Submission to Ego

The extent of incompetence of the British Navy in particular and the British government in general in dealing with the consequences of its relaxation of its professionalism is astounding. But no less so than the crass and juvenile behaviour of the conscripts it welcomes to serve in the once-hallowed Royal Navy. This is, after all, the follow-up to the egotistical 'me' generation, charitably taught that they could do no wrong, that the world belonged to them and they owe no one, no ideal, no individual, not their country, anything at all.

The selflessness that once permeated society when answering the call to duty in defence of one's country, its values, freedoms and ideals have been so utterly subverted by the prevailing social mores of self entitlement that it remains a dim memory of an anachronistic time long removed from the present. Pride has become personal, having nothing at all to do with the value inherent in representing a universal, let alone nation-wide ideal.

Patriotism and duty is now a flexible thing, an ideal that can be invoked or revoked, given the circumstances and how personally favourable they happen to be at any given time. Honour is a characteristic remotely recognized, but having very little substance in this time and this age. Courage and perseverance are truly out of the range of the capabilities of those who have come of age at a time of personal self-regard which stands first and foremost in a personal lexicon of priorities.

None of this is so dreadfully surprising. After all, it is a reflection of the tenor of our time. What is more disappointing, though, is the lack of humility through it all. That there does not exist a sense of personal shame, of having somehow failed to rise to the occasion, that is the let-down. Ameliorating circumstances are brought forward and confused emotions cited, but through it all there is a certain sense of bravado, a belief that the most explosively cringing and personally disabling response is acceptable because those circumstances pardons one.

And that, furthermore, that one is to be viewed charitably despite having succumbed to a fearfully self-serving mode, rather than having put forward the professional mien and attitude conditions warranted is beyond mere contempt. On the other hand, the inept and craven manner in which the 15 British servicemen (and woman) comported themselves while 'guests' of the government of Iran have been fully supported by their superiors.

Those very same superiors whose lack of forethought and foresight was partially responsible for the contretemps to begin with. To chastise the unfortunate subordinates would be tantamount to bringing public scrutiny upon themselves, after all. Which would then demand the occasion of an responsively official investigation, and that would be most uncomforting for all concerned.

And the government, blithely assuring the released servicemen (and woman) that it would be perfectly all right if they profited from their experience? And that there was not so much as a blush of shame on the part of some whose craven failings were aired for all to see, and who yet thought themselves entitled to receive cash awards for revealing the circumstances of their incarceration and subsequent demeaning responses?

Little wonder the government is now standing down from its former cavalier attitude in a paroxysm of embarrassed stupidity.