A few errors have slipped into your text. I can't really understand what do you mean by "in a sense", I think that you should rephrase.
It is very hard to say whether ideology or weaponry is more disruptive. It is not the ideology or weaponry inherent with the evil spirits; rather it is how people use them, how certain people manipulate them. Undeniably, both of these two - Rephrase? both=two in part have benefited the human kind. Ideology, to certain extend, is the fruit of human’s wisdom and intelligent intelligence. The integration of capitalism in some developing countries has proved it greatly improves people’s standard of living a great improvement of people's living standard. Weaponry in a sense - ??? secures a country or a community’s stability. Countries develop high-tech weapons in a sense - ??? it is the leverage of not being involved in war. Other countries would not easily interference interfere with their sovereignty and invade territory. Personally, I think ideology would do more harm than that of the weaponry. First of all, metaphorically ideology controls people’s mind, while, weaponry is controlled by people’s mind. Specifically, if a nation believes in that the violence is the only way to protect their sovereignty, Continue, the sentence is incomplete. It is not hard to see why these nations easily involve get easily involved in wars compared to those who believe in peaceful negotiations. Weapon is just a tool to carry out the ideology. Secondly, the impacts of ideology are greater than weaponry weaponry's impacts. Currently, a large amount of human right rights issues are involve is involved with ideology. People suffer from honor killing, honor rape and gender discrimination to a much larger extend than people in wars. Holocaine is a typical example which demonstrates the ideology of discriminating people would lead to a catastrophe. I am not saying the tens of thousands causalities casualties at war are not worthy mercy.