VERSTANDEN! ÜBERRASCHUNG!
I know all my german from Worms Armageddon
They're espousing horse shoe theory for those that can't read German. Also, not a word in response to the colonialism charge, because Germans don't think they're complicit in colonialism.
Because to them the workings of the "free market" don't constitute colonialism. They have issued the second most foreign debt in absolute terms, but they also think the German republic does not bear responsibility for the colonial actions of a government, which does not have direct continuity with the one that exists now.
I've had earnest debates with Germans that say it's not their responsibility to return cultural artifacts to Benin, because they didn't take them in the first place.
Ok Hanz, if I steal your grandpa's favorite lederhosen and sell them to my buddy for a deutschmark, does he get to keep them? No Fritz, he's gonna have to give them back regardless, and if he knew I stole them, which, by the way, your... frankly awful ancestors totally knew, then he's committed a crime himself. Dieter, isn't this sposed to be a country of laws?
Nah, they're being way more reactionary.
I mean the horseshoes theory is there allright, common opinion is however that is that Greenpeace should be classified as a terrorist organization (because no one there knows what terrorism means) and also that by forcing VW to remake the 1000 keys they actually contributed far more to the enviromental problem than VW ever has.
Nah, they’re being way more reactionary.
Germans? I do not believe this.
Is this the same factory where they demolished hundreds and hundreds of old trees to build?
:party-sicko: :party-sicko: :party-sicko: :party-sicko: :party-sicko: :party-sicko: :party-sicko:
Say it with me:
G-L-A, D-I-O
Spooks are knocking at my door!
G-L-A, D-I-O
No more false flag episodes!
Not everyone is as chickenshit as you. Not every act of resistance is an Op.
Doesn't matter, same consequences. Germany is cracking down on the left and this will be another figleaf. A few cables got damaged, great. You can stroke yourself to small scale eco-terrorism, it leads nowhere, in this case as in others.
Way back with the Bolshevik party they knew individualist terrorism like this is in practical terms worthless, bomb a tsar a new one is born, bomb a factory they build it back up with insurance money and all the while the working class feels less unity with you because they are not radicalized yet and this just scares those who dont just ignore it.
Propaganda of the deed has never worked, I get that people may think "Oh this is cool though" but violence for its own sake or for the coolness of it is not revolutionary. If it doesnt serve a material effect, which in practical terms small scale terrorist actions like these don't, then it must serve as a message, but who receives the message?
The Bourgeoise already know that their actions will cause shit like this, they are not gonna grow particularly more afraid and cautious as a class because of this because there has always been small scale terrorism against them to one degree or another.
The message the proletariat receives is not "We are on your side, we are fighting for you", because the proletariat at large does not yet fight for this or have a conscious desire to fight for this, whatever long piece of theory you associate with your deed will be tainted by the fact that you are doing( to the eyes of the proletariat) random acts of violence for what seems to be your own individual desires. You cant go back afterwards and try to describe to the people why you are doing these acts of violence, the people first have to wish to do all this themselves and be ready to rise up, otherwise you're just some lunatics who set fire to a factory cause you were mad at Elon Musk.
Tbh I would in fact classify individualist terrorism like this or like the RAF or any such group as an ultimately reactionary response to failure or delays in the building and sustaining of a movement, I am personally experienced with the extreme frustrations of how weak the left is in the west and the equally extreme desire to just "do something, make a statement", but indulging in revolutionary daydreams of eating the bourgeoise and tearing down their system has never to my knowledge helped aid the left in any meaningful way, and has several times hurt it in the backlash.
This is pretty much the only tactic I can say I instantly will denounce from any leftist movement, others I will try to look at the viewpoint of the people performing the tactics and strategies but just violence for the message of violence is a tactic that has been dead for over a century and is to a large extent self indulgent.
Edit: Also wanna note that the closest the Bolsheviks came to doing similar acts to the propaganda of the deed people, which is robbing banks and cash transports for funding, they tried their hardest to keep a secret cause it would not only cause friction in their party itself, but waving around guns and grenades was very obviously understood to not be the look they wanted to represent them.
