“I refuse to work in defense. I’d rather my work wasn’t used to blow anyone up” is a line I’ve used in multiple job interviews. I like to think the hell I end up going to at least has chilly weather and/or really good AC.
I volunteer in my free time so that more Russian occupiers will be eliminated. I’m very proud of myself.
The number of people defending Lockheed Martin here is staggering, but I guess I shouldn’t be surprised given the apparent makeup of Lemmy’s population
I’ll make this very, very simple: working for a well-known defense contractor who brags about making bombs is bad. Working for Lockheed Martin is unethical.
Working for a large corporation (Microsoft) that funds or supports wars (Israel) is also bad, but not as bad as Lockheed Martin, the company that actually builds the bombs that are bought with the dollars that Microsoft sends to Israel
Working for any company that could theoretically contribute economically to a war is bad, but not as bad as the previous two examples and is more or less unavoidable for working people
Paying any kind of tax (especially in the US) ultimately funds wars, and so isn’t good either, but it’s not as bad as any of the three above options, and no one can avoid it (except billionaires of course)
I had a friend in a difficult position, deciding between high pay at Buy N Large or the opportunity to work on insanely cool shit for Death Inc.
Ultimately he chose Death Inc, and the reasoning was along the lines of “This might kill a hundred people, but at least it’ll kill them specifically. I can’t even conceptualize the harm Amazon et al. do on a global scale to entire populations without even trying”.
Made me think. I didn’t have a very good answer to that.
those bombs will kill far more than just a hundred people, far more than he can ever conceptualize. the consequences of those deaths will shape the world more than the extra microsecond an engineer could shave off of an internal Amazon function
Also, “if I don’t make this thing that will kill a hundred people specifically, they’ll just use something that kills more people with less precision / more casualties.”
How is precision weaponry “insanely cool shit”???
It means you can take out the bride’s party, or the groom’s party.
Technically if you think about it, he’d be saving innocent lives, since non precise weapons have more collateral damage. Might as well make bombs accurate and hit the right targets.
The “right targets” tend to be innocent lives as well. Besides, who said anything about precise weaponry? These days, it’s all about AI, where precision is actually not the goal
I mean it’s impressive from an engineering standpoint
“Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? That’s not my department”, says Wernher Von Braun.
Don’t say that he’s hypocritical
Say rather that he’s apolitical
And which benevolent corporations IS acceptable to work for?
no ethical consumption under capitalism etc etc but… there are companies that don’t make a profit by murdering middle eastern people
That number is shrinking alarmingly fast
check out our latest product: Avatalk Digital Business Card
Catching General Dynamics strays
This is one of the few reasons I dislike living in the area I do, defense contractors are basically the only ones nearby hiring for engineering roles. Luckily I work remotely, but if that ever changed and I couldn’t find another remote position, I’d probably have to move. I’m not about to sell my soul.
Same for me, except IT.
Its pretty much either work at The Base or Geek Squad. One of these options pays enough to leave the area.
Am getting a niche going for elderly centric IT help.
All we have is elderly here 🤷 take that over jarheads
Id take the jarheads tbh. They can usually follow instructions and admit it if they don’t know what they’re doing. Civil Engineers were always a fun tech support call, too.
Sounds like good honest work but i don’t think id have the patience for it long term
Fair.
I’m not the smartest tech person. Don’t really have a passion for it, but for whatever reason listening to an elderly prattle has never been draining. If I can turn airplane mode off for those fuckers and write them instructions on how to send an email I’ll take that over actually working lol
Does it pay enough to ever be free one day?
I’ll let you know when I find out.
(Guessing no)
I know which one it isn’t!
Or, and hear me out, get a job and suck at it.
Found the Boeing recruiter!
With the amount of classified information that goes into weapons manufacturing, where your just making doo-dad#1, it’s understandable some people wouldn’t even know their doing something wrong.
Makes me think of the, “when does life begin” debate. When do random parts become a weapon of mass destruction?
I’m unable to get any info on what my grandpa did after leaving active duty and going to work for LM on government contracts. I have paperwork mentioning him, and it’s alllllllll still sharpied out almost 70 years later. Dude was a logistics engineer, he basically organized warehouses, yet apparently was so important to the nuclear sub program (Mare Island in the 50s & 60s tells me that much) apparently that I’m not allowed any further info
It’s entirely possible he didn’t know what he was working on, I only have guesses because of other shit we know from decades after his death
Why?
