Nuclear weapons: Non-proliferation or anti-imperialism?

Nuclear weapons have the tremendous power to wipe out humanity as well as everything else on this planet. For this reason I am opposed to their use and their existence. Sadly, nuclear weapons do exist and will continue to exist for the foreseeable future. While superficially it would seem Marxists would follow much of the left in being against the proliferation of nuclear weapons, in a world where there is such a difference in the conventional forces of imperialist states and their victims it would seem that nuclear weapons may be the only viable means for a state facing imperialism to protect itself as an ultimate deterrent. This might lead to the conclusion that the proliferation of nuclear weapons may be in the interest of Marxists and the global proletariat, and nuclear weapons should not be the privilege of a small number of (mostly capitalist) states.There is a strong counterargument to this however. A significant portion of bourgeois nuclear scholarship believes nuclear weapons would only be used if a state was on the brink of destruction. this is generally agreeable, since imperialism can be more "precise" by conventional means. This does raise the question however, would a bourgeois state that is being seized by a revolutionary proletariat utilize nuclear weapons to defend itself? We have yet to see a nuclear state undergo proletarian revolution, but should the bourgeoisie grow desperate enough they might deploy nuclear weapons against a revolution that looks like it will succeed.If it were the case that the bourgeoisie might deploy nuclear weapons against a proletarian revolution then we have an obligation to reach total nuclear disarmament prior to this revolution. Since a one sided bourgeois state disarmament seems highly unlikely this would be throwing away the anti-imperialist capability of nukes in a world rife with imperialism. This is also assuming we could even reach total disarmament.How do we resolve this contradiction? Should we work towards total disarmament and hope states like the DPRK can deter imperialism by conventional means? Should we support proliferation in the name of anti-imperialism and hope that revolutions can neutralize bourgeois nuclear threats or worse, survive nuclear attacks? Should we only support proliferation to worker's states? Am I overestimating the depravity of the bourgeois and perhaps they wouldn't use nukes against us? What do you all think? via /r/communism https://ift.tt/2T5y3s0