The strain of neo-luddism that ran through their statement also rubbed me the wrong way. I understand that green capitalism is still capitalism, but do they expect people in the imperial core to just willingly give up the benefits of industrialization and post-industrial technologies?
You have to make a case for why things like public transport and degrowth are actually materially good for people (or at least offer a palatable alternative), not just say "hey guys let's go back to living in wattle-and-daub hamlets because it's The Right Thing To Do."
Some of the language definitely read as really weird, in particular the line about "the unbroken belief and adherence of all previous market-dominated forms of society to technological progress", I typically try to avoid commenting on eco-ideology groups cause I usually subconsciously lump them all together as anprims but I am generally sceptical of any leftist ideology that decides to specifically put eco front and center in their name, it just has a tendency to signal weird and impractical ideas about technological progress at best, and at worst end up leading into social darwinism for chronically ill people and others who fundamentally rely on modern technology.
Word. While I do think anprims have a handful of good critiques of the "civilized" imperial core, the thing that always goes unsaid in all of their theory is the fact that scores of people, mostly disabled and elderly, would have to die pretty horrible deaths for their vision of society to come true.
To continue my Devil’s advocacy, your further comments lead me to question whether you are not being arrogant in thinking that you have THE exact perfect analysis (aka party line) that will allow you to know exactly when and how to act that will work perfectly to bring about successful communism. No matter how and when you act/don’t act, there will be critics who say “now is not the right time” or “that was not the right action/tactic/strategy to engage in.” Those critiques apply to organizing unions, strikes, protests, sabotage, assassination, or any other way people try to change things.
To continue your line of thinking about keeping things that are unpopular quiet (like the Bolsheviks robbing banks), every thing communists do is pretty unpopular in the countries benefiting the most from global capitalism, from unions to protests to radical education etc. All of those things are not what I would call universally popular.
And In fact communist groups have a terrible history of labeling every single thing that is not their plan as reactionary. And the Bolsheviks were able to claim that they were right about those they labeled reactionary because their strategy worked- for a while. Yet now that there system has fallen, they are susceptible to the same epithet.
None of us know what, if anything, will work (although we may know what won’t work) until it works. The bolsheviks did not know that what they did would work, and perhaps had they done some things differently, the USSR would not have weakened to the point of being able to be destroyed by the 1990s.
I get those arguments but I can see those exact same arguments being made against any revolutionary activity by reformists and social democrats.
And can even be used by revolutionaries looking for an excuse not to act against any action, from trying to organize a union to deciding to go on strike. “Oh the people don’t support this yet” etc etc.
How does any action that doesn’t lead to immediate and permanent total revolutionary communist liberation of the Entire world proletariat escape the critique you made?
—————
I generally agree with you but I am playing Devil’s advocate a bit in order to better understand my own inclination to agree with you.
I'm not like super educated on this but I'd say the big difference between this and something like organizing a strike or other similar actions is that with those actions you are approaching the working class directly and trying to educate and radicalize on a personal level, bringing in the participation of other workers rather than performing actions entirely separate from the working class, publishing a manifesto and relying on them disregarding gut feelings about violence/destruction to approach your manifesto on a good faith level and get radicalized from that.
Its definitely not a straight divide between self indulgent radicalism and using radical actions in the workplace to organize workers though, most cases need to be looked at a little closer and analysed. Tbh this case in particular I think suffers from not being destructive enough, if we are gonna look at the effects of it. Damaging a few power cables and publishing a manifesto will probably radiate more an aesthetic of young misguided rebels than a serious political action.
I agree, though i think you are assuming a lot by thinking the purpose of this action was to radicalize anyone through the manifesto. In fact i highly doubt that is the intention.
The strict Marxist idea would be that material conditions determine people’s revolutionary or reactionary nature, not radical education, nor some manifesto about an act of sabotage.
I don’t think radical education really works much at all to be honest. Material and social conditions radicalize people who have no Marxist education, and many bougie PMC losers can quote Marx to you all day long but would never actually try to change anything or engage in a revolution of the opportunity presented itself because if the class privilege they don’t want to lose.
