Is tree-spiking a legitimate revolutionary act?

[Aspiring Humanist]

If a tree spike meant to protect a tree injures a proletariat logger, is the act of tree-spiking still revolutionary? Or is the logger counter-revolutionary for choosing to be a logger?

[Kuppo Shakur]

Or is the logger counter-revolutionary for choosing to be a logger?
You got issues mang.

[Aspiring Humanist]

Yeah yeah I realize that he doesn't have the choice but you know what I mean
This forum has some problems with nitpicking.

[Psy]

The problem is the grievances of the environmentalists are not the grievances of loggers and making loggers job more dangerous just alienates the environmentalists. I mean if loggers went on strike for better working conditions how many environmentalists would support them, so why should loggers support environmentalists after environmentalists try to kill them?

[scarletghoul]

Unless the tree in question is a super magical proletarian tree which gives the international working class revolutionary wisdom (like the talking tree in pocahontas, but with the face of lenin or something, i dunno) then no, "tree-spiking" is not a revolutionary act.

[ar734]

If a tree spike meant to protect a tree injures a proletariat logger, is the act of tree-spiking still revolutionary? Or is the logger counter-revolutionary for choosing to be a logger?

No, it is absolutely not revolutionary. It is attempted murder. There are many ways to stop logging. Do you think that Marx would have approved of planting explosives in coal mines to save the environment but which would kill the children working there? It took years of struggle to make child labor illegal and to, among other things, make coal mining safer for miners. We need to stop logging and coal mining. But killing workers is murder. The logging and coal mining companies do that, not socialists.

[Princess Luna]

NO there are plenty of ways to sabotaging logging operations that don't put the lives of workers in danger

[Fopeos]

There is nothing revolutionary about injuring fellow workers. People go into logging for the same reasons they go into mining- those jobs usually offer the best wages in the communities where they are based. They aren't blood thirsty tree haters, they're just trying to pay their bills.
Wood is one of our most renewable resources. We'll continue to cut down trees and use lumber in our socialist future, we'll just do it in a rational and responsible way.

[jake williams]

We need to stop logging
No we don't. As already mentioned, trees are a renewable resource.

[Ocean Seal]

For what's its worth aside from being counter-revolutionary, it doesn't seem to help much. If they're not getting what they need from trees because they're being sabotaged, the capitalist class is likely to petition for expanded permits to cut down even more trees. Just some food for thought.

[Comrade Crow]

No we don't. As already mentioned, trees are a renewable resource.

Trees don't grow on trees.

It takes awhile for trees to mature, so, despite it being a renewable resource, I could see the concern of enviromentalists. As for tree-spiking, no, I don't see it as a revolutionary act to potentially harm or kill fellow workers.

[scarletghoul]

Trees don't grow on trees.
lol yes they do

[piet11111]

Cutting down trees is the best part of my job shame i rarely get to do it.

also blood thirsty tree hater is so going to be my new user title