Warfare, Welfare, and Compromise

Now's the time that we need to share
So find yourself
We're on our way back home
--Supertramp

The State can be divided into two wings: the warfare wing and the welfare wing. Statists generally possess strong affinity for one wing while opposing the other wing. Those who believe in welfare policies, for example, usually do not share the same affection for warfare policies.

This dichotomy may be grounded in philosophical differences. For instance, supporters of warfare might believe that strong militaristic abroad paves the way for a less intrusive State at home.

The dichotomy might also be grounded in economics. Resources that go to the other wing mean less for my wing.

Over time, however, partisans in the warfare and welfare wings come to understand that they need the cooperation of the other side in order to advance their agendas. Because neither side possesses a substantial majority necessary to commandeer resources by democratic vote, the warfare and welfare wings engage in processes of compromise to get what they want. Thus, spending bills and budgets are typically jammed with items from both sides in tit for tat fashion.

It is ongoing compromise between the warfare and welfare wings that grows the State.