With a total UK land area of just under 25,000 Sq Mile, a population of just under 61 Million, our position of 7th richest (recently driven from 4th, probably by self interest and personal greed) isn’t too bad. Now, did we have a strong military capability because of that wealth or was that wealth maintained because of a strong Military? Against the same statistics, we are permanent members of the UN Security Council, head of the British Commonwealth (a much underestimated and underutilised body) and member of various overseas pacts. Again, are we in that position because we’re not poor or not poor because we are?
We became great because we were endowed with leaders who preferred to be big wheels rather than cogs within one. Furthermore, the flawed or not political system gave them the means to achieve it. Having achieved it, they elevated their Country to a similar status in the process and took pride in doing so. As ever, the majority of the Country was composed of people happy to be just cogs, albeit personally prosperous ones, not really caring about power, influence nor responsibility. The political system now allows the self seekers and duty avoiders to set the national objectives and ambitions. In short, the waiters have taken over a 5 star hotel and feel embarrassed that it’s not a hostel. Quite a few of the waiters occupy influential positions all the way to SO1 (and civvy equivalent). As a consequence, we are now having this discussion.
I never had a lot of time for the famous Kennedy family but the one that made it to big fellah belong septicland said something that, I for one, will always value; “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”. The question doesn’t sit well with people with small ambitions beyond personal wealth.
I agree with a number of you (I think) but particularly Widger.