Ballistic missile defense and coastal artillery: Basically similar endeavors?

I'd be interested in
reading a study comparing the two -- 19th century coastal artillery and 21st
century ballistic missile defense. They strike me as similar -- both intended
to use technology and money to fend off the foreigners, and perhaps with a
slight isolationist tinge in their backing, because they promise to allow us to
dispense with expeditionary land, sea and air forces. Yet both are of doubtful
military efficacy. Does anyone know of such a work?

Also, did coastal
artillery ever really do
anything, aside from having a possible deterrent effect that can neither be
proven nor disproven?