The people who did this action were likely radicalized due to their lived conditions, and their manifesto is likely an attempt to reach out to others who have been similarly radicalized and tell them they are not alone. For many people, the time to act is now because they cannot stand to live in this world anymore without resisting capitalism. Regardless of whether you think you have the correct strategy of how, when, and what to do to create a successful communist revolution, until that plan starts to gain momentum and become a concrete hope for the hopeless, they will continue to act because the alternative to acting for them is likely suicide/heroin/alcoholism/etc.
there are millions of the oppressed who have always died waiting, and some who refuse to wait. Those people existed in pre-soviet Russia as well, and their un-strategic actions did not ultimately doom the revolution, and since the actions happened and the revolution happened, you could infer that they contributed somehow to that society taking that path.
I can’t fault those who act for acting even if it does not seem like it will be strategically helpful, because there is no powerful communist movement to give anyone any hope anyway. So you/we can think that we have all the perfect strategy and plan to get from here to communism, but until we can show people it can be implemented, i can’t blame people for not trusting that we know the correct path from here to communism. And to think that we do and condemn others who don’t listen to us is highly arrogant i think.
Capitalists never need an excuse to crack down on the left. Blaming resistance for repression only serves to excuse the actions of the oppressor.
Obviously, I’m not gonna lose any sleep over a Tesla factory being burnt down, but isn’t this just adventurism? It’ll accomplish literally nothing but turn the popular opinion (even further) against communists and give the bourgeois state yet another excuse to crack down on leftist activity
the kantian view of morality is that an action is correct if everyone could do it and it would lead to a better world
so, stealing is wrong because if everyone stole shit would suck, but picking up trash is right because if everyone did it there would be no litter
if we extend that logic to lighting elon musk's factories on fire,
Kinda feels like a loophole if you can just specify an exact scenario where it never affects the wrong people, idk but if I was making a system of morality it seems weird that people could escape arson being bad by saying "I only mean arson against bad people", I'd probably have to revise that if I were Kant and this is how his morality works.
Edit: Didnt Kant have like an example where you have a duty to never lie for moral reasons even if the specific situation would outweigh the negativity of lying with the positive effect of the lie?
isn’t this just adventurism?
Yes.
Cool? Sure. Revolutionary? No.
The effect is the same but no, this isnt any more of an op than any other kind of "propaganda of the deed" action.
What goods though? The factory, even if burnt to the ground, is definitely insured and would be built up again or some equivalent facility would be built, the trees torn down to make room wont return because of this, the bourgeoise at large are unaffected because individual actions like these are factored in and wont disturb them. Most of the proletariat will just see arsonists hiding behind a political cause and the people likely to be recruited by this are at risk of just wanting to do more individualist terrorism like this which will just create an organization that is only known for random acts of destruction. I genuinely do not see the productive aspect of this aside from "I personally think this is cool because the left isnt strong enough for large actions, so we can have some self indulgence as a treat".
I think you hit the nail on the head here. We celebrate this (and it is admittedly kind of cool) because we crave the catharsis of seeing people actually doing stuff, but by itself this is not a revolutionary action.
To their credit, it seems like the group itself acknowledged this in their statement, and is mostly hoping that the fire will serve as agitprop. But like you said, I don't think most of the local proles will see it that way.
I've been trying (and failing) to find the full text of their avowal letter. Anybody got the text?
From the two sentences that get quoted in papers, they sound pretty trainpilled
That's just the abridged version though. Seems to be deleted from indymedia and I can't find any archival mirror that caught it.Found it, wasn't deleted
Yeah hilarious but not surprising that they wouldn’t link to it in the article.
Currently machine translating their avowal: (done. sorry to anyone reading while I edited <3)
Arson attack on power supply of Tesla factory in Berlin-Brandenburg.
Against the progress of destruction - let's put our sabotageClimate strike for a different world!
