To What is Your Ship Anchored?

The ship was a shallow draft, Fetcher class Destroyer (USS Marshall, DD 676).  She was a left over from World War II and the Korean Conflict.  Now she was relegated to the somewhat less than glorious task of training reserve sailors.  That is she had a skeleton crew, which was to be completed by a reserve crew (Rescrew) that could be called up to man her in wartime or in time of national need.

However, most of all she served as a floating school house for dry land reserve sailors on their two weeks of annual training.  She deserved more than that but in the wisdom of the Department of the Navy that was her lot in life and certainly better than more of her peers who had been sold for scrap.

Oh, yes, she was a she, not an it, because she like most ships had personality and much more, that defined her.  You see you could have two ships built from the same plans and both would have different ways about them.  That is why most sailors speak of one ship that they road and to which they relate, as if she was a spouse of sorts.

This cruise had been to take her from Seattle to Treasure Island, San Francisco Bay, California so the Rescrew could attend fire fighting school.  After all at sea, you had better take care of your ship for it was a long swim home.  

On the way back to her homeport, we made a stop for "Liberty" in Vancouver, B.C.  However, as it turned out the channel master could not board us until the next morning so we anchored just outside the harbor to await his arrival.  That is when the following took place.

Sometime earlier the Bridge had called for the "special sea and anchor detail."  So it was that now she is in the hands of those who not only had great skill at the helm but knew best how she answered the helm.

Soon the Bridge called, "All stop" and the constant vibration of the engines slowed to quiet and thus without power  she gradually lost her "way."  There we were "dead in the water" and soon the call came from the Bridge, "Release the anchor."  The anchor chocks had already been removed in anticipation and so at the call of the Bridge, the chain brake released.  It was then the air of the fo'c'sle  was filled with the clatter as the anchor chain which had been stowed under deck in the chain locker, ran out.  

Before long the anchor caught the bottom and once again the chain brake was set.  It was then that the Bridge called for "reverse engines" and slowly if not imperceptibly the anchor was made secure to the bottom.  Most of the slack was then taken out of the anchor chain.  When all was secured, the special sea and anchor detail was secured and since it was late in the afternoon much of "ship's work" was also "knocked off" for the day.

That night as those thing that happen aboard naval ships happen, evening chow, "Sweeper, sweepers, man your brooms, sweep down...," evening call to colors, the movie on the mess decks, lights out, the tides came and the tides went.  The ship rose and fell, as she rode that anchor chain some 360 degrees.  She was secured to her anchor and her anchor held to the bottom. 

This of course brings up a question.  It is a question that one is wise to ask.  To what are you anchored and how secure is your anchorage.  In the ebb and flow of life, various tides and currents seek to drive us in this direction or that. You see we live in the midst of a post-modern, secular, ego-centric culture where truth if it exists at all is seen as relative and ever changing.  Again, to what are you anchored?

Could it be that our skyrocketing suicide numbers, overflowing mental hospitals, counselors with full to overflowing case loads, etc are related to our disconnect and even disdain for God and His values?  Indeed are not our western societies populated by people who are confused, insecure, and easily victimized because they have no secure anchor point. Nothing which will weather the storms and uncertainties of life.

For most of the 10,000 years or so of recent history, western man has been stabilized by a belief in a god of some sort.  To cast off from that notion, as we have in the last 150 years or so since secularism has gained traction, is to leave one adrift and vulnerable as the winds of life blow and the tides of adversity run.

You see that ship avoided drifting into the shallows or the shoals that night and thus suffering damage or loss because her anchor was secure in that which would not move.  It was secure enough except that for a few sailors on deck watch fore and aft and others on watch throughout the ship, little concern was paid to her drifting.  She was as secure as that to which she was anchored.

"The Cost of the Loss of Personal Initiative?"

Recently I read an interchange on Facebook and it set me to thinking about an aspect of what is constantly being presented to the American public under the guise of news.  It was an interchange in which one respondent spoke of "the man" and "corporations."  His contention seemed to be that these nebulous entities were disadvantaging people.  For the sake of this discussion I shall forgo the fact that even if such entities as did exist they do not possess the power that seem to be given to them.  What was missing in the discussion was the whole matter of personal responsibility. 

