The Emergency State: America's Pursuit of Absolute Security at All Costs

by David C. Unger

From the New York Times ’s veteran foreign policy editorialist, a lucid analysis of the harm caused by America’s increasingly misdirected national security state

America is trapped in a state of war that has consumed our national life since before Pearl Harbor. Over seven decades and several bloody wars, Democratic and Republican politicians alike have assembled an increasingly complicated, ineffective, and outdated network of security services. Yet this pursuit has not
only damaged our democratic institutions and undermined our economic strengths; it has fundamentally failed to make us safer.

In The Emergency State , senior New York Times writer David C. Unger reveals the hidden costs of America’s bipartisan obsession with achieving absolute national security and traces a series of missed opportunities—from the end of World War II through the presidency of Barack Obama—when we could have rethought our defense strategy but did not. Provocative, insightful, and refreshingly nonpartisan, this is the definitive untold story of how America became so vulnerable—and how it can build real security again.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, Current Affairs

368 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 2012

Reviews

[Peter Goggins · Rating 3 out of 5]

Author correctly identifies the fact that congress and the judicial branches have willingly handed over most of their constitutional authority to the executive, largely granting it unitary powers, all in the name of national security. Additionally, the cry of national security and over-vesting of powers in the president has led to a situation wherein essentially no investment is made in the American society, hollowing the entire thing out.

Author castigates each president from FDR forward (with special ire for Wilson too) for their continued building of the emergency state. Reagan and bush the younger are castigated specifically for their destruction of the American middle class and proffering of the unitary executive theory, respectively, both in the name of national security.

Some of the author’s conclusions - namely that maintaining a military capable of fighting a peer adversary is unnecessary - have aged poorly. Additionally, the author appears to subscribe to the theory that NATO expansion has prompted Russian aggression - an argument analogous to asking a rape victim what they were wearing at the time.

[Robert Chapman · Rating 1 out of 5]

I have no doubt that the historical events presented in this book are accurate. I can also see a correlation between the author's interpretation of those events and an "emergency state" view. The reason I scored the book so low is that I just could not get into the book no matter how hard I tried.

The way the story was told, and the audio narration, left my mind constantly wondering.

I cannot recommend this one.

[Spencer Willardson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a book that I picked up randomly from our public library because it looked interesting. It was interesting, but also frustrating. Unger hits some things on the head in terms of the growth of the security state in the US. I was particularly interested in the his work describing the security state that essentially mirrored the "deep state" rhetoric of Donald Trump. I don't think Unger would have sympathized with Trump in any way, however.

There was some frank acknowledgement of the role that democratic presidents, particularly FDR, Truman, and Johnson had in setting up the security state, but not a connection to the ways that that state of affairs also helped to drive their more ambitious domestic issues.

My main problem with the book was that it also seemed to put the onus on the US in its response without acknowledging the real security threats that drove and drive some of these issues domestically. It may be the sign of a good book that I was nodding in agreement about 40 percent o, shaking my head in disbelief another 40 percent, and really wondering about things for the other 20 percent of the time that I read the book.

I think this book pairs well with The New American Militarism: How Americans are Seduced by War for those who are worried about the way that the state is evolving.

[Gemini · Rating 4 out of 5]

I started this book before COVID-19 & finished it during the crisis. May not have been the smartest thing but then again it wasn't totally related, or was it? This book essentially goes back about 50+ years through history of various administrations & how their actions (or inaction) impacted not just our country but the world. It's actually kind of scary to see how things arose. The things that were hidden from the public & the typical government cover up of certain things. Security is never really something we have to worry about, but we are lead to believe that it is, which is a farce. Placing blame on people(s) or countries for something (that was most likely our own doing) where it actually did not belong & then duping millions of people. This country has always been at war. It's unbelievable but in its history it's always been fighting w/ someone. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong & then when it comes to helping poor countries we don't lift a finger. We have put all our energy fighting when it only benefits us & it has also backfired. The way this book speaks to so many of these types of issues makes you realize how the consequences of our actions have cost millions of lives throughout history.

[Jim Garrett · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book lays out a very compelling and worrying account of whether or not the United States has kept itself in a continuous state of emergency. When one reads this one can't help but think of Star Wars and Emperor Palpatine's rise to power. In that movie one character says, "So this is how Democracy dies, with thunderous applause." One has the same sense when reading this book that our government has bit by bit nurtured crisis after crisis in order to create a police state, but one that exists camouflaged, simmering under the surface rather than overt as in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

Even more depressing than Bomb Power which I recently reviewed, because it goes into much more detail. The author makes some excellent suggestions to remedy the problems identified, but in the 12 years since the book as written nothing has been done to implement them.

[Collin Douglas · Rating 2 out of 5]

A useful and insightful essay on the need for reform of the American foreign policy structure with a few hundred pages of shallow history tacked on.

[Mike Hill · Rating 3 out of 5]

Long winded word salad at every chapter. While the overall premise of the book is valuable, the back story of over 100 years ago is very boring.

[Roger DeBlanck · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unger offers an evaluation of how the United States largely created its own dilemmas in foreign policy. He claims that over the past century these mistakes have, consequently, forced America into a perpetual and unnecessary mentality of alarm, which requires defense and protection at any cost. The entire premise of Unger’s book is based on the notion that in hindsight every decision and outcome takes on more clarity about how and why certain events in history transpired, and that certain events could have been carried out differently and, therefore, prevented world catastrophes and the predicament American finds itself with policing the world. For example, he assesses how Wilson initiated the groundwork for abuses of power during his presidency. He then proceeds to assess how FDR followed suit and overstepped his executive authority by shortcutting constitutional laws in order to aid and abet Great Britain during the early years of the war. These arguments are true in a vacuum, but in the sweeping, tumultuous context of history and the world twice at war, did not Wilson and FDR try to keep America out of the conflicts? Did they not want peace?

