Introduction

For as long as humans have lived in this world, wars have existed. Wars between tribes, wars between species, wars between countries have all been fought for power and conquest or as a defense against the violating party. Wars have always been a lesson in common loss and the need for compromise, because no party gains something in a war without putting the lives of a massive portion of its population into jeopardy unless the conflict is heavily one-sided, in which case, it cannot be categorized as a war but more accurately as an attack on a helpless population.

With the boom in industrialization, private weapons manufacturers became a huge player in wars and became top suppliers for their countries, and other countries with whom they could strike a deal and sell weapons to. Even Though weapon sales are much more controlled and restricted as compared to consumer products, weapon deals still happen for profits and contribute greatly to a nation's economy. The world is in a perpetual race of arms. Some countries rely on their own weapons manufacturers, while others rely on their ally countries or private actors from those countries to provide them with their desired weapons at some cost that either benefits the providing country monetarily or benefits their allyship in kind.

Colt's Manufacturing Company is largely believed to be the first private mass producer of weaponry, contracted by the U.S. government.

A list of the world's largest weapons manufacturing companies:
Chart: The World's Largest Arms-Producing Companies | Statista

Why profitable wars should not exist in a civilized society

Generally, and especially under capitalism, if profits are to be made, then people and companies will work towards them. Even if we wish that these people and companies had greater ideals, such a world will not exist. When weapons and the death of humans becomes profitable, rest assured that private parties will race to innovate the most efficient way to kill. Profits incentivize more funding, more research, more weapons and more massacres. It is very hard for me to give a convincing argument against having profitable WMDs because it is as obvious to me as needing water for life.

Who suffers and who gains

Throughout the long history of the world, it has been clearly evident that war brings suffering to the innocent civilians and forcefully drafted soldiers that are caught in the crossfire. A handful few in the country's "leadership" make the decision to go ahead with annihilation, and the rest of the people pay the price. Meanwhile, the weapons manufacturers get rich off of dying humans and mass trauma.

Aiming for a Utopia isn't a bad thing

Although there are people who are immediately repulsed by the word 'Utopia', it is not a bad thing to aim for. A Utopia is an ideal world full of peace and happiness where all of humanities biggest problems have been solved.

The problem that most haters of the idea have with it is that a utopia is an impossible ideal to achieve. But we always strive for ideals in our lives. We go to the gym to reach closer to what we think is an ideal body, we study to reach closer to what we think is an ideal amount of knowledge to have on a topic, we work to earn the money we ideally want and in the bigger picture, we want to end up with an ideal life. Why is striving for a utopia then seen as such a bad thing? Well, there are some people who feel like a peaceful utopia full of love and kindness is gay, and their homophobic brains cannot come to accept anything that they irrationally label as gay and there's no arguing with them sadly.

Solutions

We need to pay more attention to stuff that we have accepted as the norm. Diseases and weapons of mass destruction should not be profitable. The mere existence of such profitable ventures necessitates the persistence of human tragedy. It is not normal for a civilization to research how efficient it is to kill members of its civilization and make people billionaires in the process.

Conclusion