Only designing for a single use lets it be much more lightweight, durable, and cheap (the components need to only withstand a single shot). It's not a new concept either, the original Panzerfaust from WW2 was a single use anti-tank gun.
Not defending fascists, but most assault rifles today can trace some design lineage back to the StG 44. Which is usually regarded as the first practical assault rifle.
Yeah, the design of the AK-47 was strongly inspired by the StG 44. Just because a technology originated in a fascist country doesn't mean that it's necessarily shit.
Yes but it makes more sense when you realize nato is inherently an aggressive and offensive force. You want lightweight and disposable AT because your doctrine is defined by mobility and the reliance on air dominance on the assault. This is in contrast to Russia who mostly relies on multi use anti tank weapons because their doctrine is primarily more defensive based.
What is the point of walking around in public with an anti-helicopter weapon and two revolvers? Even if we lived in the homo-judeo-islamic-bolshevik reality the far right imagines we're in, is ISIS-MS13-AntiFa gonna come at you with an Apache anytime soon? The revolvers would maybe be kinda useful but I'd just keep the shoulder mount rocket at home unless you start hearing about the AntiFa Air Calvary division coming to town.