Bargain Wars
By Max Borders

Why cheap proxy wars and endless interventionism still cost too much. Here, we consider a more holistic case for limiting American military adventures and proxy wars abroad.

In 1781, the captain of the British slave ship Zong, Luke Collingwood, deliberately ordered that over 130 enslaved Africans be thrown overboard because the ship was running low on water. Under the rules of marine insurance at the time, the loss of enslaved people due to illness during the voyage could not be claimed. But if the enslaved were "jettisoned" to save the ship, they could be written off as an insurable loss. So the ship’s owners could file a claim and be reimbursed for the value of the lost "cargo."

The Zong case highlights the chilling logic of actuarial assessment applied to human lives under slavery. Collingwood made calculations about the economic value of killing them that did not include their worth as humans. Instead, he reduced real people to financial risk units.

Something similar can be said about American interventionism.

Consider this from the formidable Tim Clancy:

Rarely in US history has so little been spent to gain so much in degrading the military power of a strategic competitor as supporting Ukraine vs. Russia has.

This isn't to discount the sacrifices Ukraine has had to bear, but from a US perspective, this has got to be one of the most effective interventions of all time in a cost vs. benefit analysis.