homo sapiens over the last few millennia. Hopefully an introduced fungus will make his ilk go extinct.
I believe in 1st amendment, but I do believe we have existing laws about this kind of literature. Maybe Red states can do something by banning it’s sale in their state, which undoubtedly the scum bags will want to use the ACLU to make a case about it. This will give the case wider attention, to see how degenerate these people are. Hell, we can’t just take them out, although this will solve the problem quickly, because once they face just one action, they crawl under tables and call out the big guns to protect them.
Just have to write a similar book like
How to Blow-Up a Climate Camp
How to Blow-Up an XR argument
How to Ridicule a Climate Catastrophist
How to Successfully Sue Twitter for Selective Book Banning
Then once you get banned, sue sue sue
Your friend Sue tells me to send you a message, she says:
“Relax, darling, you won’t get far accusing a little twerp to his own mother’s face. Twitter’s big brother, CIA, has already run home and told mommy about your baseless accusations and cruel bullying.”
She sent me that in one of those buff envelopes with blocks on where you scratch out the last address and fill in the department next to receive the paperwork. At the top is printed “Property of the Independent Judiciary”
or how to accuse anyone advocating the destruction of the US economy of sabotage and being a traitor…
I have a different problem to deal with. The company which pays my pension – BP – has an Irish CEO called Bernard Looney, who says it is now company policy to “transition”
away from producing oil and gas. They are a firm supporter of “nett zero” what ever that is. I think he means they will rely on windmills and glass mirrors to produce energy and thereby stop producing vital plant food Carbon Dioxide.
He does not say what is to replace all the items which rely on hydrocarbon chemicals.
So by the criteria of the gook who wrote tis book how should he be rated.
BTW he advises that BP will no longer support in any way politicians who had anything to do with questioning the recent Presidential election fraud.
All of these stories are the same.
Proclaim the big lie that the science is settled and then try to scream people down.
I think anyone trying to disable a gas line or power plant in winter can be charged with attempted murder.
It just takes imagination
For me, places where the green movement is strong, California, New York, etc need a 3 month hiatus from fossil fuel, and as well energy sources that relied on fossil fuel for their construction and maintenance for example hydro power. It just gets cut off. We need to do this to prepare folks for what is coming. It’s unfortunate that we no longer have horse drawn wagons in use – their digested food could have provided a source of fuel for cooking and eating. Oh well freeze in the dark. Do it or shut up I say!
Oh, thanks. You do realize that a lot of folks in California and New York don’t happen to agree with the idea of stopping fossil fuel use. So we are to suffer from your great idea?
Yet you keep voting for the people promoting this, or are you folks suddenly of the opinion that there’s a difference between democracy and majority rule?
Maybe take a hand in raising the children again, instead of outsourcing to the Montessori Bolsheviks?
When a captain runs his ship aground, everyone goes down with the ship, even those who disagreed with the captain.
You have the choice of which ship you want to sail on.
Ironically, the book is written with software. Software runs on hardware powered by electricity. Electricity is generated with fossil fuels.
And the book– it is printed with ink that is derived from soy which is harvested by machines running fossil fuels. Printed on paper from trees harvested by fellers running fossil fuels; or printed on paper recycled by machines using electricity generated by fossil fuels. Delivered in plastic crates made from fossil fuel. Delivered on vehicles that burn fossil fuel to arrive at a specified point by a specified time.
I could go on but my arm is hurting.
“…ink that is derived from soy…”
I knew there’s a reason their writings are so much like pendulous, cancerous man-tits!
Or, or: Hey, so that’s why libtard academia is so gender-confused and obsessively queer, it’s the oestrogen in their ink!
Got another one: Californy soy-boys are so afraid of their own totties, even the blood they sign the Devil’s contract with is vegan.
Yeah, I know, never had a hankering for stand-up comedy…
Reminds me of the old Anarchists Cookbook informing the Weather Underground and related groups on ways to stick it to The Man.
Don’t use it. Many of the instruction are wrong; more likely to harm you then the target.
