Oh person writing for bloomberg, this is a good thing for china. A proletarian dictatorship should not become a major arms trader. It should design and stockpile weapons primarily for its own defensive use. American arms manufacturing has to deal with a myriad of issues due to its nature as a global supply chain and global war machine.
I find it reassuring that despite having such a massive economy and export dominance in almost all industries, and despite having such large quantities of arms production, virtually all of it is for defensive purposes. Although this may just be cope.
It is not a problem to help nations trying to defend themselves from imperialists. I don’t think there is anything wrong with selling weapons to certain countries like pakisthan who need defending from India.
However, becoming a “major arms trader” is a different thing. It is problematic for many reasons.
You need to start putting money into R&D for a lot of different weapons, each suited to a different situation to satisfy the diverse needs of your diverse clientele.
The above also makes scaling up production a challenge, as you have more product lines.
Selling weapons to lots of countries creates a political problem. The public of the countries you sell to will question why they are relying on you.
It creates perverse incentives. Consider this psychotic shit for example.
Note that perverse incentives come from all arms selling, not only if it’s major.
You will now only give significant support to those countries which need it the least (rich ones), need to engage in predatory economics or outright imperialism to efficiently manufacture arms (else you’ll strip your own resources and may not have enough to defend yourself), passively (if not actively) encourage those who buy from you to engage in more war (as they will know they can acquire more weapons if needed), and create a reputation for yourself as responsible for global violence (people will notice it is your weapons being used to exterminate their loved ones, and that you did it for money).
There is never a net benefit to making death into a market.
Oh person writing for bloomberg, this is a good thing for china. A proletarian dictatorship should not become a major arms trader. It should design and stockpile weapons primarily for its own defensive use. American arms manufacturing has to deal with a myriad of issues due to its nature as a global supply chain and global war machine.
I find it reassuring that despite having such a massive economy and export dominance in almost all industries, and despite having such large quantities of arms production, virtually all of it is for defensive purposes. Although this may just be cope.
If those arms are going to countries looking to defend themselves from imperialists, why not?
It is not a problem to help nations trying to defend themselves from imperialists. I don’t think there is anything wrong with selling weapons to certain countries like pakisthan who need defending from India.
However, becoming a “major arms trader” is a different thing. It is problematic for many reasons.
Note that perverse incentives come from all arms selling, not only if it’s major.
You will now only give significant support to those countries which need it the least (rich ones), need to engage in predatory economics or outright imperialism to efficiently manufacture arms (else you’ll strip your own resources and may not have enough to defend yourself), passively (if not actively) encourage those who buy from you to engage in more war (as they will know they can acquire more weapons if needed), and create a reputation for yourself as responsible for global violence (people will notice it is your weapons being used to exterminate their loved ones, and that you did it for money).
There is never a net benefit to making death into a market.
It’s not cope. Selling weapons is a terrible idea and whitey only does it because of a terminal money addiction.