https://blue.feedland.org/?river=http://data.feedland.org/blue/feeds/NateBlakely.xml Tue, 28 Nov 2023 18:23:43 GMT feedland v0.5.59 https://cyber.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html Tue, 28 Nov 2023 18:23:42 GMT NateBlakely Tue, November 28, 2023 1:23 PM EST <p>From Žižek (2022) on climate action &amp; protest movements, and Malm&#39;s How to Blow up a Pipeline:</p> <p>&quot;from the movement against slavery, to the suffragettes, to the movement for Indian independence, to the Civil Rights Movement and the ANC in South Africa, the use of direct action involving property damage was an important part of the tactical arsenal. Malm refers here to the notion of a ‘radical flank effect’ elaborated by Herbert H. Haines: a radical wing of a movement pushes the authorities to negotiate with and meet the demands of a more moderate wing...As data abundantly show, non-violent calls for lower emissions are largely ignored, the climate change movement should consider targeted property destruction and sabotage (CO2 emitting devices that cause &quot;luxury emissions&quot;- such as luxury yachts and private planes, fossil fuel infrastructure...).The more conventional non-violent methods of protests will not do the necessary job, and the desperate calls for action are more or less just the cover for business as usual.”</p> <p>What should we make of this? Are we missing a radical wing in our green political movement?</p> Tue, 28 Nov 2023 18:23:43 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=208249 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=208249 From Žižek (2022) on climate action & protest movements, and Malm's How to Blow up a Pipeline: "from the movement against slavery, to the suffragettes, to the movement for Indian independence, to the Civil Rights Movement and the ANC in South Africa, the use of direct action involving property damage was an important part of the tactical arsenal. Malm refers here to the notion of a ‘radical flank effect’ elaborated by Herbert H. Haines: a radical wing of a movement pushes the authorities to negotiate with and meet the demands of a more moderate wing...As data abundantly show, non-violent calls for lower emissions are largely ignored, the climate change movement should consider targeted property destruction and sabotage (CO2 emitting devices that cause "luxury emissions"- such as luxury yachts and private planes, fossil fuel infrastructure...).The more conventional non-violent methods of protests will not do the necessary job, and the desperate calls for action are more or less just the cover for business as usual.” What should we make of this? Are we missing a radical wing in our green political movement?