A government has a responsibility to its citizens to ensure their safety. Therefore, some people think that the government should increase spending on defence but spend less on social benefits. To what extent do you agree?

The enhancement of

d

efense

(military) military action or resources protecting a country against potential enemies

defence

spending has increasingly seen as a trending topic to be debated currently, Many people believe that the authority should compute the preservation of its society by increasing its military budget. Actually,

this

type of thought has been existing since the mid of the 20th

century

,

this

idea called as “Military Keynesianism”, which is a perception that believes if the government should improve its military quantity to secure the nation from any outside threat, It means the regime needs to prioritize the

d

efense

(military) military action or resources protecting a country against potential enemies

defence

sector

instead

of the social benefits of the civilians.

However

, the writer of

this

essay strongly opposes the idea of “Military Keynesianism” to be implemented in the 21st

century

because the shifting behaviour of states that will be discussed

further

.

This

essay aims to provide a clear argument on why the authority should compute social benefits more than the

d

efense

(military) military action or resources protecting a country against potential enemies

defence

sector, and

also

provide rebuttal on why the approach of “Military Keynesianism” is not relevant anymore in

this

current situation. By prioritizing the social preservation and utilizing the allocation to fund a social security programs,

such

as education, health care, aid for unfortunate peoples, unemployment, housing, and environmental protection. It absolutely will boost the development of a state, the unfortunate people could be able to attend school, afford health care, and get a job.

Furthermore

, social spending will

also

lead to improve the productivity and capacity of its citizen, it eventually will make more people get a job, the more human resources will be improved, the number of illiterate will decreases, and many more. To conclude, if the fertility and quantity of its resident improved, it obviously will enhance its state’s income as well for the

next

term, and if the government utilizes the budget to fund social guarantee programs, it will become more sustainable compared to

d

efense

(military) military action or resources protecting a country against potential enemies

defence

programs. The concept of “Military Keynesianism is not relevant anymore in

this

current condition,

This

concept was very popular back in the 1900s, the main reason why it was popular in 100 years ago, might be because in the past, there had been many armed conflicts that happened, and it eventually made people believe in the concept of Military Keynesianism.

However

, in the 21st

century

, there was already many multilateral agreement designed to uphold peace and human rights in which restricted war crimes, there is

also

the International Humanitarian Law, which strictly regulates about the conduct of armed conflict, and its legally binding for every sovereign state in the world because it derives from Customary Law, which is a general principles accepted by the international community. Due to many legal instruments on human rights and armed conflicts, in

this

current condition, war rarely happens. Thereupon, it is useless for a

country

to spend much on

d

efense

(military) military action or resources protecting a country against potential enemies

defence

if it is not relevant in

this

current condition, It is better to spend on social benefits that could enhance the productivity of a nation. In Conclusion, the world has shifted, and in

this

modern era, there are many multilateral agreements that bind countries and limit the state behaviour to threaten another nation,

that is

why in the 21st

century

, war is not likely happening,

therefore

it is useless to some extent if a

country

has over budget on

d

efense

(military) military action or resources protecting a country against potential enemies

defence

sector. The rule should compute the social insurance of its inhabitant

first

and solve social problems. It is because if the needs of the people of a

country

already fulfilled, it will eventually make them become more productive, and it improves its quantity. The enhancement of capacity of civilians will obviously lead to strengthening the economy of a

country

. After the economy has increased and the social insurance of the citizen has fulfilled, the government could consider increasing its allocation on

d

efense

(military) military action or resources protecting a country against potential enemies

defence

to ensure its preservation.