Of all the tools for oppression and murder, advanced weaponry is pretty low on the list for what actually makes the murdering happen. If you work for a company that does any kind of business with any repressive regime (ie most companies above a certain size), the simple fact that you’re working for a cog in enabling the economy of the repressive regime to pay its cops, its soldiers, its secret police and informants and massive bureaucracy, is as much as a contribution as “I was .1% of designing a multirole jet that’s 10% better than the previous multirole jet”
Hell, anyone making steel of the correct grade to go into small arms probably kills more innocent people, by that standard, than your average person working for Western defense contractors.
I mean yes there is a sort of “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” dilemma when it comes to working. But just with that dilemma, you don’t just give up, you try to minimize your participation as much as you can healthily do. And I think not working for a corp who’s sole purpose is to develop weapons for killing people is one of those no brainers.
It might be a no-brainer if it was all “We are making orphan crushers for the orphans”, but the defense industry is much more complex than that. For example, would you say that a Ukrainian working for a Ukrainian defense firm, whose sole purpose is to develop weapons for killing people, is evil?
I do think there is nuance to the situation and exceptions. Your example being one. But I would consider Lockheed (the example of the original post) would be the no brainer one. Those weapons aren’t going to defending my family from an imperialist power, they are going to death squads in South America and committing genocide in Palestine.
I do think there is nuance to the situation and exceptions. Your example being one. But I would consider Lockheed (the example of the original post) would be the no brainer one. Those weapons aren’t going to defending my family from an imperialist power, they are going to death squads in South America and committing genocide in Palestine.
But Lockheed-Martin’s equipment is going to Ukraine as well. Are the families of Ukrainians not worth defending? And ‘death squads’ in South America are not particularly likely to be using state-of-the-art US jets and missiles for their murders. And considering the state of things in Taiwan and Europe, if the US doesn’t end up on the side of the imperialist powers, I don’t know how much I would bet that Lockheed-Martin weapons won’t be defending other families from imperialist powers in the near the future,
Considering the strict controls on defense exports, it is far more relevant to question who the US government chooses (directly or indirectly) to support with Lockheed-Martin’s output. When the US is against genocide, as in Ukraine, Lockheed-Martin’s output is used to save innocent lives; when the US is for genocide, as in Palestine, Lockheed-Martin’s output is used for murder. Though even then I would note that it’s not particularly pivotal to the murders committed.
The correct target for ire in this, other than perhaps capitalism in general for creating a significant disconnect between social responsibility and firms of all industries, is the US government and where it funnels this equipment. The firms themselves are amoral but unexceptional, both in consequences and in nature; and the people who work at them (other than at the highest decision-making levels) are no more immoral than any other cog in the capitalist machine.
With Lockheed you are forced to choose between being complacent with it because they supply Ukraine’s defense against occupation by an imperialist power or outright oppose it due to its supplying towards the Palestinian genocide. The genocide is a dealbreaker in any capacity for me. Even ignoring the genocide, the bad outweighs the good to me by a longshot. I oppose it just like how I oppose McDonald’s, Amazon, Starbucks, and more.
With Lockheed you are forced to choose between being complacent with it because they supply Ukraine’s defense against occupation by an imperialist power or outright oppose it due to its supplying towards the Palestinian genocide. The genocide is a dealbreaker in any capacity for me.
But then, is that not just enabling one genocide in exchange for another? Palestinian genocide is a dealbreaker, but Ukrainian genocide is an acceptable price to pay? (I’m not actually accusing you of accepting Ukrainian genocide for not supporting Lockheed-Martin - honestly, fuck Lockheed-Martin as a company - just highlighting that the argument necessitates accepting utilitarian consequences that run contrary to the anti-genocidal goal of the principled stand)
My point, though, is more that Lockheed-Martin is more than a no-brainer. There is consideration to be had. These firms are amoral, but that means that they are capable of enabling good as well as enabling evil.
If your choice is designing tractors, which will be sold to farmers recovering from a genocidal civil war in Sudan as well as genocidal colonists in Israel to consolidate their land gains and draw a profit with which to imperialize more, or designing warplanes, which will be sold to those resisting genocide in Ukraine as well as those perpetuating genocide in Israel, which is the moral choice? I don’t think it’s a no-brainer to say that the weaponry is the more immoral of the two. I’d say that the core immorality is selling to the genocidaires at all - which would not be specific to either industry.
