Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Epicalyx wrote

I struggle to read your posts, but just some thoughts which will hopefully add:

There are many ways to do environmental sabotage. Those againse Shell during the anti-apartheid struggle in the Fire at Midnight zine stickied in f/Attack is one interesting example. The SHAC model has shown a lot of interesting potential.

Decentralised attack means knowing the ones you are in affinity with around the world are there and ready, growing and preparing for whatever can be done together, even if we never meet.


lettuceLeafer OP wrote

I mean I'm not arguing that an attack can't destroy a company but I'm saying it's unlikely to effect the industry. The actavist in the case of the SHAC model the actavist day they are trying to help animals when in reality they do nothing provable to help animals. The industry of animal testing hasn't been harmed in any material way.

Sure one company is gone but the competitors just used it to make more money by increasing the animals they test on. I mean look at the major firms that would be in competition. As the SHAC model was taking place they still continue to make even more profits.

I feel like the SHAC model is just the logic of the US justice system made anarchist. Instead of fundementwlky attacking the cause of the thing u dislike it punishes a small percentage of offenders. And as expected punishing offenders doesn't curb the demand or supply in any meaningful way so the Anarcho judges just increase the punishment which still does nothing.

All this time and effort and tearing a whole entire company and there is no evidence that the other animal testing companies reduced animal suffering at all.

I feel like this argument is trying to convince to me that the SHAC model reduces animal suffering bc it shut down a company when my argument is that shutting down companies doesn't prevent others from quickly filling the demand. Which is exactly what happened. I can't help but feel like the SHAC model proves me exactly right. Even what sabotores consider a massive win objectively speaking was a massive failure in helping animals.