The new indie film “How to Blow Up a Pipeline,” out in theaters Friday, can be seen as a kind of heist movie, complete with tension, twists and a precarious conspiracy to get an illicit job done. But instead of being driven by a desire for cash, the characters are motivated by a desire for social change.
Swedish scholar Adreas Malm wrote the book to persuade climate activists to consider embracing property destruction and sabotage as an activist tactic.
That theory of change is outlined in a 2021 book that inspired the movie and shares its name. Swedish scholar Adreas Malm wrote the book to persuade climate activists to consider embracing property destruction and sabotage as an activist tactic. Malm makes the case by elucidating how traditional peaceful protest has grown enormously in recent years yet failed to achieve results that have any hope of warding off catastrophic climate change. Sabotaging the fossil fuel industry, Malm argues, will make it less profitable and will make mainstream climate advocacy look moderate by comparison.
The movie dramatizes Malm’s argument by following eight people who come together to try to blow up an oil pipeline. On the surface, the tension is about whether they’ll be thwarted or even kill themselves in the process. But underneath, tension also lies in the audience’s receptivity to the characters’ plan: Is this a justifiable course of action?
Naturally, the book and the movie have sparked spirited discussion and criticism across the political spectrum — Fox News held a panel slamming the movie as violent propaganda. But it has also sparked internal debate on the left. When I discussed the movie with a group of progressive friends in a bar after a screening, people were split over what the movie was trying to say and whether it was defensible.
I called up Daniel Goldhaber, the film’s director and one of its three co-writers, to discuss how the movie came into being, what it means and what he thinks of Fox’s…
Read the full article here