What part of the argument is specious lol? What actual sabotage does he prescribe in the book is aimed at actual capital and not, like, some dude’s vehicle he uses to get to get to work?
You can just say you, along with some others on this site, have become emotionally attached to the book.
You're changing the subject. The accusation in the quoted text is not that Malm's prescribed actions are insufficiently militant, but that the aim is to appeal to the hearts and minds of the ownership class.
It seems like you were expecting Malm's book to be a manual for how to carry out sabotage and are disappointed that it's actually a discussion about different movements and conditions for destructive actions and why they were or weren't effective in their particular scope
What part of the argument is specious lol? What actual sabotage does he prescribe in the book is aimed at actual capital and not, like, some dude’s vehicle he uses to get to get to work?
You can just say you, along with some others on this site, have become emotionally attached to the book.
You're changing the subject. The accusation in the quoted text is not that Malm's prescribed actions are insufficiently militant, but that the aim is to appeal to the hearts and minds of the ownership class.
It seems like you were expecting Malm's book to be a manual for how to carry out sabotage and are disappointed that it's actually a discussion about different movements and conditions for destructive actions and why they were or weren't effective in their particular scope