The Questionable Value Of Loyalty

Loyalty. Even the sound of the word carries a certain gravitas. Loyalty is comfortably ensconced in a league with other golden virtues such as honor, dignity, and integrity. It is used as a final line of demarcation in character judgments. We've all heard variations on the line, "If there's one thing I will not tolerate, it is disloyalty." Loyalty seems to be the bedrock beneath society's most cherished arrangements: family, friendship, and patriotism.

I say this is all a bunch of nonsense.

Suppose you were going to try to do something really big and you needed the help of many other people to pull it off. You've got (basically) two powers of persuasion at your disposal to secure their cooperation: coercion or inspiration. For example, during the space race of the 50s and 60s, John F. Kennedy declared the goal of sending a man to the moon. America was inspired by this vision of scientific progress and made it happen with scant to none evidence of coercion. On the other hand, Kennedy's meddling in Vietnam (out of loyalty to a European ally) precipitated the military draft under President Johnson. Evidently, inspiration was not enough to secure the participation of enough of our citizens for that venture.

Loyalty is a form of moral coercion. It is a tool used by bullies to hoodwink those they perceive to be weak. Think back to your childhood days on the playground or in the neighborhood. Some older kid wants you to do something you know you don't want to do. And what does he or she say to you? "Aw, come on, you're not going to chicken out on me now are you?" So you do this thing that will get you grounded for two weeks because you're afraid of being thought of as a deficient friend. At least you were loyal and not a coward! But what do your parents say to you in these situations? "If he asked you to jump off a cliff, would you?" This is exactly the crux of the matter of loyalty being hogwash.

It is a healthy sign for an adult of the human species to be independent, ambitious, and self-reliant. Indeed, an important part of adolescence and young adulthood is experiencing peer pressure and learning to break free of its grasp. It is not that easy to consciously sever the cords of belonging that lay claim to our individuality. But sever them we must if we are to grow up. We open ourselves up to charges of being disloyal or of feeling superior to others. Yet, where do these charges originate? Why would anyone ever accuse another person of disloyalty?

The root cause is fear. Fear of scarcity. Scarcity of love, of friendship, of a sense of societal safety, of whatever it is that one wishes to have. If I feel that you, and you alone, have the thing I need, I will do whatever is in my power to persuade you to give it to me. (including coerce you) I have to - you've got what I need! If I feel that I can obtain what I want from any number of people, I'm more willing to let the law of averages play out by spreading my persuasive energy among more prospects. Upon discovering that everything I truly need - love, joy, peace, fulfillment - is available within myself, I am finally set free from the illusion that I ever have to coerce anybody for anything. Now I get to propose my intentions and discover, to my delight, that some people are inspired by what I have in mind. You've experienced both coercion and inspiration in your lifetime. To which of these do you respond better?

Do we really need coercive ties to bind us together? Is the cost of such arrangements worth the purported benefits? What would we call loyalty if it were based purely on heart-felt preference instead of duty or obligation?

This is probably enough to chew on for one blog column. It's worth considering the implications of so-called loyalty on religion, socio-economic class, politics, management/labor relations, marriage... oh dear, I've discovered yet another lack of scarcity!