The Crimes that Fry Men's Souls
by R.C. Sproul Jr.

Some call it the dismal science. Von Mises called it praexology, the study of human action. Economics, however, is actually a conjunction, combining two Greek words, oikos which being translated means, "house" and nomos, which is in English, "law." Sometimes the Greeks got things right. In high school I divided every moment of my spare time to reading either theology or economics. I chose the college that I would attend, Grove City College, because of its commitment to free market economics, and their champion, Dr. Hans Sennholz, one of Von Mises' greatest pupils. Do not think, however, that what interested me was the incessant drawing of charts and graphs, or all the number crunching. In fact, I did not earn a degree in economics because one of the requirements was simply too much for me, a year of Basic Accounting. Nothing, not even a love of liberty, could make me do that much math.

Von Mises was onto something when he took his comparatively narrow swath of the liberal arts universe and claimed the whole as his own by suggesting that he was studying human action. Our economic endeavors, the work that we do are an essential part of our nature. That we work, that we make, that we create is a more fundamental part of what it means to bear the image of God, I believe, than that we emote, or think. Economics isn't about the charts and graphs, but about what we do as we exercise dominion over the creation.

Which in turn means that when the government throws a monkey wrench into the works of our work, it is more significant than making the lines point down in those charts and graphs. Not only do ideas have consequences, but so do intrusions by Leviathan. Leviathan not only destroys bank accounts and industries, but it destroys families, and men. It is true enough that the power to tax is the power to destroy. But far more destructive is the power to seduce with subsidies. Give a man a fish, and his soul will soon be gasping for air.

There are all sorts of reasons to despise the welfare state. When the government redistributes the wealth it commits fraud, and theft against those whose wealth is taken. When the government redistributes the wealth, it distorts the work of the market, driving up prices for that which it subsidizes. But the bleeding hearts have one thing right—we are called to have compassion on the poor. And that compassion in turn ought to drive us to dismantle the welfare state. We hate welfare because we love those who receive it. We hate welfare because it destroys men's souls.

This, I believe, is what drove the apostle Paul to tell even those handing out voluntary charity (which is, remember, a whole other animal than the kind that comes when the state taxes us, and turns around to parade its compassion in spending it) that if a man doesn't work, he should not eat. Because we have all had our souls softened by living in a welfare state, we still see this injunction in socialistic terms, as if Paul is saying that those who don't contribute their fair share must be punished. Or we see it in ruthless capitalist terms, delighting in the sight of the lazy man going hungry. I believe that Paul is concerned about the soul of the lazy man as he is about the man married to his father's wife. We aren't cold and heartless, or against medicine when we stop a madman from injecting someone with poison, even when the victim asks for it.

It matters little, by the way, how much the state lets them eat. Those who grouse about food stamps being used for twinkies rather than lentil beans are barking up the wrong tree. Those who call themselves "conservative" but hold onto the idea that a "social safety net" is a good thing, while they might object to millions of men's souls being eaten alive, are comfortable if we reduce it down to merely thousands of men's souls. That net not only will entangle those who should be free, but will attract more. There is a way to rescue the scientific accuracy of the law of supply and demand, and remake it in the form of wisdom- that which you subsidize, you get more of. Safety nets are poverty machines, creating destitute souls.

If we are going to bicker over how lavish a net to build, if we are going argue over petty issues such as who should receive welfare, if we want to debate over what tax rate this program or that will require, and what this tax rate or that will do the gross domestic product, then of course my incessant raging against the beast will look like madness. Such issues aren't worth getting worked up about. But if men and families are being destroyed, and be assured that they are, then we have stopped talking about policy issues, and have begun to talk about eternal issues.

And if we are going to be free, we need to be free indeed. It matters little whether your subsidy provides you with beans and weanies, or with an education for your children. It matters even less if you "need" the subsidy because the state has been robbing you to subsidize others. That you have been robbed gives no invitation to rob others. This is not only repaying evil for evil, but you are doing evil against the victims rather than the criminals. May we, when the king offers us a pot of gold, speak with passion, "Slaves are made in such ways." May we not only cease from our sins, but move onto good works. For Paul tells us, "Let the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he might have something to share with someone in need" (Ephesians 4:28). As we live within our Father's house, may we not only abide by but delight in His law, and so work, for this is what human action was meant to be.