I just looked though The Anarchist Cookbook (it’s real name) just now. It’s wrong in some places, but not in all. I’ve never tried making nitroglycerm, for instance, but I don’t think I would try it.
I looked it up and it’s available on Amazon. I guess left wing violence is tolerable.
Nitro glycerine, gun cotton (nitro-cellulose), picric acid (Lyddite) and many other nitrate explosives are actually quite easy to make. The problem is what to do when you’ve got it. Many are quite unstable.
Malm’s calls for blowing things up, and wanton destruction of energy infrastructure are straight-up Red Guard, Great Leap Forward stuff that k1lled tens of millions of Chinese in the 1960’s.
Anyone who thinks Malm’s calls for violence would stop at property is a fool.
The progression of what’s Okay in their sick minds wouldn’t stop merely at property once started.
Malm’s is a sick and twisted mind. That the University of Lund would have someone his sociopathically sick on their teaching faculty is a disgrace.
“Malm’s is a sick and twisted mind.”
He fits right in on the radical Left. He’s representative.
Please forgive me if if don’t explain this properly.
I noticed that many of the BLM Antifa protestors were made up of wimps.
These lefty Brandie and Andy Tiffas were uni students, teachers, government office workers and other millennial “it’s not fair” types.
Some were neo marxists in it for power and most were true believers.
However, within the crowds were a few full on sociopaths.
I call these sociopaths “Stalin” Types.
History tells us that the wimpy power seekers and true believers will be the first sent to the firing squad or gulags by the “Stalin” types, yet these useful idiots never learn.
Gods, people, I have work to do! You are keeping me here, giggling around the water cooler!
I really am not trying to self-promote here, but for brevity’s sake, I have had some amateur thoughts on this thing where whimps become so agressive and demanding:
“These lefty Brandie and Andy Tiffas”
I love it!
Good post, Waza.
That guy needs to wear a hundred masks.
i think a strong plastic bag would be the best thing for him. The world would be a safer lace.
Fauci recommends using two masks. I always thought he was two faced.
Who do I sue if I get double pneumonia?
“… he advocates depriving people of said comforts by violence and unlawful destruction of property …”.
IMO (I’m not legally trained) ‘unlawful destruction’ doesn’t do justice to the incitement, the correct description would be ‘criminal damage’ i.e. intentional and reckless destruction of someone else’s property.
If the justice system were rightfully applied the author would be charged with incitement whether or not the crime is committed or not and that offense can attract the same penalty as the crime itself would.
… too many ‘or nots’.
And Trump gets indicted for telling his followers to behave themselves. !
Go figure !!
Seems that Laws only apply if the far-left want them to.
When has it ever been otherwise?
The old Double Standard of Justice.
The Leftwing controls the national narrative and they are the ones who say who is guilty and who is not guilty.
The Leftwing says Democrats are innocent and Republicans are guilty. It’s as simple as that.
re: “OK, not a complete endorsement of violence”.
Is this really an endorsement of violence: “<i><b>there should be room for tactics other than strict nonviolence and peaceful demonstrations — indeed, he is a bit contemptuous of those who offer strategic pacifism as a solution — and notes that fetishizing nonviolence in past protest movements sanitizes history, removing agency from the people who fought, sometimes violently, for justice, freedom and equality.</b></i>”.
Easy – we’ll fact check it. As a basis, we’ll use a fact check on Donald Trump’s speech before the march on the Capitol. <a href=https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-tell-supporters-storm/>Did Trump Tell Supporters to Storm US Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021?</a>
The fact-check said: “<i>Trump did not explicitly tell people to “storm” or “breach” or “break into” the Capitol. [..] It was a subjective call on whether Trump’s use of phrases “you have to show strength” and “demand that Congress do the right thing” were meant to condone violence and crimes among right-wing extremists without explicitly encouraging it.</i>”.