"(...) we behold and hear a world where social life is sick, fragmented into millions of people, strangers to each other, spasmodically striving for individual survival, but united under the oppression of a system that is willing to do anything to quench its thirst for profit, even though it is clear that this path runs counter to the existence of planet Earth. (...) The aberration of the system and its stupid defence of 'progress' and 'modernity' is shattered by a criminal reality: femicides. The murder of women has neither a colour nor a nationality, it is worldwide. (...) And it seems as if 'civilisation' is saying to us original peoples: "the proof of your underdevelopment lies in the low rate of femicides". Make your mega-projects, your trains, your thermoelectric plants, your mines, your dams, your shopping centres, your appliance shops - television channel included - and finally learn to consume. Be like us. To pay the debt of this progressive aid, your lands, your waters, your cultures and your dignity are not enough. You must pay the rest with the lives of women." (...) We see and hear nature wounded to death, which in its agony warns humanity that the worst is yet to come. Each 'natural catastrophe' heralds the next and makes us carelessly forget that it is caused by the action of a human system. (...) Yes, the roads must be reclaimed, but to do battle. Because as we said earlier, life, the struggle for life is not an individual matter, but a collective one. It is now becoming apparent that it is not a matter of nationalities either, but encompasses the whole world."From a greeting by Zapatista indigenous peoples in Latin America to us in the Global North
We successfully cut the power supply to the construction site of the Tesla Gigafactory in Grünheide by fire on the night of 25-26 May 2021. To do this, we set fire to the power supply via six high-voltage cables (110,000 volts) within a construction fence corridor 250 metres from the Tesla factory in the immediate vicinity of the A10 motorway at the level of the Freienbrink exit. Since an interruption of the cable harnesses, which were temporarily laid above ground exclusively for the factory, cannot be carried out in its effect isolated from the regional power grid, we could not completely rule out power outages in the surrounding area either. It was our intention to hit the Tesla construction site, to make work at the site difficult for one day, to interrupt the construction of the manufacturing facilities.
Since the local population will not be able to stop the construction so easily due to the imbalance of power (capital, politics and authorities versus the interests of residents, climate protectors and ecologists), we hereby contribute our sabotage in solidarity. Should our action be successful, the richest man in the world will financially compensate for the interruption of the construction work - but the political damage to him is certain.Why are we sabotaging Tesla?
A car factory is being built in Grünheide near Berlin. Tesla is building a "gigafactory" there. As grandiose as the name and the project are, so equally grandiose is the actor: Elon Musk. His patriarchal fantasies of omnipotence are supposed to save the world? We could laugh about this if it wasn't so serious: the production of supposedly "clean, climate-friendly" battery-powered vehicles is just a new contribution to the further destruction of the planet.
Our action shows the vulnerability of this project, it undermines the supposed "omnipotence" with which Musk is haunting Brandenburg. There, he imposes building codes like a feudal lord and ignores, for example, all objections against the threatening water shortage in the region. He wants to strategically position his factory close to the Polish labourers on the one hand, and on the other hand close to Berlin, which may soon be governed by the Green Party, and its local customers. Politicians, the municipality and individual press organs, who are grovelling before Musk because of new jobs and the hoped-for economic regional benefits, will strongly condemn our action and defame us as terrorists. This is a distortion of facts - our attack destroys property, sabotages work processes and destroys money, but not livelihoods. We have ruled out the danger to human life with our action. But we understand the action as a flaming statement against the lie of green capitalism. We oppose the further destruction of our livelihoods locally and globally and the exploitation of people through expansive technological madness. Our attack is a call to fight the " Green Deal". In support of social struggles worldwide. For ecological reasons. For anti-colonial reasons. For feminist reasons. For reasons of class struggle. Ultimately for revolutionary and anti-supremacist reasons.Propagandist lies as a sales strategy while soothing the conscience.
Ecological illusion here, colonial reality elsewhere.The Green Deal is based on theft, exploitation and pillaging of natural resources
The talk of green capitalism, the New Green Deal, is nothing but propaganda. The Green Deal means establishing climate protection as the green continuation of neoliberalism. It too makes the rich richer at the expense of others. Individual electric mobility does not stop the ecological devastation, it continues and expands it. We are witnessing a technological offensive that further perpetuates the economic colonialism of the imperial age in the form of the unabated mass exploitation of millions for luxury in the global North. In addition to material goods, it is now the luxury of clean air. Yet we know that this is an illusion: we all live on the same planet, breathe the same air.
