Religion was central to my early work in political economy. I lived among the Hutterite Brethren in the late 1960s, visiting and staying with two-dozen Hutterite colonies in the Northern Plains. My goal was to explain what conditions enabled a communist society to survive, and in their case even thrive.

This fieldwork occasionally involved driving through gumbo, a sticky and slippery mud. It adheres, builds up, and ultimately constrains progress. Once you’re in it, it’s nearly impossible to break free. Drying out is the only solution.

After my Hutterite experience, I chaired Environmental Studies at Utah State University and naturally became fascinated with the Mormons. Why, I wondered, did one of the most successful organizations in world history, the LDS Church, fail so completely in their early efforts to establish some 200 communal societies, the United Order.

Given humans’ acquisitive nature, economics provides lenses for seeing and understanding the consequences of differing systems of incentives. In sum, systems that align individual incentives with social goals work far better than those that do not.

Absent a compelling crisis however, establishing social goals is difficult indeed. And, assuming agreement on a goal, what is the most appropriate means of achieving it? When should we resort to governmental coercion (taxes) to supply good works? This is not a simple problem.

Both the Hutterites and the Mormons endured horrific experiences with government. The Hutterites were nearly exterminated in Europe and the Mormons were driven out of Nouvoo, Illinois. Hence, it is not surprising that neither tends to support intrusive governance they do not control.

Both groups, however, provide social services to members. The Mormon’s Relief Society was founded in 1842 in part “to provide relief for the poor and needy.” Today it has over five million members. The Hutterites take care of their own though informal means.

It is tempting to employ the federal government as an agent to perform good works. Once we identify an important and worthy cause, why not use the IRS to extract funds to pay for it? I recently encountered this question.

Each Sunday, Pilgrim Congregational Church provides an opportunity to share celebrations and concerns. While we were meeting last week, six severely injured Marines were returning to their hospitals after enjoying the therapy of fly-fishing here. I asked parishioners to join me in celebrating the wonder that brought them here, the Warriors and Quiet Waters Foundation (WQW). Several individuals asked me how they could contribute.

Local volunteers created this organization three years ago. This season it will bring six groups of wounded warriors, one with their wives, to Bozeman. All of this, I explained, was done with volunteered funds, time, and equipment. Each warrior is given a full set of gear (rod, reel, wades, vest) to take back so he can continue this joyful, restorative activity. This is a special sacrifice from the professional fishing guides who usually earn $320/day (plus tips) during their short, hectic season.

After the service, one respected and politically experienced individual suggested that perhaps Federal Stimulus money could be obtained to support the WQW effort. I don’t speak for WQW, but I assured him that federal money is not necessary. Such funds would sully and degrade the project. The motivating spirit and many volunteers, surely one, would be lost.

My friend was amazed at my reaction. I doubt if he understood my concerns. In most prosperous nations the state has “gradually annexed all the responsibilities of adulthood—health care, child care, care of the elderly—to the point where it’s effectively severed its citizens from humanity’s primal instincts.” Why shouldn’t WQW join in? Because federal money is like gumbo.

The above quote is from New Hampshire resident Mark Steyn’s essay “Live Free or Die,” which appeared in the April issue of Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College. I found the essay an insightful and compelling argument against governmental expropriation of good works. I recommend it.