After acknowledging that Donald Trump called on supporters to “peacefully and patriotically” march or walk to the Capitol, the fact-check conclusion was: <i>In sum, while Trump did not say the words “storm” or “break into” the White House, Trump indeed told supporters to gather at the U.S. Capitol and try to convince members of Congress to delay the constitutional process that would affirm Biden’s presidency. For those reasons, and the ones outlined above, we rate this claim …..</i>
OK, it’s over to you now – what did the fact-check conclude? Remember the question being fact-checked is “Did Trump Tell Supporters to Storm US Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021?“.
<i>….. a “Mixture.”</i>
Yup, that’s right. The fact-checkers could not bring themselves to admit that Donald Trump had not told supporters to storm the Capitol, even though in their own analysis they had explicitly stated that he had not. They said “<i>It was a subjective call</i>”.
So – now let’s apply the same standards to whether the call for “<i><b>tactics other than strict nonviolence and peaceful demonstrations</b></i>” is an “endorsement of violence”.
Analysis: It is an explicit call for tactics that are not (nonviolent and/or peaceful). ‘Not nonviolent’ necessarily means violent. ‘Not peaceful’ necessarily means nonpeaceful. So it is unequivocally a call for violence and/or nonpeaceful protest. But this is a subjective call (Note: we have to apply the same standards).
Conclusion: Whatever won’t upset certain people (Note: we have to apply the same standards).
I think they are implying destroying a physical thing such as an oil pipeline is not actually a violent act, because no one is actually having violence committed against them.
A. If I go into a hospital a shoot a patient, everyone would agree that is violent.
B. If I turn off the patients life support, most people would also consider that a violent act.
C. If I blow up a oil pipeline or coal fire power station that causes a blackout at a hospital, greentards would consider that an act of justice.
Violence is a general comment which can be applied universally and not only towards humans. We talk about a “violent” explosion. True the statement is tautological but surely there are no non-violent explosions. His usage of language is violent and is easily construed to be an explicit direction to act. Purposely limiting the supply of life giving fuel during Winter is almost certainly a death sentence for many, especially the old. Remember that 20 times more people die from the cold than from heat.
There is no possible way one can apply the rules of English to construe Trump’s speech as anything but peaceful, helpful and encouraged by the Constitution. There is no sub-text or hidden meanings. There are no grounds for impeachment. In fact there wasn’t even any due process. President Trump’s legal and constitutional rights were violated by the US congress.
There is going to be a LOT more of that happening, too.
To lots of people.. anyone that won’t bow down and grovel to them.
Doesn’t anyone in authority see the pattern? It’s as obvious as anything can be. You have a president who isn’t following the swamp’s rules, an election campaign that produces one candidate who is hated so thoroughly she drops out. Then there’s a demented, three time loser and known plagiarizer, liar and probably criminal who wins the nomination over 20+ better candidates, then appoints the female candidate who was forced to drop out. Now they’re president and vice president. Hell, it sounds like a cheap Hollywood screenplay.
I may be an ignorant Canadian with a ludicrous “woke” buffoon for a prime minister, but dear gawd, this is too bloody obvious. The man can barely read and certainly hasn’t the intellect to write legislation … and we’re supposed to believe he wrote and issued 17 executive orders on day one. Who’s pulling his strings, China, Russia, big tech … who? It’s a bad rewrite of The Manchurian Candidate trying to turn 1984 into reality.
Please excuse the rant, but I’m very, very angry.
“Who’s pulling his strings, China, Russia, big tech … who? It’s a bad rewrite of The Manchurian Candidate trying to turn 1984 into reality.”
I think it is Obama who is pulling Biden’s strings. I think we have the third term of the Obama administration in progress.
Obama never had much respect for the United States, for various reasons. I think that is why he had no compunctions about violating the U.S. Constitution and using the power of the Federal Government to attack and undermine his political opposition (Trump). And it looks to me like the attack is still ongoing.
You know, the Chicoms voted Xi “president for life” and the Russians keep extending Putin’s terms. I wonder if something like that will happen here. I bet Obama would love for a Democrat-controlled Congress to vote him “President for Life”.
Not possible? We didn’t think social media would successfully ban the President of the United States, either, until just recently. We didn’t think we would see two sham impeachments in Trump’s first term, but we did.
The Democrats are drunk with power and are swiftly heading for a “1984” outcome.