The switch from a car with a combustion engine to a smart electric car will not have a single positive effect globally. The air will be better where electric cars are driven, but non-renewable raw materials will be consumed in huge quantities to produce this renewable energy and to build the cars. Copper is the main raw material needed to build the new power lines, charging stations and electric motors. Much of it comes from South America. People there work hard for little money to get the metal out of the ground. Landscapes are destroyed. Large amounts of electricity are used to operate the mines and process the copper. Almost everywhere, the power plants are powered by coal, which is transported from China across the Pacific by ships. The ships are powered by dirty marine diesel. In Chile, for example, people are getting sick in large numbers from the exhaust fumes of the coal-fired power plants, ecosystems are degrading. What is ecological about coal mining in China or Australia? How ecological is the shipping of copper out into the clean world of the electric car do-gooders? How small can the " ecological fingerprint" of a dirty heavy industry producing clean cars be?
A lot of lithium is needed to build car batteries. In the next 9 years, the amount of lithium used is expected to increase by a factor of 20 to 30. This means a corresponding increase in energy consumption for extraction, transport and processing. In the extraction areas, displacement and land theft from the indigenous population are commonplace, for example in Argentina. There, the land is sacrificed to the ecological conscience of those who want to continue to live as expansively as before; there, livelihoods are destroyed so that financially well-padded parents can continue to take their children to kindergarten or public school in their SUVs with a clean eco-conscience.
No battery currently installed in electric cars works without cobalt either. But cobalt is rare. To illustrate: If Audi were to build one of its production models, the A4, strictly as an electric car, the car factory managers would have to buy half the world market's supply of cobalt. VW has calculated that it would need 130,000 tonnes of cobalt for e-car production. World production is currently 123,000 tonnes. That doesn't include Tesla or any other car company. The battery of a Tesla Roadster alone consists of 6831 cells. There is a reason that Tesla is working on the cobalt-free battery: Not enough raw materials are available to build the planned quantities of e-cars. But that also means that the available resources will be scraped out of the earth without regard for people and ecosystems. We can be sure of that.
Rare metals and earths are also needed, consumed, mined, processed, shipped, etc. for what is called "sustainable" energy production. This applies to the wind turbine as well as the tidal power plant. All efficient electric motors need these metals and earths. They come mainly from China and Africa and are mined and processed there under the same appalling conditions as in South America.
The consumption of resources, the social conditions of exploitation and the ecological damage are enormous. In addition, most rechargeable batteries are ready for the scrap heap after a few years. Just as scrappy as the ideological idea of progress, which is linked to expansion and the exploitation of surplus value - and not to social conditions and solidarity for all people.The patriarch and his nightmare dream
Elon Musk, owner and patriarch of Tesla, is for us only a single representative of a caste of men who are united in their aggressive capitalist-technological will to modernise and their delusion of world domination. As egomaniacs, they see themselves as the centre of a world they believe to own. They are characterised by extreme irresponsibility and anti-social activity.
But Elon Musk is also the richest person in the world and the founder of many companies, the prototype of the economic patriarch. In his companies, everything is strictly prescribed. Anyone who doesn't work efficiently is fired. Musk believes in limitless techno-capitalist progress - he also believes that we are very likely living in a simulation. Someone like that could not care less about the number of corpses he walks over. It is not for nothing that he is planning the colonisation of Mars. That's only logical if life on Earth will become hell for most people if things continue as they are. And he would know.
It is well known that his company SpaceX is the world's leading commercial provider of rocket flights. His SpaceX Dragon spacecraft supplies the International Space Station (ISS), and another spacecraft called Crew-Dragon also takes people there. Musk is currently working with "success" to make space flight the mainstream tourist experience for the rich. He is putting the money he makes from the supposedly so clean electric cars into expanding his rocket fleet. Thus, every purchase of an electric car from Tesla is nothing more than a contribution to the further ecological destruction of the biosphere - there is probably no need to say anything about the ecological balance of rockets. As a symbol of his potency, years ago he had a Tesla convertible, complete with a doll in a spaceman's outfit at the wheel, ejaculated into space on one of his rockets. Since then, the thing has been orbiting the earth devoid of meaning.
