Writing for Academic Discussion Is it justifiable to allocate public funds for the arts when there are people in need? - revised -

Writing Topic: Do you think it is justifiable to allocate public funds for the arts when basic needs like food and shelter remain unmet?  (public policy)

 

 

☆Let’s Think

In what ways do artists contribute to society?

 

For reference:

“Art has always been a powerful weapon of the oppressed — Philosopher Viktor Frankl honed his theory that our primary motivation for living as humans is to find meaning while imprisoned in Dachau and other concentration camps for being Jewish. Oscar Wilde wrote “De Profundis” while imprisoned in England for the crime of loving a man. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote his famous “Letter from Birmingham Jail” while imprisoned for protesting against racist segregation. There is no better means of cultivating understanding and empathy than through art. And for me, there’s no better outlet to convey truth and inspire resistance than the art of the moving image.

 

I believe that one great movie can change the world.”

－ Michael Moore in “From the Rubble Rise 22 Powerful Voices” on michaelmoore.com

 

 

☆Hints for Points

Unjustifiable

・  Around 830 million people were suffering from chronic hunger in 2022. The number of people who suffer from temporary hunger is much larger. They are vulnerable to such factors as war, climate change, disasters, and economic downturns.

・  When one child dies due to poverty every six seconds, it is unacceptable to use resources to support the arts, which we do not necessarily need to survive.

・  Public resources are to support the most vulnerable. Helping the poor should be prioritized.

・  It is unfair to support those who have enough money at the expense of those who live on subsistence.

・  The root cause of poverty is violence like wars and conflicts, and the rich world is complicit in them. It is just hypocritical to be immersed in the arts if they do not work to solve the problem.

・  Although the arts contribute to making a difference in the long run, people in dire situations have no leeway to care for art, and when we know there are such people, it is natural for us to act the same. We must support them as if we were in their situations.

 

Justifiable

・  Art heals our souls and give us hope and power to live. Therefore, people need art especially in hardship.

・  Creating and enjoying the arts are not simply activities in leisure times, but rather fundamental behavior necessary to live as a human being. Prohibiting the arts as corrupt hobby of the wealthy in revolutions led to withering the power of the entire society. This shows that arts are indispensable in people’s lives whether they are starving or not.

・  Society is complex, and for an either-or choice cannot be applied to allocation of public funds for humanitarian aid and the art. Stopping artistic activities won’t save children in Gaza from starvation, cold, and bombing. We should do both arts and actions.

・  Art is used for public education. Many novels and movies, for example, take up or reflect social problems such as depravity of the underclass. They motivate people to work for the disadvantaged.

 

 

☆Sample Answer

【Thesis】Although I enjoy the arts, especially music and movies, I still think that humanity is lost if art is prioritized at the expense of those who suffer. We must not forget about our brothers and sisters suffering from abject poverty.

【Supporting Details】Hundreds of millions of people are starving around the world. Not only disasters and diseases but also conflicts as well as corrupt systems like capitalism keep the most vulnerable people like women, children, old people, and handicapped people without food, clothing, and shelter. When they have some money, they would definitely use it for food, not for the arts. Thus, government resources should be allocated to save them, to eliminate deprivation. That we do not see the poor around us will not exempt us from helping those in need. We are the same humans no matter where we are. Those who are starving are us, and we must put their lives before our hobbies.

【Counterargument-treatment】I understand that art rescues souls of those in depravity. However, people in war zones managing to play movies for children for their mental health or people in ghetto seeking solace in music is one thing, while comparatively wealthy people in safe zones talking about budget allocation is another. It is the obligation of the advantaged to provide help for those who are disadvantaged who cannot provide it for themselves.  

It is meaningless when an art is created turning a blind eye to the predicament of other humans, no matter how beautiful, powerful, or impressive it is,

【Conclusion】Why don’t we first stop exploitation that deprives hundreds of millions of their basic human rights, and then enjoy art after becoming off the hook? (276 words)

 

 

Write your response in 10 minutes. Show each other your responses. Write down questions or suggestions to each other’s response.

 

 

                                                   DRAFT