Blowing up fossil fuel infrastructure is a moronic idea that'll create an environmental disaster worse than the infrastructure existing. Instead, sabotage it so that it stops flowing.
I would say ethics doesn't really make sense unless there is some sort of rulebook calling for this that I'm not aware of. Because I'd say moral-but-not-ethical is doing what's right even if it's against the rules/expectations that apply to you (particularly in a professional capacity, and even then there are different contexts like company policy vs wider ethics).
Yeah, I assume there's gotta be a better way. Like clogging it beyond repair (shut off+completely solidified), siphoning operations (assuming a spill isn't caused)... And in either case, converting it into something less bad and/or storing the carbon in a stable manner.
(Although even rebuilding from what I see may be at least $1M-$2M per mile, they sure have the money but it's not insignificant either)
Same thoughts, my mind even came up with a good plan.
Drones equipped with remote activated termite pots.
It melts through steel easily and fossil fuels burn. You can do this from a distance and it uses cheap available materials.
I don't have the guts to do it though...
So it remains an Idea.
The terrorists in that book are ethical and fair. In reality the types that would actually engage in that behavior would consider collateral damage as part of the “de growth”.
The terrorists in the book are ethical and fair, because B is Mother. Without his black-ops hand guiding those kinds of things, they allude it would be a lot worse than drone swarms and pebble missiles. Transforming blind rageful terrorism into relatively guided eco-sabotage and brinksmanship that pushes through carboncoins and wealth caps.
I also noted this time around, that Franks talk with the Kali takes place before Mary and B chat about blackbooks stuff. So B was already doing the needful, for a long while.
I would, but this bad air quality thanks to our fossil fuel industry has given me pretty bad asthma and other respetory problems resulting in low energy.
So your solution to fossil fuels causing pollution. Is to cause an ecological disaster? "Let's blow up the pipeline full of oil that is bad for everything it touches. Surely the resulting oil spill won't be bad for everything covered".
You can deconstruct a pipeline while keeping environmental contamination to a minimum. There is a fairly well-known book out there that tells you exactly how as well.
You're also not understanding what is at stake here. You could do better to weigh the scale of what is coming down the pipe at us vs localized oil spills.
It's a moral obligation to engage in civil disobedience and direct action. Especially if you live in a country like mine where protesting now carries the risk of a $$,$$$ fine.
I understand perfectly what's at stake. How ever I also understand that the average USA resident is... how do I put this..... fucking stupid? Like sure there is a book on how to do it right. But some idiot is just going make a sodium bomb because that's easy. And that's the issue I feel like no one else sees. Tha average American is stupid and situationally unaware of anything. It's a moral obligation IF you can do it without additional harm. To be frank I doubt my fellow Americans to be able to do it properly. Civil disobedience is a great thing but there is a significant gap between Civil disobedience and domestic ecoterrorism
To be completely transparent I am writing this off a bottle of wine. So either this is complete lunacy, or my true thoughts, And I can't see which.
See, by posting this, I'm on the watchlist too. So the watchlist is watching the watchmen watching the watchlist watching the watchmen ad infinitum. If you're asking "watch the fuck?", to explain without using the word watch, I've engaged an infinite mobius surveillance loop.
Small companies measure their hard drive capacity in Gigabytes/Terrabytes. Large companies measure their hard drive capacities in Petabytes/Heptabytes. The NSA measures their hard drive capacity in acreage.
I generally imagine myself standing on trial with the argument of self defense. While it's what I would argue in a hypothetical criminal trial, the outcome is enough of a deterrent