Scan barcode
schopenhauers_poodle's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
fast-paced
3.5
Sometimes when I read reviews here I wonder if we read the same book. Here are some of the things "How to Blow Up a Pipeline" is not:
- an instruction manual to build weapons or bombs
- Malm discovering direct action
- poorly written or unclear because he uses big words
- too long
What it is, is a polemic and call to action to move beyond the narrow set of state-sanctioned tactics used for decades if we are to stop climate change. To blow up a pipeline, the first step isn't gathering tools or building a bomb. The first step is intellectually accepting that actions that destroy property are justifiable and, historically, were crucial in effecting change. We need a diversity of tactics that includes destructive action is the point Malm attempts to make.
My riposte to the many reviews I see attacking the book for being "dense", "too academic," or "not making sense" is that you need a dictionary and to re-read the book, perhaps with the guidance of a reading group. Then re-read it again.
I find Malm to be a charming and humorous writer and speaker who has little patience for the fluff of identity politics, academic theorizing, and the like, (see his interview with Verso where he rails against object oriented ontology). He is not shy or polite and that will surely rub some people the wrong way. If you're upset over the name of the group he was a part of nearly 20 years ago, I think you've completely missed his point and the much larger issue at stake.
Now to the actual content. This is a very short book and a fast read. It's structured in three parts that seek to demolish the liberal myth of the supremacy of strictly non-violent actions, argue property destruction is a valid and successful tactic using historical examples, challenge the notion that destruction of inanimate objects is violence, and finally, argues that fatalism and despair about the future is baseless at best, actively harmful at worst.
If I can make a critique of this book, it's the lack of workers and labor movement in terms of sabotage/property destruction and historical analysis, which I think is a mistake. I suspect part of the reason for this is a choice of brevity over detail given the audience Malm seems to be writing for is a blank slate with an uncertain attention span.
So who should read this book? I would say "How to Blow Up a Pipeline" could be a good read for anyone struggling to understand why "violent" action, the destruction of a pipeline or the breaking of a window at Hind's Hall at Columbia University, is valid. For an insider view of what it's like to plan and do the type of direct action Malm discusses, then Ann Hansen's "Direct Action: Memoirs of an Urban Guerrilla" which I recently finished is probably what you're looking for.
- an instruction manual to build weapons or bombs
- Malm discovering direct action
- poorly written or unclear because he uses big words
- too long
What it is, is a polemic and call to action to move beyond the narrow set of state-sanctioned tactics used for decades if we are to stop climate change. To blow up a pipeline, the first step isn't gathering tools or building a bomb. The first step is intellectually accepting that actions that destroy property are justifiable and, historically, were crucial in effecting change. We need a diversity of tactics that includes destructive action is the point Malm attempts to make.
My riposte to the many reviews I see attacking the book for being "dense", "too academic," or "not making sense" is that you need a dictionary and to re-read the book, perhaps with the guidance of a reading group. Then re-read it again.
I find Malm to be a charming and humorous writer and speaker who has little patience for the fluff of identity politics, academic theorizing, and the like, (see his interview with Verso where he rails against object oriented ontology). He is not shy or polite and that will surely rub some people the wrong way. If you're upset over the name of the group he was a part of nearly 20 years ago, I think you've completely missed his point and the much larger issue at stake.
Now to the actual content. This is a very short book and a fast read. It's structured in three parts that seek to demolish the liberal myth of the supremacy of strictly non-violent actions, argue property destruction is a valid and successful tactic using historical examples, challenge the notion that destruction of inanimate objects is violence, and finally, argues that fatalism and despair about the future is baseless at best, actively harmful at worst.
If I can make a critique of this book, it's the lack of workers and labor movement in terms of sabotage/property destruction and historical analysis, which I think is a mistake. I suspect part of the reason for this is a choice of brevity over detail given the audience Malm seems to be writing for is a blank slate with an uncertain attention span.
So who should read this book? I would say "How to Blow Up a Pipeline" could be a good read for anyone struggling to understand why "violent" action, the destruction of a pipeline or the breaking of a window at Hind's Hall at Columbia University, is valid. For an insider view of what it's like to plan and do the type of direct action Malm discusses, then Ann Hansen's "Direct Action: Memoirs of an Urban Guerrilla" which I recently finished is probably what you're looking for.
erinjp123's review against another edition
2.0
I dont want to downplay the issue that climate change is, cause its a huge one but I did not like this book. I thought it was going to be more metaphorical things we could do with an intense name, but nah this guy really wants us to blow up bulldozers and shit and go to jail for the greater good. This book had no there there, was just him boasting about what he does with no proof that it helps anybody (and kind of hurts if hes causing people to form groups against his group) and really doesn't make sense for the most part. Nobody his fighting with him that super yachts are good for the environment, nobody who reads this book probably has one, but no, I'm not going to go mess with one.
wagnerw1's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
sad
fast-paced
4.5
dillythevilly's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
slow-paced
5.0
tokenfemale's review against another edition
This book was very dense and a slog to get through. It's disorganization of points worked against it and it was hard to get through more than a few pages at a time. It uses a lot of academic language and just had a lot of information that is harder to follow.
Breaking down the book into shorter chapters with more concise break points would have helped a ton to finish this book. The arguments, at least in the 50 pages I read weren't clear and felt like they overstayed their welcome while blending into each other and not feeling concise.
Breaking down the book into shorter chapters with more concise break points would have helped a ton to finish this book. The arguments, at least in the 50 pages I read weren't clear and felt like they overstayed their welcome while blending into each other and not feeling concise.