As an anarchist, I disagree with the linked video’s notion that small groups shouldn’t act autonomously. That is garbage. But the rest of what it says about security culture and safety and the fact that the movie was pretty clearly made to encourage activists to compromise their security and/or hurt themselves is right-on and worth spreading to comrades everywhere.
It’s again worth stressing that this has basically nothing to do with the book of the same title as the movie, and the video makes that clear.
I think Marxism Today totally missed the point of the movie. How to Blow Up a Pipeline is engaging fun you can share with your liberal friends, that also happens to challenge their notions of acceptable praxis against climate change.
It’s a heist film in the Ocean’s Eleven tradition, using all the classic tropes like nonlinear narrative, assembling the crew, third act twist - it’s unrealistic because it is meant to be entertaining rather than informative. I watched the interview MT clipped from, and they left out the context that they consulted with the counter-terrorism expert so that they wouldn’t get into legal trouble for demonstrating actual bomb-making techniques. They collaborated with a government official because wanted their film to have the widest possible release, not to help or hinder people making actual bombs.
I agree that Marxist groups have a hypocritical relationship with ‘adventurism’ - they only use that term if the cadre’s results aren’t immediately celebrated by the proletariat. If they succeed and it polls well, they call them the people’s vanguard and pretend their plans were stamped at party headquarters. Stalin was a literal heist man, robbing banks for the Bolsheviks. I’m sure the guy who punched Richard Spencer consulted a committee first.
I love the reviews by army-funded Michael Bay film fan types - they all grudgingly admit it’s an excellent film, and without any irony say their only demerit is that it’s ‘propaganda’ - that’s high praise. If you haven’t seen it already, assemble your crew.
Fair that the video producer probably took the movie a little too seriously. People calling themselves “Marxists” tend to do shit like that. LOL. And hilariously good takes about Stalin and their notion of adventurism.
Still, I think their point about it being presented as some kind of alternative to the book (i.e. THIS is the REAL how-to guide) and not coming with good enough disclaimers is still probably a reasonable take. And sorry, but I find “collaborated with the national-security state just to make sure we don’t get in legal trouble” to be extremely weak. One could collaborate with anyone familiar with handling explosives to help you figure out how to change and/or omit important enough details about bomb making (not to mention people like defense attorneys), and changed stuff that would NOT put people at direct risk if they followed the example. Not to mention the shit about collaborating with the state that was also included. These are examples of extremely dangerous misinformation that just shouldn’t be included ever, and aren’t necessary just to produce a bit of fun and engaging agitprop.
Saw it recently and couldn’t have put the points better myself. High Five Five ;)
