Boston Bomber Proves that Idle Hands Are the Devil's Workshop

Your grandma told you it was so: "Idle hands are the Devil's workshop."  The story of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the elder brother of the Boston bombers, lends strong credence to this largely ignored wisdom.  In the article linked below, we see that Tsarnaev was apparently lazy before he was evil.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/tamerlan-tsarnaev-and-family-received-welfare_719056.html

Past generations understood the link between idleness and corruption.  We've all heard about the "Protestant Work Ethic" and how it contributed to making America great.  One thing our forbears understood was that everyone needs to be busy at something - everyone needs the dignity of work.  My father understood this.  He made it one of his goals to keep his three sons busy on the farm.  He gave us the dignity of work and the satisfaction of accomplishment.  He taught us that work and accomplishment were inseparably connected.  My father also understood that young men (as well as older men and women) need something productive to occupy their time, else they will fall into unproductive and ultimately evil patterns if they are not careful.  He knew that hard work occupied your mind and released youthful tensions.  Dad knew that if you worked hard, you'd be too tired to get into too much trouble.

Where did prior generations get these "crazy" ideas that work was important?  From the collected wisdom of the Bible and from their own experiences.  Scripture begins with God giving man work to do.  Solomon wrote about the value of work.  Jesus taught positively about productivity and making the most of one's abilities.  The apostle Paul taught that if a Christian would not work, he would not eat.  Every society instinctively knows that those who will not work should not be rewarded.  I remember this principle being taught in one of my first childhood picture books - The Little Red Hen.

I support a system of help for people in need, but I am adamantly opposed to the welfare system I see in place today.  American welfare incentivizes the unproductive instincts of those who receive it, while destroying the work ethic we need to promote.  Anytime someone comes to believe he or she has a right to receive something with nothing required in return, bad results are bound to follow.  Our national statistical trends prove this to be true (see Coming Apart by Charles Murray).

If I ran the country, there would be help available for those in need,  but able-bodied recipients would work for any assistance.  I don't care if there is nothing we really needed to be done (which is not the case), I would put assistance recipients to work cleaning government buildings, picking up trash, painting guardrails, serving at shelters for battered women, helping at homeless shelters and doing anything else we could come up with to give them the dignity of work.  People need to connect accomplishment with reward.  Welfare programs could do that.  Recipients who performed well would get more stimulating work with a possible route to full employment.  Those who refused to show up on time and work every day as requested would see their assistance vanish as rapidly as their work ethic.  In fact, I suppose what I'm talking about is replacing our current welfare program with a guaranteed work program - a much better option in my not-always-so-humble opinion.

I don't want to hear the objections about people needing time to find "meaningful" work while they are on assistance, or about single mothers being taken away from their children because they have to work.  Those issues are not the government's problem - those belong to the individual.  The best thing a government can do is provide an opportunity for dignified sustenance while these folks figure out what they will do to improve their situation.  Government assistance should not be an option that people perpetually use nor desire to continue forever.  It should be an encouragement to transition to self-support.  It should inspire, not mire.  It should help, not harm.

So is my thesis that government welfare leads to terrorist bombings?  No -- and yes in some ways.  My contention is that promoting idleness among working age young men (and women) will allow them to indulge their considerable pent-up energies in unproductive ways.  Let's help our government understand what our grandparents knew instinctively - idleness leads to trouble.  Whether that trouble takes the form of falling under the sway of religious extremism, cheating on your spouse, or just playing video games and drinking beer all day, these behaviors are not beneficial.  Let's not compound the problem by promoting idleness through our systems of welfare.