Andreas Malm’s book won’t actually tell you how to blow up a pipeline—and, to all the corporations and governments reading this, I assure you: I am not going to blow up a pipeline. That being said, How to Blow Up a Pipeline is certainly a provocative title that drew me in. The text is less of a how-to manual and more of a book of philosophical and political theory. Offered as a short primer, it is a defence of taking action in a world in desperate need of it.
Andreas Malm essentially makes the case that typical liberal reactions to climate catastrophes is not leading us to the kinds of change that are necessary in order to save the planet and human life as we know it and that “radical” alternatives are necessary. Demonstrations, protest signs, and letters aren’t cutting it. Running parallel to Rob Nixon’s “Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor,” Malm makes the case that corporations and governments are actively killing people through their ongoing inaction and active facilitation of environmental destruction. By allowing polluters to continue polluting, so runs Malm’s argument, it is a form of mass murder.
How To Blow Up A Pipeline makes the case that our typical climate action is ineffective. Our “demonstrations” and “protests” do nothing to shift policy. Our impassioned speeches are not moving the needle for any of the people out there causing the most pollution. There are times when environmental movements and animal liberation movements can rely on peaceful protest to gain public trust and generate conversation, winning hearts and minds, but sitting by peacefully is not putting any pressure on the pollution industry to change.
As an alternative, and at least implicitly referencing The Wretched of the Earth by Frantz Fanon, Malm encourages violence. Recognizing that violence against people is generally unpalatable for garnering support for a movement and that it would lose the moral high ground by doing so, Malm’s main tactic essentially shifts towards violence against property. He references a project in which air was let out of tires for high-polluting vehicles. It’s an inconvenience that consumers need to consider and that puts pressure to change consumption behaviours. I might make the case now that we’re seeing similar kinds of destruction against Tesla (although they’re supposedly the eco-friendly option…).
Reconstructing the argument could be done through a series of syllogisms and in the moment, it was pretty persuasive. The objection might be raised that property destruction would do more harm than good for average consumers, but the reality is that we cannot allow the status quo to persist. We need to make it inconvenient and undesirable for people to pollute.
Nor can we revert to despair. Malm challenges the hedonistic laissez-faire of some intellectuals that feel none of the direct impacts of climate change. If it is too late to make a change, it is still not acceptable either to throw our hands up in the air and shout that we might as well enjoy our final days and pollute as much as we please. Malm refers to intellectual figures like Jonathan Franzen who asks that since it’s too late, why should we deprive ourselves of the same joys other polluters get to have? Of course, Malm rejects this self-serving philosophy.
Malm suggests that every revolt has been put down by the defeatists. Yet, there is still a political function for hope: “Hope is not a door, but the sense that there might be a door somewhere. [...] Hope is an axe you break down doors with in an emergency.” People voice a common objection to controversial situations: “If only people had protested peacefully, change could have happened.” Malm shows how the objection falls flat and refers to all kinds of historical precedents where change only happens when there are strategic, active interventions. Some may protest peacefully, of course, but the real changemakers are the ones who actively dismantle the system by force.
And thus we are here. A world in need of fewer pipelines and more action. May the book serve as a kick in the pants and the light of a fuse.
Happy reading!
No comments:
Post a Comment