'Divestment hits them where it hurts.' Does it? You sell, someone else buys. Example: 2 years ago I suggested to friend in Germany to buy Rheinmetall shares. The joke: 'buy local' cos they're based in our city, Duesseldorf. The sad history: in WWII British bombers missed that factory and flattened part of a street, killing my granny's brother and his wife; my mother, then 20, found their corpses among those lined up on the pavement. The opportunity: make big profit by investing at the beginning of that new armament boom re Russia/Ukraine. We didn't - clean hands, clear conscience. The result: as my friend checked, we'd have almost doubled our money. The side effect: most likely some jingoist millionaire or a cool kraken fund raked in the dividends and share price rise instead. And so the war machine stayed well oiled and profitable - but we had less money to support our good causes. - I've pondered this re divesting from Israeli spy- and killing-tech companies and those based in the illegally occupied territories. There are enough pro-Israel billionaires to finance them anyway... Only effect would be publicity: when Norway or a big university pull out it makes the news. Otherwise it's just a feel good thing - like clicking an online petition and thinking: 'that hit them where it hurts'....
Thanks so much for sharing this, Lothar, both the family history and the uncomfortable maths of divestment versus impact. It really captures how messy “hitting them where it hurts” can be when shares just change hands and the war machine keeps rolling.
Where it does seem to matter is when divestment is paired with loud, strategic attention: big institutions explaining why they’re pulling out, and using that moment to shift norms, regulation and public pressure, not just their own portfolio. That is the space this community is trying to work in: turning private ethics into collective leverage rather than just a cleaner conscience.
Would love to keep this conversation going in more depth… if you’re up for it, you’re very welcome to join the subscriber chat where a bunch of us are chewing on exactly these kinds of dilemmas and what meaningful action looks like in practice.
Congratulations, Fionn! And I am turning down my washing machine. :)
Yes! I always prefer washing cooler, just use a detergent that still works at 20C. It is also a lot better for your clothes.
'Divestment hits them where it hurts.' Does it? You sell, someone else buys. Example: 2 years ago I suggested to friend in Germany to buy Rheinmetall shares. The joke: 'buy local' cos they're based in our city, Duesseldorf. The sad history: in WWII British bombers missed that factory and flattened part of a street, killing my granny's brother and his wife; my mother, then 20, found their corpses among those lined up on the pavement. The opportunity: make big profit by investing at the beginning of that new armament boom re Russia/Ukraine. We didn't - clean hands, clear conscience. The result: as my friend checked, we'd have almost doubled our money. The side effect: most likely some jingoist millionaire or a cool kraken fund raked in the dividends and share price rise instead. And so the war machine stayed well oiled and profitable - but we had less money to support our good causes. - I've pondered this re divesting from Israeli spy- and killing-tech companies and those based in the illegally occupied territories. There are enough pro-Israel billionaires to finance them anyway... Only effect would be publicity: when Norway or a big university pull out it makes the news. Otherwise it's just a feel good thing - like clicking an online petition and thinking: 'that hit them where it hurts'....
Thanks so much for sharing this, Lothar, both the family history and the uncomfortable maths of divestment versus impact. It really captures how messy “hitting them where it hurts” can be when shares just change hands and the war machine keeps rolling.
Where it does seem to matter is when divestment is paired with loud, strategic attention: big institutions explaining why they’re pulling out, and using that moment to shift norms, regulation and public pressure, not just their own portfolio. That is the space this community is trying to work in: turning private ethics into collective leverage rather than just a cleaner conscience.
Would love to keep this conversation going in more depth… if you’re up for it, you’re very welcome to join the subscriber chat where a bunch of us are chewing on exactly these kinds of dilemmas and what meaningful action looks like in practice.