Climate activism 'unfortunately' far off from blowing up thousand pipelines per year, Andreas Malm tells New York Times
Jimmy Failla: This is the latest scare tactic to get people to care about climate change
The Big Weekend Show co-hosts discuss an AI company predicting champagne could go extinct by 2050 due to climate change.
"Accidents" and deaths may be inevitable in extreme climate activism that could merit blowing up thousands of pipelines, author and radical climate activist Andreas Malm said in a startling new interview.
The "How to Blow Up a Pipeline" writer and activist gave an interview to The New York Times on his upcoming follow-up book, "Overshoot: How the World Surrendered to Climate Breakdown." At the top of the exchange, Malm was questioned on how "it’s hard to think that deaths don’t become inevitable if there is more sabotage" like blowing up pipelines.
"Sure, if you have a thousand pipeline explosions per year, if it takes on that extreme scale. But we are some distance from that, unfortunately," Malm answered.
When pressed on that response, Malm argued, "Well, I want sabotage to happen on a much larger scale than it does now. I can’t guarantee that it won’t come with accidents. But what do I know? I haven’t personally blown up a pipeline, and I can’t foretell the future."
MEDIA PRAISE ECO-TERRORIST FILM 'HOW TO BLOW UP A PIPELINE': 'RATIONAL IF DESPERATE PRAGMATISM'
Andreas Malm attends the "How To Blow Up A Pipeline" Premiere during the 2022 Toronto International Film Festival at TIFF Bell Lightbox on September 10, 2022 in Toronto, Ontario. (Photo by Jeremy Chan/Getty Images)
Malm admitted that he has recently taken part in actions that have been "illegal" and "militant." The interviewer, David Marchese, then pushed back against his condoning of political violence in a democracy.
"We live in representative democracies where certain liberties are respected. We vote for the policies and the people we want to represent us. And if we don’t get the things we want, it doesn’t give us license to then say, ‘We’re now engaging in destructive behavior.’ Right? Either we’re against political violence or not. We can’t say we’re for it when it’s something we care about and against it when it’s something we think is wrong," the interviewer said.
"Of course we can. Why not?" Malm pressed.
"That is moral hypocrisy," the interviewer responded.
"I disagree," Malm said.
NEW YORKER HOSTS CLIMATE CHANGE EXTREMIST WHO ADVOCATES FOR 'INTELLIGENT SABOTAGE'
The New York Times interviewed Malm ahead of the release of his new book "Overshoot: How the World Surrendered to Climate Breakdown." (Photo by Alain Pitton/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
He went on to suggest that violence could be used as a proper response when overthrowing a violent system such as slavery.
"The idea that if you object to your enemy’s use of a method, you therefore also have to reject your own use of this method would lead to absurd conclusions. The far right is very good at running electoral campaigns. Should we thereby conclude that we shouldn’t run electoral campaigns?" Malm said.
He also revealed that he has shown his four-year-old child the film adaptation of his book.
"There were a couple of scenes that stayed with them, particularly when people were wounded. They found this fascinating. They know that their father is a little politically crazy, if I can put it that way," Malm said.
The Times wrote in a note on the interview that Malm believes specifically in property violence, not in violence against people. "Just to be explicit about this: Malm does not endorse or advocate any political violence that targets people. His aim is violence against property."
At one point, Malm said it would be "disastrous" if someone in the movement killed another person with a gun to advance the cause.
"Political history is replete with movements that have conducted sabotage without taking the next step," he said. "But the risk is there. One driver of that risk is that the climate crisis itself is exacerbating all the time. It’s hard-wired to get worse. So people might well get more desperate… We might smash things, which people are doing here and there, but no one is seriously considering that you should get a gun and shoot people… The point that’s important to make is that the reason that people contemplate escalation is that there are no risk-free options left."
Andreas Malm suggested future climate protests may result in "accidents" and possibly deaths. (Photo by Jeremy Chan/Getty Images/Photo by Krisztian Elek/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)
CLIMATE PROTESTERS DISRUPT RAMASWAMY TOWN HALL IN IOWA
Malm, who wrote a book titled "How to Blow Up A Pipeline" in 2021, admitted that he does not live a "zero-carbon lifestyle."
"No one who lives in a capitalist society can do so," he said.
Malm added the climate movement would be in a very difficult position should former President Trump win the 2024 election.
"What should the climate movement do then?" he asked of the climate movement's reaction to a Trump victory. "Should it accept this as the outcome of a democratic election and protest in the mildest of forms? Or should it radicalize and consider something like property destruction? I admit that this is a difficult question, but I imagine that a measured response to it would need to take into account how democracy works in a country like the United States and whether allowing fossil-fuel companies to wreck the planet because they profit from it can count as a form of democracy and should therefore be respected."
The New York Times previously published a guest essay by Malm in 2022 where he supported the disruptive tactics of the Just Stop Oil organization and promoted property destruction.
Lindsay Kornick is an associate editor for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to
