I just saw an Instagram video about these warehouse arsons, and I’ve gotta say—it was some of the most brain-dead commentary I’ve seen on this whole situation.
The person straight-up said we shouldn’t condemn the arsons.
What?
No, seriously—what?
Of course we should condemn them.
Because here’s the reality that keeps getting ignored: those warehouses—like ones operated by Amazon and others—are not empty shells. They are workplaces. There are people inside them. Workers. Staff. Security. Drivers. Human beings.
So when someone says “don’t condemn arson,” what they’re really doing—whether they realize it or not—is downplaying the risk to those people.
And that’s not just a bad take. That’s dangerous.
Because language matters. When you normalize or excuse something like arson, you’re not just offering an opinion—you’re shaping how other people perceive it. You’re lowering the barrier. You’re making it easier for someone else to think, “Maybe this isn’t such a big deal.”
That’s how escalation happens.
And honestly, what makes it even worse is the context. You’ve got influencers sitting comfortably in their bedrooms, talking into high-end cameras, building followings, getting engagement—while casually telling people not to condemn actions that could literally get workers hurt or killed.
Come on.
You can’t claim to be “for the people” while dismissing something that puts people in danger.
That’s not solidarity. That’s performance.
That’s someone treating a serious, real-world issue like it’s just content—something to farm reactions from, something to boost their visibility, something to make them look edgy or radical.
But there’s nothing radical about ignoring risk to human life.
There’s nothing pro-worker about excusing actions that could take away people’s jobs, threaten their safety, or destabilize their communities.
If anything, that kind of take reveals a disconnect.
Because it’s easy to romanticize chaos when you’re not the one who has to deal with the consequences. It’s easy to say “don’t condemn it” when you’re not the one clocking in at that warehouse. When you’re not the one who could be inside if something goes wrong. When your livelihood isn’t on the line.
That’s the difference.
Real advocacy is grounded in reality. It considers outcomes. It prioritizes people.
This kind of commentary? It does the opposite.
It strips away the human element and replaces it with vibes, aesthetics, and outrage-driven takes.
And yeah, I’ll say it plainly:
This is fake pro-worker shit.
Because if your stance results in workers being put at risk, then you are not standing with workers—no matter how much you say you are.
You don’t get to claim that label while encouraging—or even just refusing to condemn—something that could harm the very people you’re supposedly defending.
That’s not just inconsistent.
It’s irresponsible.
And it needs to be called out.