And the core of the objection is against the idea in the meme that people who work at these firms as engineers are in some way more immoral than the rest of us working for soulless genocide-enabling corporations that provide the tools and funding for genocide.
Even ignoring the genocide, the bad outweighs the good to me by a longshot. I oppose it just like how I oppose McDonald’s, Amazon, Starbucks, and more.
I mean, I wouldn’t argue with that. But I also wouldn’t put much moral weight on whether someone chose to work at one of those places in anything but a pretty high executive capacity.
The problem of manufacturing weapons would be significantly less controversial of LM (for ex) had even a few scruples.
Defending yourself is fine.
Making tools to defend yourself is fine
Making tools for people to defend themselves is fineMaking and selling those tools for use in attacking is not fine.
Profiteering from harm is not fine.\
Communists make weapons too tho. It’s kind of a whole cycle.
One, the issue isn’t the production of weapons in of itself. Weapons are used for defense, survival, and recreation which are (in my opinion) ethical. The issue is “defense” contractors like Lockheed are not producing weapons to defend against exploitation, oppression, etc. They are produced for imperialist powers to defend the interests of exploitors, oppressors, and war mongers.
Secondly, I am an anarchist. Statist “communists” are often no better than capitalists to me.
They are produced for imperialist powers to defend the interests of exploitors, oppressors, and war mongers.
And also to oppose the interests of exploiters, oppressors, and warmongers.
From causes as good as anarchists in Rojava to as evil as fascists in Israel.
It almost sounds like you might be suggesting that there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism
Something like that. And little ethical work.
Plus you have deterrance weapons like the F22. It hasn’t actually killed anyone, because no one has challenged it. That sort of weapon can keep wars from starting, since they’re less likely to win.
Not so sure about the deterrence argument. My point is just that defense industry firms are not particularly core to the problem of people murdering each other, and certainly not the workers therein, any more than farmers are guilty of feeding murderers if their client sells to a genocidal state.
If less people worked to make weapons, there would be less weapons made.
How is this a hard concept to understand?
If less people worked to make weapons, there would be less weapons made.
Okay?
How is that relevant?
Do you think that there is a dire shortage of tools for murder, and only the modern defense industry is sustaining the strained supply?
Do you think that there is a dire shortage of tools for murder, and only the modern defense industry is sustaining the strained supply?
Israel, Russia, and Ukraine sure seem to think so. None are producing enough munitions domestically to satisfy themselves.
Less weapons made still means less weapon used.
Israel, Russia, and Ukraine sure seem to think so. None are producing enough munitions domestically to satisfy themselves.
In the case of Russia and Ukraine, the reason they need to produce more munitions is to prevent the opposition from having the advantage in the war. If both sides were totally stripped of munitions by tomorrow, you wouldn’t see a cessation of the war, you’d see a continuation of the war simply with less advanced tools, such as in the civil war in Sudan. And Russia has already demonstrated that it has no shortage of men who are willing to murder people with knives and sledgehammers.
Don’t really know what you think “No more munitions!” is going to achieve here. Certainly don’t know what shunning the Western MIC is going to do here, except expose more Ukrainians to Russian genocide.
Israel isn’t producing enough munitions to satisfy itself because it knows it doesn’t have to when the US is willing to subsidize their genocide.
Less weapons made still means less weapon used.
No, it means less of that particular weapon used.
So do you work for a defense contractor or do you just have great respect for the act of killing in general
Sorry for having the radical idea that mass violence predates specialized weapons industries. Or the radical idea that countries should be allowed to defend themselves against genocidal aggressors. Whichever of the two you’re objecting to.
It is pretty radical to argue that a small contingent of Zionist Israelis would be successfully eradicating the people of Palestine if both sides just had sticks, so the U.S. should just keep manufacturing and selling MK-84 bombs. Or we can talk about how absurd a claim it is that the arms industry is looking out for the little guy—you know, the group that can pay for less of their product? Thank god for arms manufacturers—that’s probably what Uyghurs think when they’re stopped at checkpoints by military police
I’ll go even farther. Have you voted in the last 50 years? Guess what you help elect the president and chief commanding death at the end of the bayonet and the from the top of the drones.