Perhaps the reason that there is "the man" and "corporations" is that such notions seek to absolve one of personal responsibility by seeking to blame others.  If I can blame “the man” then I can safely assume victim status and therefore gain a plethora of benefits.  For example if I am a victim, then I can commit a crime and not be held responsible.  If I am a victim then I can assume an entitlement mentality.  If I am a victim, then I “should” be, rather entitled to have that which the next fellow has worked for.  Then comes another of those words, “deserve.”  If I am a victim, then I deserve to have what others have.  It is almost as if there is a proactive entitlement.

Let’s do a reality check here.  In terms of the “corporations” it was as though the employees of those entities were entitled or deserved to work there.  It was an opportunity that had become a right and thus when said corporation did something that may have made perfect business sense but that did not fit the paradigm of "best interest of the employee" the company was seen as "getting over on" the poor disadvantaged employees.

Look!  All of us are victims of something or another.  However, some choose to get on the victim train (a train that goes to nowhere) and some choose to keep a firm hold on personal responsibility and press on with life.   The reality is that the NO ONE can make anyone do anything they are not willing to do.  No one including the large corporation and the unions that are involved can make an employee continue to work for that company, keep an employee from being personally responsible for his own welfare, his own future, etc.   As I read the Facebook interchange a thought two thoughts came to me.  

The problem is twofold.  First, as has been discussed there is the matter of personal responsibility.  Second, there is the matter of personal dependence.  In the matter of dependence, the individual must have become so dependent upon the employer, union, government, etc. that he cannot see himself moving on to a different situation and better opportunities.  This of course is a matter of choice.  

The simple truth of the matter though often avoided, one cannot hand off one’s own personal responsibility.  Problems abound when one comes to believe he can do so and invest these and other entities as their ultimate source of security and care. 

The sad part is that when this happens, another element of life flees from us.  It is the whole matter of seeing and seizing opportunity.  When I divest myself of personal responsibility and become dependent upon another be it union, business, or government, then there is a very real chance that I will not exercise the initiative to seize such opportunities as may be present in my world.  This is the whole problem with extending unemployment over and over again.  Interesting how suddenly people find jobs when the unemployment benefits end.

The real tragedy is not that opportunity is gone it is that initiative is gone.  Even when one comes from a “faith in God” view, still in all it is a matter of personal initiative.  Such is gone because we have come to believe more in what goes on inside the union leadership, corporate office, and government than we believe in and trust in God. Still in all it is personal responsibility lived out in personal initiative with a healthy dose of faith in God, that will carry the day!

Finally, people make choices and we must respect their right to do so.  However, I highly resent that the Congress seems to think that it is their role to fund safety net programs for people who have and continue to make stupid and irresponsible choices.  People must be allowed to be responsible for and to suffer the consequences of their choices.  If nothing else it is a great learning tool.  

So the question becomes, should a person choose to trust his employer, the union, or the government with his present care and future security?  The question then becomes what happens if that business or the union, or yes, the government should fail.  Such a person should then be allowed to suffer the consequences of his choices.  The same would apply to any other “dependency” entity that you might list. 

If a person does not exercise personal responsibility and initiative, and if that person does not provide for the lean times, and if that person then does not put something aside for the future, there is nothing at all wrong with allowing that person to "enjoy" the consequences of his choices!   Now before you class me as a less than caring conservative/libertarian, yes, there are exceptions.  Certainly there are people who need a helping hand up, people who need care because of unfortunate circumstances not of their making, etc.  However, know this one thing!  There are not as many in genuine need as are on the welfare rolls.  There are not as many as the mass media, the evening news, those on the left, academia, and the Beltway Gang of Thieves have led us to think that there are!!!  

Reduce the government give aways, allow people to deal with the harsh realities of personal responsibility, allow people to experience the consequences of their choices, encourage people to be productively take initiative, and watch the economy heat up as people go out and productively resume responsibility for themselves.   Remember this one thing, you cannot give up nor can you give away personal responsibility.  It is one of those things that one simply cannot give away.