Or they could articulate how unstrategized bombs would help anything.
But are those actually unstrategized? Often times individuals and groups doing these kind of actions actually coordinate, have some kind of debate & reflection process and use in depth knowledge to actually hit pretty relevant targets.
Also I think its pretty obvious how sabotage is helping: the direct consequences are very easy to grasps and measure, like how long a certain thing didnt work or how much the cost of repair was. So until there is an actual mass movement that is able to accomplish similar feats via strikes etc., those sabotage actions are in a class of their own when it comes to achieving direct results.
Or why scary dangerous bombs more likely to blow you up are better than a gun made from like 10$ in filament for anything that would matter.
Probably because the use case is different? With a gun its hard to actually destroy things, they are made to harm humans.
But I agree, bombs are very dangerous for yourself and people die trying to build them / put them to use.
There are a million ways. Im not saying bombs are always or never useful but more often the’yre completely stupid useless performative nonsense. Not a considered performance.
Im saying bombs tend to appeal to the most useless inchoate half assed assholes who dont break meaningful stuff or send a genuinely useful message.
Its not like there arent other better more thorough ways to break most things that need breaking.
The American electric vehicle maker Tesla was forced to halt production at its European factory near Berlin due to deliberate arson, according to both the company and local authorities.
Happens quite a lot in europe. More examples are collected here on the switchoff blog. Of course not every action documented there is on the same level.
This would be better if there had been an Anarchist terror attack of relevance in the last 90 years.
Or they cpuld articulate how unstrategized bombs would help anything.
Or why scary dangerous bombs more likely to blow you up are better than a gun made from like 10$ in filament for anything that would matter.
But are those actually unstrategized? Often times individuals and groups doing these kind of actions actually coordinate, have some kind of debate & reflection process and use in depth knowledge to actually hit pretty relevant targets.
Also I think its pretty obvious how sabotage is helping: the direct consequences are very easy to grasps and measure, like how long a certain thing didnt work or how much the cost of repair was. So until there is an actual mass movement that is able to accomplish similar feats via strikes etc., those sabotage actions are in a class of their own when it comes to achieving direct results.
Probably because the use case is different? With a gun its hard to actually destroy things, they are made to harm humans.
But I agree, bombs are very dangerous for yourself and people die trying to build them / put them to use.
There are a million ways. Im not saying bombs are always or never useful but more often the’yre completely stupid useless performative nonsense. Not a considered performance.
Im saying bombs tend to appeal to the most useless inchoate half assed assholes who dont break meaningful stuff or send a genuinely useful message.
Its not like there arent other better more thorough ways to break most things that need breaking.
nothing like the present!
You mean something like this?
https://www.brusselstimes.com/952378/teslas-german-factory-halts-production-after-sabotage-arson-attack
Happens quite a lot in europe. More examples are collected here on the switchoff blog. Of course not every action documented there is on the same level.