Now is the time to fight back against this tyranny by demanding our free speech not be infringed by anyone.
I see where Fox News is starting to label themselves the “Free Speech Channel”. I’m glad to see it. It will focus attention on the leftwing propagandists who want to stifle free speech.
Thanks for the insights. I thought I was losing my marbles thinking those things. I guess sometimes ‘conspiracy theories’ aren’t so theoretical. I agree about Obama, but who’s pulling his strings. He wasn’t installed as president on his own merits, nor did he earn the funds to buy a $15 million waterfront estate. There’s some really “rotten fish in Denmark”.
“I agree about Obama, but who’s pulling his strings.”
That I don’t know, but I don’t think any radical leftwing billionaire would disagree with about anything Obama wanted to do, so they may not have to pull his strings to get what they want, all they need to do is put him in a position to do his thing. Which, imo, is to destroy the good history of the United States and turn it into an evil racist nation, which is the way he sees it.
The Democrats in Congress are abusing their political power for partisan political gain, plain and simple.
… and a substantial bit of financial gain, too; I’ll warrant.
Anyone who pays attention to the slide of a democratic country into a socialist state knows more violence is coming. Most people are too young to remember the violent terrorists of the late 60’s and into the 70’s.
I expect no action at all from the big media companies except maybe to “support and explain” why all this is necessary. They certainly won’t ban ideologies they support.
The hypocrisy…it burns.
I have to wonder how so many supposedly intelligent, often well educated people managed to become so self deluded. It has been completely obvious to me for more than 20 years that the small amount of warming on our planet has been both beneficial and indistinguishable from natural variation. I have not seen any convincing science or arguments that supports even a small amount of anthropogenic warming. I’ve seen nothing but good coming from the increased CO2 and for the most part; far more benefits from fossil fuels than detriments.
fantastic idea, I’m gonna do something exactly similar…
Thus, I’m gonna…
Take myself to (somewhere near the top of) A Prominent Place in the centre of Modern Metropolis
Shout loudly about something contemporary, e.g. How tasty Meal Worms are
In a (haha) orderly manner remove all my clothes and throw them off the top of said place, along with $100 notes and do/say something outrageous so as to gather as much attention, to myself, as I can
And that will gain me my 15 minutes of fame. What’s not to like?
(The $100 bit will only last that many milliseconds – don’t blink case you miss it)
(A multiple guess questionnaire is coming up next, brace yourself and ‘Prepare The Supercomputer‘ for some full-speed-ahead & state-of-the-art unprecedented kilonova massive massive data adjusting)
You ready? Yes?
Computer, you ready? Beeep.
Mmm, we’ll take that as affirmative
OK, lets do it.
Thereafter, people will..
a) Regard me as a Visionary Leader and hang on my every word and Twitt
b) Gather up my $100s and blow them on The Latest Style Widget for their Tesla ##
c) Call for my arrest and incarceration in The Local Loony Bin
d) Regard me as ‘A Bit Sad’ and thereafter totally ignore me
## You can buy ‘fake or actual bird droppings’?
Fake would be classier and more exclusive/exotic methinks. We are talking Tesla here yanno
Has Malm been fired from his university yet?
Of course not. That only happens if you disagree with the Greens
He is a Marxist prick. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Andreas+Malm%22&hl=en&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjasc6v1rvuAhXoVRUIHRq3CXAQ_AUIDigA&biw=1536&bih=753&dpr=1.25
This is proof – if proof were needed – that no matter how draconian actions governments take, it will never be enough. Entire countries have embarked on total decarbonisation at a breathtaking speed – and the US under Biden is on board too. Thus, we are looking at banning new cars by 2030 (UK, unless electric which will be beyond the reach of the majority of car owners), banning fossil fuels for heating in new homes by only 2023 and entirely a decade later. None of this seems to matter to these fanatics. According to people like them, the leaders have “deaf ears”. It’s as if they live in a parallel universe. Shutting off oil by sabotage would not lead to a more rapid decarbonisation. It would lead to the authorities repairing the damage and a lot of pissed off people.
