The article discusses the political economy of rearmament. Using cases studies in the United Kingdom, the United States, and France from various periods, Kevin Narizny of Harvard University tests hypotheses regarding the difference in rearmament policies between left-wing and right-wing government. The paper aims at providing more insights and filling the gap within the literature body of political science related to the relationship between social welfare and military strength. Kevin Narizny tried to prove that class interests have strong impacts upon how governments react to rearmament needs, and these impacts are the opposite of the conventional wisdom. .
Using eight case studies from the United Kingdom, the United States, and France, Narizny analyzed governments' responses to international threats and found that left-wing governments are much more likely to undertake massive increase in military spending than right-wing governments. The authors explain that right-wing, conservative governments find it difficult to raise taxes on lower class and are unwilling to raise taxes on upper class, thus are unable to expand military power. On the other hand, left-wing governments can effectively use military needs as a mean to reform taxation policies. This is contrary to the popular belief that leftist governments are weaker than rightist governments when it comes to national defense matters. .
The article has filled a gap in its relevant literature body because there had been limited research of the same subject. The result is the opposite of conventional wisdom, which could prove to be useful for further research as well as for real life applications. The author choses sufficient number of case studies to ensure that the results are meaningful. However, there are a number of ways the author can improve the paper. First, the research used case studies as the underlying means of testing the hypotheses.