War—What is it Good For?
by R.C. Sproul Jr.

I believe it was either Franklin or Henry who said, "Those who would trade any liberty for greater security deserve neither." In the wake of the attacks of September 11, this warning looms large. Like everyone else, I was nauseated as I watched first the planes hitting the World Trade Center, and then watched the World Trade Center crumble. Like everyone else, my nausea turned to resolve soon after. The government must bring these men to justice. Since this column began almost six years ago we have argued over and over again that the state has been given a ministry by God, but that it has, as with so many states before it, forsaken that ministry to take up others. We have looked at state intrusions into the care of the poor, into the business of education, into making sure we eat our vegetables, and buckle our seat belts, into trying to manipulate the economy through tinkering with their silly paper money. We have argued that this is a double curse. First, when the state interferes where it should not, it creates havoc. But second, when they enter the battle on the wrong front, they are not in position to wage the war on the proper front. When they are busy handing out cheese, their hands are too full to wield the sword.

My hope is that some of this will change now. A frightened nation is looking to Washington to pick up that sword, and is cheering the soldiers on as they do so. With Washington's hands full, perhaps they will stay out of our economic and personal lives for a time. There's nothing like an emergency to get ones eyes off of distractions.

My fear, however, is more likely to come to pass. There are those in Washington who would love nothing more than to see we citizens exchange a bit of liberty for greater security. Opinion polls are showing that to be the case, as the great majority of respondents claim they would rather have more wire tapping, computer eavesdropping, etc., if it would help the state to do its job. The trouble is that when the threat abates, the state does not snap back to its original size. Powers gained by the state remain with the state.

Franklin Sanders argues in his novel Heiland that states are well aware of this propensity among its citizens. He suggests that states intentionally present to the people a great threat so that the people will in turn beg the state to make the threat go away, whatever it takes. I'm not suggesting that the attacks of September 11 were a government plot. I am suggesting that there are those in power now who want nothing more than to make hay while the sun is shining.

But there is a second great fear. States in times of war not only grow more intrusive regarding our privacy, but also regarding the economy. Governments seize whole industries for the sake of the war. They impose wage and price controls. They prop up ailing industries. They ration. And such has already begun.

If anyone wants the airline industry to thrive it is me. I spend too much time and too much money to want to see any of the competitors in this field go under. I also sympathize with their plight. Without the events of September 11, no doubt many of the airlines would have been fine, With them, many were on the brink of destruction. But that does not make it wise, or legal for the federal government to start writing them checks.

First, it punishes those in the industry who had acted with greater prudence. Remember the ant and the grasshopper. Why would they tax Southwest Airlines, who, in running a tight ship for years, had accumulated sufficient cash reserves to weather times of hardship, to bail out United Airlines who entered September 11 with a week of cash reserves? This only provides a disincentive for wise preparation. Rewarding a lack of preparation, and punishing careful preparation creates a greater lack of preparation. That which you subsidize you get more of. Had the weak competitors been allowed to fail, the stronger would have filled those markets with greater efficiency, and we would have all been better off.

Second, it is illegal. Nothing in the Constitution grants the federal government the power to write checks to struggling companies. Such is not among its enumerated powers. The tenth amendment forbids the feds from doing anything that is not among its enumerated powers. The shocking thing is not that they wanted to do this, but that with all our flag waving, no one bothered to check the highest law of the land of the free and the home of the brave to see if what we were applauding were legal. They are lawbreakers, and we cheer them on in ignorance.

But we can afford to practice economic folly. Economic growth is just around the corner, because we are at war. Everyone knows, from the guy who sweeps the halls at CNN, to the high powered economic advisors who serve as their talking heads, that war is good for the economy. Stuff breaks, and having to replace the broken stuff stimulates the economy. Which is why I propose the following. After we have Bin Ladin's head on a platter, and after Hussein has been sent to the stone age, let's do this. Let's build our war plants right on the beach, and as every tank, every airplane, every bazooka rolls off the line, we'll just dump them in the ocean. Then we'll all be rich. Friends, you do not get rich by failing to produce. And you do not get rich by destroying things. Nor do you get rich by producing things designed to destroy things. That we have a nation that believes this foolishness is evidence enough that we are a nation of fools.

Time will tell what God has in store for us. We, citizens of His kingdom, can go forward with confidence, whether the state does well in waging war, or whether leviathan merely grows larger still. For leviathan is a tame beast, hanging on the leash of the true King. He is our refuge and our strength. Be at peace, as Leviathan wages war.