new york times advocates the destruction of property in latest op-ed about the climate crisis
« And indeed, a logically unavoidable conclusion seems to be that the climate movement hasn’t yet done enough. It must try something more.
As for the ethics of property destruction, it is not, in this case, very complicated. Fossil fuels kill people. If you disrupt the flow of such fuels and damage the machinery they impel, you prevent deaths. You stop the perpetration of harm. You may destroy an inanimate object — and no one in the climate movement is suggesting anything other than targeting dead things — so as to protect living beings. Or, put differently, if you are locked in a house on fire, you have a right to break some windows to get out. »
@Lady genuinely would not have called that
@aescling a lot of NYT guest writers are professors and a lot of professors are very tired of things