Just to be clear new ICE may be banned from 2030.
Ordinary people who can’t afford new cars won’t be affected, we will just need to keep fixing our old ICE cars – a bit like Cuba
And we will get our gas from Venezuela?
“It’s as if they live in a parallel universe.”
They *do* live in a parallel universe. A universe created for them by the Leftwing Media. A false reality.
Groupthink and the pressure for social conformity have led many astray. “Social conformity” is anything the Leftwing Media says it is.
This is just more of Leftists’ saying, “Do as we say, we’ll do what we want.”
Under 1st Amendment free speech rights, and SCOTUS’ definition of incitement to violence in the Brandenburg v. Ohio decision, “How To Blow Up a Pipeline” is allowable speech in the US,
Unfortunately, Leftists do not afford the same free-speech standards for conservatives, as evidenced in the insane and unconstitutional Trump impeachment Kabuki Theater currently being staged..
Facebook has often censored my posts as “Fact Check:FALSE” for posting links to peer-reviewed papers which contradict CAGW dogma.
Facebook is a private company, that has been granted special indemnification protection from being sued for content containing: slander, liable, incitement, insurrection, porn, indecency, etc. (Section 230 of Decency Act) because they’re supposed to be just a “content provider”, however, when they edit content, they’re acting as editors and publishers who have no Section 230 indemnification rights…
Our free speech rights are under assault by Leftists and I don’t want the Legislative branch to decide what constitutes free speech.
it’ll be interesting to see how this mess works out.
I’m not very optimistic.
I think there is going to be some pushback to the Leftwing madness. The full scope of the Leftwing insanity is just now coming into focus, and a lot of people are upset and are speaking out against it.
“So it is already too late according to him 14 years ago. He might ask himself how many times it will be “too late” and he still has his good life in Capitalistic Sweden.”
The guy is wrong in his past predictions so what does he do? Why, he makes more predictions for the future. That’s what you call “tunnel vision”. He can’t see anything but the CAGW, that he is sure is coming.
There’s a lot of mental illness involved in alarmist climate science.
Why don’t the energy companies implement the NYT and Tatiana’s wishes and cut off supplies to NYC or even NYState?
But Greens are in a glass house—i.e., also vulnerable. Bombings might incentivize counter-bombings of wind turbines, etc. Or, better, incentivize demos with dummies illustrating how the other side might escalate things.
THat’s what I’m thinking… first the oil pipelines get bombed, then some windmills and solar farms in retribution. Pretty soon we’re living in the middle ages.
Whether or not the wind and solar farms get bombed, destroying the oil infrastructure will send us back to the middle ages.
17 substations is all it would take.
Unfortunately I disagree.
I think you have to let it get worse before it gets better.
I sure most of the 75 million people who voted Trump think that most of the 75 million people who voted Biden are normal people.
I am not wishing for violence but The radical left/ greens must be allowed to do something so bad it hurts many of the Biden voters.
The left campaign is founded on blaming others for the misery of the masses. They must be exposed as actually being the ones causing the misery.
The problem is that as long as they control the media and social networks, nobody will know that it is the left that is causing their misery.
They will be told that it is Trump/capitalists hold outs who are causing all their problems, and the only solution is to turn over even more power to the socialists.
By the time the average person figures out who’s doing the damage, it will be too late to fight back.
Among the laws the Democrats are eager to get passed in the current congress are a lot of gun control laws.
“The left campaign is founded on blaming others for the misery of the masses. They must be exposed as actually being the ones causing the misery.”
I absolutely agree.
The public is already on to the Leftwing Media. In a recent poll, 80 percent of respondents said the Leftwing Media are the main cause of the divisions in the United States.
So the situation is not completly lost.
They must be exposed as actually being the ones causing the misery.
CA has been single-party rule for quite some time, and they’ve managed to do a pretty good job deflecting blame.
Your post could be construed as incitement too.
There’s no to retaliate.
If the greens were to start destroying pipelines etc, the loss of fossil fuels would bring the affected states to appreciate the benefits of cheap energy especially in a cold winter or hot summer.