By the next chapter, Unger works ahead to Truman. He claims that the Cold War and the emergency state began at the precise moment when Truman failed to reconcile with Stalin over postwar control of Germany and Europe. He criticizes Wilson and FDR’s undermining of power as essentially preparing the stage for Truman to proceed with misguided doctrines in the postwar world. And yet a few pages later he argues that had FDR lived he would not have allowed the emergency state to continue. This type of reinvented evaluation of history comprises the book up to the modern day. It is a curious argument, which can be interesting, and Unger can be praised for providing a nuanced exploration of historical events and circumstances. His ideas, however, become less convincing due to the glaring fact that his chief device is to argue against what happened in history and in favor of pointing out choices and circumstances that he predicts would have prevented future turmoil and entanglements had other decisions been undertaken. The unfortunate result of what happened is a mindset in America that nurtures a formulated, perpetual “emergency state.” Unger’s ideas are valuable for their obvious concern about American’s need to do better. That is an assessment that few, including myself, are in disagreement. In his last chapter, Unger outlines a course of actions and practices that can help America for the future. This may be his strongest contribution. At heart, even with its intent to magnify what went wrong, this is an optimistic book about how we can think of making things right.

[Wendy · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of my favorite courses in law school was a small seminar on "the law of emergency," and this book would have made great scene-setting reading for it. Unger lays out his thesis in the first chapter, then spends a chapter examining the expansion of the "emergency state" in each presidency from Woodrow Wilson through Obama. While there's an angry, frustrated passion that seems to drive the argument, the argument itself is pretty objectively made: since WWI (and in many moments before, including Lincoln's presidency), every president has effectively maintained a "state of emergency" to justify some variety of extrajudicial activity, some constriction of constitutional liberties, and heightened spending on (and use of) our defense forces.

Unger is very careful to illustrate that this isn't just a Republican phenomenon either; Democratic-led executive branches have done just as much, if not more, to facilitate this continued state of alarm. Cheney and Rumsfeld did not come out of left field, as it were; they were inheritors of a continued tradition for many decades.

This is compelling reading, chilling stuff that should make a citizen of this country think a lot more carefully about the way we expect the political branches to interrelate and *actually* check/balance each other. And, of course, the rhetoric of fear that sets the framework for this all-or-nothing national security paradigm needs to get the big heave-ho. Who will manage to do that, though, is anybody's guess. :(

[Carlos · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was incredibly interesting and thought-provoking. Unger takes the reader through an analysis of how the crisis-mode, in which the last US administrations have functioned, has not been the result of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 but are rather a legacy of FDR’s emergency-administration during WWII which has become the status quo for the last seventy years. In this president by president analysis of, primarily, foreign policy Unger shows the reader how the temporary executive constitutional overreach facilitated by WWII has been used ever since to increase the executive branch to the detriment of the legislative one. He further points out how at each step the public has become more and more removed from the foreign policies that have caused anti-American sentiments around the world and how even the most recent post-Cold-War Democrat administrations have failed to curtail the overreach that had long been justified by the Red Menace. Although I don’t wholly agree with Unger’s sole focus on presidential actions, especially as it leaves Congress and the public completely devoid of responsibility in their relinquishment of overseeing authority, the book certainly makes the case, for the first time in my experience, that the opposite of the current US foreign policy of world policing is not isolationism but a more responsible role in the realm of international politics.

[Jeff Schauer · Rating 3 out of 5]

A thorough and convincing, if occasionally rather plodding, review of the missteps in U.S. policy which have led to the enshrinement of what Unger characterizes as the "emergency state". He proceeds president-by-president, and identifies a number of interesting "roads not taken" or "turning points" not seized, and concludes with some recommendations for reclaiming the conduct of our international affairs from the "emergency state".
While the book's critique of the violations of law that underpin the conduct of much U.S. foreign policy are unquestionably sound, I'm less sure about its assumption that the constitution as penned in the eighteenth century is adequate or ideal for managing our country's relations with the wider world today. Unger's stodgy attachment to the founders' intentions allows him to forgo grappling with serious moral and structural issues which begin to rise at the end of the book (around humanitarianism, genocide, internationalism).
At the end of the day, his critique is sound, but his argument is more technical than moral, and perhaps somewhat weaker for it.

[Rflutist · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is an excellent review of recent American history, written with the slant of the demise of democracy. Whether or not you agree with the author's assessment or viewpoint, you'll fill in any gaps on your knowledge of history. The books points are well-researched and footnotes direct the reader to further articles and points of interest. I'd give this book a 4 1/2. It is not speed reading; take the time to read it when you have the time to pay attention and absorb its message.

[Frances Dinger · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very thorough, but occasionally redundant. Still, a good exploration of how even peacetime presidents have retained wartime powers and how that has affected constitutional democracy, international affairs, and the American economy.

[Budd Margolis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Vital critique of the impact Presidents have had in building the state of fear and constant war footing. The costs, the desecration of the Constitution by all parties and the lack of security the strategy and trillions have afforded the country.

[Linda · Rating 5 out of 5]

A must read for everyone.

[Melanie]

Ugh, this book was just too boring and dry.