I feel this is a representation of 2 sides of one coin or rather that thees two have similar objective but go about trying to reach it in their own very different ways, one is violent and the other is peaceful all tough they might not necessarily agree with one or the other’s way of reaching the end goal, they agree on the goal with is saving earth and the environment.
I support ecovandalism but not on property that belongs to average humans trying to live their life. Yeah I own an ancient car with a combustion engine, but please don’t destroy it, because I don’t have money for a more efficient one and other that it, I try to do everything as ecologically as possible.
I use public transport when possible (even in my village in the middle of nowhere), I separate waste, save energy by not using proprietary software that’s inefficient, everything I buy is second-hand, just a few things off the top of my head. I had two windows and the windshield destroyed over the span of a few months, with all-caps text sprayed on the doors saying “I destroy the planet”… Please don’t do this, don’t be a scumbag. There are plenty of us doing their best in our financial situation :)
‘Diversity of tactics’ is really important to achieve a goal. If all you do is sign petitions, no one will take you seriously. And if all you do is violent demonstrations, you’re gonna get treated as a hooligan with nothing to say.
You need dialogue to raise awareness, and protests to raise the pressure on politicians.
I think it’s pretty rude of you not to introduce yourself to the FBI agent assigned to you as you typed that out.
Gallows humor aside, this is incredibly important. Y’all need to read “How Nonviolence Protects the State” as well as “This NonViolence Shit Will Get You Killed.”
