Some people believe that goverments should fund and promote artistic and cultural activities for their citizens. Others, however, think that these activities should be left to private individuals and institutions. Discuss both these views and give your opinion.

It is a piece of staggering evidence that numerous citizens acknowledge that artistic and cultural actions should be advertised and subsidized within a nation's society.

In contrast

, many others depict the endorsement of these movements and reckon that it is best if individuals and private organizations are the ones who regulate them.

Although

the funding of it could prosper artists from being financially restricted,

this

essay coincides with giving liberty to craft and cultural objectives to make them feel free without any constraints. 

First

and foremost, the subsidization and publicity of arts could profit crafters economically, without the urge to worry about monetary burden.

Additionally

, they are

also

being guaranteed exposure from the government to ensure that their innovations are viewed by society. But the real problem is that the administration would try to implement some laws to apply to restrain their creativeness.

For example

, countries with a dictator history like Belarus, Russia are awarding innovators with grants, but they need to obey specific statutes. These red flags are the apparent indications of the cons of state allocation.

On the other hand

, providing freedom to personas who create magical works is tremendously beneficial to push them out of their comfort zones.

In addition

, with the easiness to develop their abilities in an absolute path, these cultural experts could grow their potential

further

without worrying about particular regulations restricting them from getting creative.

Furthermore

, when well-known collection centres are discovering their imaginative creations,

this

could be a helping hand for them to gain attention and creating earnings.

For example

, a friend of mine has a genuine love for drawing, and she posts her projects on social media platforms. One time, she was noticed by an American art centre who desperately wanted to buy her innovation, and without any hesitation, she sold it and earned a decent amount of dimes. These are the visible indications of why it is better to let creative humans designing whatever they desire.  In conclusion,

although

it might be very crucial to subsidize talented professionals to prevent them from monetary insecurity, the sovereignty

that is

given to these creative inventors outweighs the allowance from a state's regime, giving them unlimited space to formulate valuable designs and enabling them to pursue their best interests in their preferred ways.