U/Goldstein_Goldberg
Thats a Nazi.
Cryptofascists love their duper’s delight style dog whistles, such as mentioning "shekles/schmeckles’ or the like.
The actual currency of the zionist entity is the shekel
Yeah, and the “OK” hand sign in other contexts does mean “OK.” Doesn’t stop cryptofascists from contexually applying it outside of those uses with vaguely plausible deniability.
Yeah obviously
I admittedly read your comment the way I’d often hear it from Reddit. "Um, so drinking a gallon of milk while flashing an OK sign is now fascist dogwhistling to you? Are the fascists in the room with us right now? Do you need help? Who hurt you?"
it just surprised me when I found out about it the first time, “WAIT THAT’S ACTUALLY THEIR CURRENCY?”
I look forward to reading in the news a story about two white supremacist divers who get eaten by sharks. The investigators find the divers’ waterproof cameras and watch the footage:
The divers are trapped in a submerged shipwreck after sharks appear. They look out for the sharks leaving but visibility is low. In the old captain’s cabin, there is too little room to turn around. The one taps the other’s arm and signals, ‘Look over my shoulder, are the sharks gone?’ The other signals, ‘White Power, fuck yeah!’ so the first unbars the door, swims out and gets et.*
*Et is the simple past tense of eat. Remember this the next time you’re playing Scrabble.
I blame the fash for ruining what I believe to be an objectively funny name for a currency.
Atleast we have Vietnamese dongs covered
this has to be parody… pretty sure even Slava Ukraini-heads know clusterbombs are a bad look
I’m also curious what “massed Russian infantry attacks” daily videos he had seen.
This does come off a bit too hard to be legitimate I think, especially the “responsible investing” bit. I don’t think an actual warmonger would phrase it like that.
On the other hand, I have absolutely seen people who think clusterbombs are a totally fine weapon to use. I am related to one. His argument was that they’d end the war faster and save more lives. Which…I don’t think I need to say that I disagree with that.
This is someone who sees how much money is going to be made after the war when the west loots and plunders Ukraine and wants in on it. The “Help them win” stuff is just them trying to cover their own guilty conscience.
capitalist brainrot has convinced most normal people to go against the basic, child-level understanding of war being a bad thing. instead being against war is somehow juvenile and naïve. so it’s just normal to wonder how you can fund the results of your labor into killing machines. it’s just okay. it’s fine, i guess. nothing needs to improve here
No one is immune to propaganda, and many people have consumed a lifetime of propaganda that tells them that those that call for war and those that perpetrate war are typically the Adults In The Room who Make The Hard Decisions and Get Shit Done.
That’s it I’m posting my articles to that subreddit next.
Do it! Now!
I dove into this a couple years ago trying to find some not-aggregious ETFs to invest in. There were very very very few mixed-industry ETFs that excluded both fossil fuels and weapons, which is a really low bar to clear.
Also that’s what banks say but then their “green” ETFs still include weapons and fossil fuels.
There’s this ESG standard (Environment, Social, corporate Governance) that’s supposed to be an easy indicator for investors but it’s so useless it’s not even funny anymore.
It’s so bad that hardcore imperial publications like the Financial Times have railed against ESG with completely liberal arguments. Even plurality owner of the empire Blackrock has internal dissent at the highest level towards the construct.
Now even after your stomach accommodates to the sheer amount of raw evil pouring forth from this, you will find that the Murder ETF is a nonsensical product that has no market. People buy ETFs because they are supposed to be a safe long-term investment representing a large cross-section of the economy, if your goal is financial stability why would you go gamble on the outcomes of military battles?
if your goal is financial stability why would you go gamble on the outcomes of military battles?
Because WallStreetBets style failson ghouls get off to it, even with the contradiction.
you aren’t gambling on the outcomes of military battles you are gambling on the military buying more weapons
Agreed. It’s like how the investors in private prisons aren’t wagering that there’ll be more crime, there wagering that the capitalist state will imprison more people. If you ask any Marxist whether the American Empire will buy more weapons and imprison more people, the vast majority would say yes.
My comrade in christ there are bitcoin ETFs
invest responsibly
I’m going to invest in communism, just bought a Lenin revival stock
bad news Lenin is now on the moon after the stock did so well
What is ETF?
Exchange traded fund. It’s basically a lot of different stocks bundled together into one Stock that you buy. It usally covers a specific part of the global market. So you can buy an ETF that represents the entire US market (this would be similar to buying stocks in every Dow Jones company), an ETF that represents the retail market (so you get shares of Walmart, Target, TraderJoes etc.), or in this case an ETF that represents the Weapons Manufacturing market (so Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Rheinmetall etc.).
Usually they’re great investment devices as because they don’t lean too much on a single company, they just tend to have more stability and better returns overall
It’s an index fund except set up in a way so that middlemen can make more money.
Universal Basic Warcrimes
Sustainable Organic Fair Trade Vegan Cluster Munitions
At this point, I’ve seen people on all sides of the political spectrum advocate for the killing of civilians and dehumanising whoever is their enemy. Not surprised unfortunately.
where have you seen communists advocating for the killing of civilians?
It has been a few weeks, but I did see a post clearly stating that the ends do justify the means
stating that the ends justify the means isn’t advocating for the killing of civilians (even if I wouldn’t personally use that phrase); I don’t know what the post was referring to, but if it was about the war in Ukraine, my guess would be that it was acknowledging that civilian deaths (on one side or the other) are unavoidable and that the alternative – e.g. doing nothing to stop the slaughter of civilians in the Donbas and ignoring the threat of a US proxy on its border – would be worse
It has been a few weeks
Even if you’re not making shit up, if this is yet another tiresome “and therefore both/all sides are equally right and wrong,” you’re just another right wing coward trying to dodge the label.
“I just claimed that all sides are equally right and wrong, therefore my status quo advocacy seems enlightened and smart and I stand above you all somehow!”