The fairy tale of the ecologically and politically correct big investor is a neoliberal lie spread by those who want to believe it. Tesla mainly builds top-of-the-range models and SUVs; now also a passenger car that can go over 300 km/h. The Saudi sovereign wealth fund, under the control of the inhumane crown prince, holds Tesla shares worth up to $3 billion. This dictator is building and earning money in Brandenburg.
Musk is a patriarchal visionary as well. He wants to network the human brain with machines and founded the company Neuralink for this purpose in 2016. Elon Musk's earthly dream is automated driving based on artificial intelligence. Many functions in Tesla cars are already controlled by app. The new models continuously film the interior of the car and also the external environment. This data is sent directly to the Tesla cloud. Anyone who buys a Tesla makes themselves part of a dystopian surveillance apparatus. In 2020, Tesla received the Big Brother Award, which is given for particularly intrusive technical control. The reason given was that data is permanently analysed and stored. It was said that Tesla cars are "surveillance systems on four wheels".
This resource-wasting surveillance mobility is supposed to secure the future of individual transport and integrate it into the social context of exploitation and surveillance. This has also been the case in the car industry up to today: assembly line work was enforced by Ford on the automobile so that it could be produced more cost-efficiently. But above all, to isolate the workers and to undermine their union organisation through the fragmentation of work steps. One only has to read what Mr. Ford wrote about this. We take just as seriously how Musk wants to shape the world. He unabashedly dreams the patriarchal dream of domination over earth and space. Enough experiences have been made with such men in the last 5000 years. Let's make sure that time has run out for him and his ilk.Grünheide
Grünheide is to become Elon Musk's second large factory to produce electric cars. He calls it the "Giga-factory" for a reason. The dimensions are monstrous, like those of the other giga-factories. The first one builds batteries in Nevada (USA). In order for it to be built, laws were changed at Musk's request and 1.3 billion in taxes were waived. Giga-factory 2 builds photovoltaic systems. Giga-factory 3 in Shanghai (China) builds cars. Number 4 in Grünheide will be the same. Starting in the summer of 2021, around 12,000 workers will build 500,000 cars per year there. Later on, 40,000 people will build 2 million cars per year. That would be about 5500 cars per day.
Property prices in the area are already rising. The gentrification known from Berlin will affect the area around Erkner with an expected 35,000 newcomers. This will be at the expense of financially weak households and will lead to strong displacement of the population from the region. The uncertainty and anger is correspondingly great. Tesla is also a disaster on the ground. Besides the deforestation for the construction of the factory and the massive increase in local and supra-regional traffic, the high water consumption will be the ecologically most serious consequence for the region. The board of the Strausberg-Erkner water board even warned of drinking water shortages. For the initial operation, Tesla forecast the consumption of 3.3 million m³ of water per year. Only after heavy criticism did Tesla change its estimate to 1.4 million m³ for the beginning. Later, it will be 2.15 million m³ of drinking water. In the long term, there is already talk of a demand for more than 15 million m³ of water per year. According to ecologists, this will have a negative impact on the water supply of the region and the nearby landscape and nature conservation areas. From 2022, with the estimated water consumption of the factory, there will no longer be sufficient water reserves for the development of the region. In addition, the pumping of large amounts of water exacerbates the problem of declining groundwater levels, which is a consequence of the climate disaster. None of this concerns the head of the Potsdam State Environmental Agency. Hearings of Tesla opponents leave him cold and he approves one environmental mess after the next. Now even untapped drinking water reservoirs are to be exploited.
In Brandenburg's politics, Daimler's investment of 50 million euros for the production of E-Sprinters in Ludwigsfelde celebrates the state as a "mobility hub".
And Tesla brazenly advertises itself as the "most advanced factory in the world". But Tesla has so far used technology in its factories (e.g. in the paint shop) that is both older and more backwards in terms of environmental protection than that used by conventional carmakers in Europe. Water consumption and emissions are significantly higher. It's like building a chemical plant in a drinking water protection area.
Tesla's payment record is poor, despite preferential treatment by local licensing authorities. They can just afford it. Tesla did not pay the water bill for the construction site. Only when the water was turned off in October 2020 did the money start flowing. They are used to laws being changed and structures being adapted for them. The Brandenburg University of Applied Sciences is setting up a degree course in "electromobility" so that the necessary young engineers can be bred, the nearby motorway is being renovated especially for factory operations and the L38 is being extended.
