we have to modernize our thought process on the relationship between capitalism and violence. many would posit that violence is a side effect of capitalism in an effort to produce profits. but it can't be as simple as that. "defense" contractors, aka weapons manufacturers/war profiteerers, are not average citizens. their pay is very high and it isn't a coincidence that they are an integral part of the elite class. they siphon off hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer funds every year directly into their own pockets. though, specifically, these weapons manufacturers are in a search for profit, their position within the broader elite class serves an integral function. without state violence and the weapons to back it up, what control do they have over those masses? nothing. the centralization of the means and modes of violence amongst the elite class is the mechanism in which masses are kept subordinate. while it may be true that capitalists seek "profit", what does that profit actually mean? those "profits" that capitalists seek at the end of the day are rooted in a desire to determine what enters everyday citizens' lives and extract any productivity for themselves. that is, total control over the masses is what they truly seek and that centralization of the means of mass violence is what keeps citizens in check. violence enables control and is the only path to it. it therefore can't be merely stated as a "side effect" of profit seeking.