I think you meant to write “no need to retaliate”. I fully agree. If the uber green proposals being pushed by Biden’s advisors even start to get implemented, the American public will quickly realize that this can not end well.
yes, well spotted – “no need to retaliate”
Well most of the people in that state seem to be insane or totally disconnected from reality anyway. I mean listen to the Governor they elected!
A real quick search using the words “History of New York Hurricanes” Yielded many hits, including this one: https://www.timetoast.com/timelines/historic-hurricanes-in-new-york-over-100-years
It is pathetic that the Governor of NY doesn’t have a clue of his own states history or blatantly lies about it. What is even more pathetic are the people that believe him!
well if it joins hillary and sparkles markles dud books as remaindered for a dollar or so it might burn well….
the ONLY books Ive ever destroyed are any of attenboroughs and any other pro warmist crud I see at ex library sales or s-hand shops
I buy to remove them from the gullible who might buy n believe any of it.
i see it as my contribution to a return to sanity;-)
President Xiden blew up the Keystone XL pipeline on his first day in office, putting 10,000 out of work. Then he took a nap.
And you can bet the author uses fossil fuels every day every day….
Just as the elite in Russia and China live in luxury while the masses live in poverty, I have no doubt that Malm convinces himself that because of his sacrifices for the greater good, he’s entitled to the luxuries he enjoys.
The simplest thing to do, since Malm detests the use of carbon-based fuels (and other modern conveniences), is shut off his heat and electricity. If his heat is provided by electrica power, shut that off. Period.
Then listen to his howling. After all, no one is forcing him (or anyone else, for that matter) to use carbon-based resources of any kind, right? So, logically, removing him the list of people who do use those resources solves that dysphoric problem.
With the overnight temperature in my town expected to be -25 C tonight, which is not even an unusually cold temperature for this time of year, no natural gas means no home heating. I invite Malm to spend the next week or two in a tent in my back yard with clothing and bedding that is not made from fossil fuels.
Nor manufactured using fossil fueled machinery. Purely natural! And don’t forget the tent must also be completely natural. No food processed or water purified using fossil fuels either.
From the article: “The science on climate change has been clear for a very long time now.”
Incorrect. The author is assuming something not in evidence.
That is, unless she meant, as the Brits would say, “It’s clearly complete bollocks.”
When they say “the science” like that, we know where they are coming from. 🙂
From the article: “In this lyrical manifesto, noted climate scholar (and saboteur of SUV tires and coal mines) Andreas Malm makes an impassioned call for the climate movement to escalate its tactics in the face of ecological collapse. We need, he argues, to force fossil fuel extraction to stop—with our actions, with our bodies, and by defusing and destroying its tools.
How about if you and your fellow alarmist travellers give up your personal use of fossil fuels first, to set a good example for all the rest of us? That way you don’t have to blow up anything.
The author slashed SUV tires? I guess that shows what type of person he is. He might get in trouble doing that around this neck of the woods.
From the article: “The author of this savage call to arms must know there is no chance of convincing ordinary people to give up the comforts of modern civilisation, so he advocates depriving people of said comforts by violence and unlawful destruction of property.”
This is the typical radical Democrat/Leftist mindset. If you don’t go along with their radical ideas, then they feel free to try to force their radical ideas on you. For your own good, of course.
These people should be required to live fossil fuel products free for a month to get an idea of what they are really asking for. Doubt that any could even make it a week.
Two 5-star reviews on Amazon praising the suggestion of violence.
Another excellent book project timing, while the FBI is off chasing ghosts and rabbits.
Sorry readers, sometimes your must suffer to improve your knowledge.????
I love the Marxist surplus value term, with no consideration for the input of the person who organises all this activity. Because organising a business is so easy, anyone can do it right? So its remarkable that so few people try.
Like the peaceful idea as proposed by ANTIFA/BLM “ideas” (RIOTS) the past 11 months. Let them be the first to do without and see how they survive.
Can’t help but wonder how a book promoting “soft” violence to blow up social media infrastructure would be reviewed by the NYT.