This is the continued normality of the destructive industrialisation of the 19th century, which is now riding the wave of green capitalism into the 21st century. In which, without regard for people and natural resources, vast landscapes, almost the entire continent, almost the entire world, is subjugated to industrialised, en-smart-ened production.Consumption and individual transport - or: another world
For what is motorised individual transport, which has been elevated to a fetish, used? To get people to their jobs in a totally flexible and totally monitored way, to have them consume at all times, to be able to transport people as quickly as possible - so that they work more and consume more.
Is an electric SUV an improvement that will make anything better?
In order to be able to live a life that does not destroy the vital foundations of the earth, we do not need electromobility. What is needed is less mobility overall, less individual transport, and above all less consumption, the benefits of which and the associated promises of happiness are hammered into us every day. It needs free public transport. It needs progress in social coexistence, a future without exploitation of our labour power. Only the perpetuation of colonial relations of exploitation makes it possible to produce electric motors that make people here believe that the cars are ecologically clean.
And asked about the social aspects: Do the wealthy Tesla buyers with an eco-conscience want the mines and quarries for their "eco" car next to their "farmers' garden"? Do they want to see the power plants that supply them with electricity from their condo roof terrace? Do they want to see the huts of the downtrodden workers next to the eco-kindergarten where they send their children?
No. These people and their working conditions should remain outside the EU. They don't want to see the misery. Because they probably simply don't care that others have to pay the blood toll for their "privileges". There is no lack of knowledge regarding the global interconnections. One can decide which side one is on. One can buy an SUV or set fire to it. We recommend the latter - without getting caught, of course.
There is enough experience with the promises of capitalist-technological progress. 200 years ago, there were hardly any forests left in Central Europe because they were consumed for mining, industry, warships, heating and building. The forest clearings were replaced by the industrial extraction of coal. We all know what the subsequent burning of coal has done. We know that the digitisation of the world has led, and will continue to lead, above all to new forms of domination. Tesla will always know who else is in the car, what is being said and where the journey is going. The data does not belong to us, it is sold and forms another foundation for the possibilities of totalitarian surveillance.Climate catastrophe and the meaning of revolutionary acts of sabotage
Among other things, the unbroken belief and adherence of all previous market-dominated forms of society to technical progress has undoubtedly had the effect that the climate catastrophe can no longer be prevented. Sabotage cannot replace major social struggles, but it can support them or set courageous accents in order to force thinking spaces and perspectives.
Why then do we still engage in sabotage actions if we believe that climate destruction can no longer be stopped? Because we want to keep the magnitude of the coming catastrophes as low as possible. Because protest and resistance against the destruction of the climate through profit-oriented exploitation of the earth's resources can have a revolutionary outlook on the future as its objective. Because with the destruction of expansive market-radical economic policies there is the chance to establish a fundamentally solidary and social way of life that shows us ways to a different society. When the devastation of ecosystems is far advanced, a new society can better deal with the consequences of these legacies when the relations of domination are fundamentally destroyed. It is only in resistance to the existing destructive relations that the possibilities for change become apparent.
The rich men who drive these processes of ecological devastation are also only results of social processes, and thus to a certain extent interchangeable, but it is not by chance that it is precisely these men who represent a politics of modernisation through destruction. Let's destroy everything that is called Tesla!
People all over the world are fighting against their destructive belief in progress. For us, many of these struggles belong together. They are united by resistance to an aggressive push for modernisation. When indigenous women in Argentina shout to stop conquering their bodies and their lands, we also support these struggles with this action.
The struggles in Hambacher Forst, Dannenröder Wald and other forests of resistance were and are points of hope for us, as are the radical sabotage actions of others in the coal mines who no longer fall for the lies of the proclamators of progress.
By the way, the insanity of individual transport and electromobility can easily be attacked further: In September, the International Motor Show (IAA) will take place in Munich. We hope that there will be enough resistance locally, decentrally and also subversively on the net to make this a fiasco.
Volcano Group: Against the Progress of Destruction(end of statement)