And if you haven’t voted (but been able to), you are likewise guilty for allowing the candidate who became president and CiC to commit their crimes (instead of the crimes the other candidate would have committed).
The only way forward is to improve society as a whole.
Hmm if all the candidates will both be responsible for killing people, are the people who didn’t vote responsible? Technically the only innocent people would be the ones who stop the candidates from being elected. but I’ll drink to improving society as a whole.
Hmm if all the candidates will both be responsible for killing people, are the people who didn’t vote responsible?
You’ll be responsible for different sets of people being killed.
There’s no option for innocence, as much as folk wish there was.
I agree: Everyone is terrible.
There’s a big difference between making steel vs knowingly making weapons that are themselves illegal or being used in genocide.
knowingly making weapons that are themselves illegal
Beg pardon
or being used in genocide.
Of course, making other materials to support genocide is much more moral.
Anyone involved in the production of white phosphorus weapons, cluster bombs, or depleted uranium munitions are knowingly participating in a war crime. Everyone from the assembly line workers to the designers to the executives needs to be locked up.
Yes, there are other non-weapon items we also need to sanction Israel to prevent access to, such as bulldozers.
Anyone involved in the production of white phosphorus weapons, cluster bombs, or depleted uranium munitions are knowingly participating in a war crime. Everyone from the assembly line workers to the designers to the executives needs to be locked up.
WP is legal for use as an incendiary and smokescreen, cluster bombs are not banned by the US, DU is not illegal by any treaty I’m aware of.
Yes, there are other non-weapon items we also need to sanction Israel to prevent access to, such as bulldozers.
Nothing should be going into Israel from any civilized country, if we were actually discussing questions of morality and interaction through one’s labor for internationally trading firms.
Continuing to sell white phosphorus to those who have openly deployed it against civilians is an act so immoral, we should be rioting to bring these manufacturers in.
I mean, I agree that selling weapons to war criminals is horrific. But the manufacturers aren’t really at the heart of the problem so much as the US government. There are strict export laws regarding the defense industry. They aren’t exactly jumping to sell WP to Russia (statement may be subject to change considering the Trump administration). They’re acting in accordance with the desires of their biggest customer, the US government, which is currently (and has been for quite some time) supporting war criminals in Israel.
Yeah, I think they’d argue for DU instead of against it. They’re not using that against people they’re using that against war machines.
There was controversy during the Gulf War about DU munitions from 20mm autocannons. 30 years of study has disproven some of the initial scares, but concerns remain about DU dust from such shells possibly being widely dispersed enough to cause health problems (though not radioactivity-related health problems).
Tank DU munitions are generally regarded as safe anymore, though.
OK, I guess we should stop harvesting wheat and making flour because it could possibly be used to support a genocide, but don’t even bother thinking about stopping the manufacture of the bombs being dropped.
Or maybe the problem isn’t “Weapons are being produced”, it’s “Authoritarian regimes are being traded with”.
At MIT in the 1980’s it was called, “Get your fingerprints on the murder weapon.”
I laughed and upvoted the meme but then I had to find it again and double check to see if it specified a country.
Got offered interviews at Raytheon and Lockheed once. Said no immediately. Can’t have a good conscience working for these companies.
Good job o7
The Devil vs an A10, who would win?
Brrrrrrrrt
Depends, are we in Georgia and is there a golden
fiddlegattling gun on the line? If so, I’d take that bet, the A10’s the best there’s ever been.That might be a good buddy comedy about the rapture where Hell rises to the surface but the US Military’s actually got it under control somehow. Like a damn minotaur comes through the fences and swings a helicopter into the pavement by it’s rudder, but a dude in a turret on a humvee shreds it like swiss cheese and all the goblins storming the gate stop cold and kneel with their hands on the back of their head very nervously.
Someone was telling me about a series about a similar premise, which ended with the US military bombing Hell with all the civilians in it, out of essentially religious fanaticism.
Feels more fitting.
…oh, oh, there’s an RPG setting i read like this recently!..like magi-punk high fantasy mashed-up with the legions of hell and heaven allying with various nation-states in open industrial warfare…
(now it’s going to bug me until i can find it)
Sounds interesting, did you find it?
