When loyalty goes too far
IT’S a phenomenon worth studying – the loyalty of underlings to corrupt leaders.
Loyalty is, of course, one of the most admired virtues. It’s a trait appreciated by all, whether it’s within families, among friends, colleagues, and employers. No one is more welcome to any group than a loyal member.
Loyalty breeds trust and confidence. Within families, loyalty is a given, something expected. In circles of friends, loyalty is what lets members stay within the group. In organizations and business concerns, loyalty, too, is the most rewarded employee attribute.
All told, loyalty is the most soughtafter qualification of an individual to maintain a badge of good standing in any social or occupational unit. It’s loyalty that establishes and validates the bona fides of an accepted member.
But can loyalty come in excessive quantities? In other words, can too much loyalty be a bad thing? Can, or should, loyalty be taken back when things go wrong?
I have in mind people who remain loyal even when the object of their loyalty goes crooked.
When an elected government official crosses the line and makes himself or herself a despot, are the subordinates supposed to go along with the abuse and oppression that goes along with the dictatorial bent?
When an elected official abuses his position and commits bad acts, are his or her staff supposed to support the committed wrongful action to the end?
To put it the other way, can supporters and staff of officials turn crooked break with their boss and walk away from him or her? How long can they be loyal to their boss? Is there a limit to loyalty?
When it becomes apparent, or worse obvious, that an official no longer epitomizes the ideals that his staff signed up for when they enlisted in his or her employ, what are they supposed to do?
When they sense, or even know, that their boss has enriched himself or herself beyond anyone’s wildest imagination, can they obey their personal morals and separate themselves from the service of their boss?
When their consciences bother them in their sleep, shouldn’t they follow their moral codes and leave their now corrupt boss?
When they can no longer explain to their families and children what has happened to their leader, shouldn’t they voluntarily excuse themselves from the employ of their boss?
But, in practice, why do a lot of people remain at the side of a corrupt official? Why do they follow blindly their boss who is now corrupt?
Blind loyalty is hard to cure. When people become blind to the hard truth it’s difficult for them to divorce themselves from the situation.
Denial is an indispensable ingredient of blind loyalty. The loyalists would rather believe the lies of their boss and deny that something is amiss, that something rotten is taking place, that something bad has taken over their boss.
Or, do they remain loyal to their boss because they, too, have a stake in their boss’ future? Are their professions and lives now entwined with that of their boss so that they’re unwilling to leave him or her?
It’s a human dilemma, this loyalty to the end. It’s hard to fathom and explain. Only the loyalists can shed light on why they remain loyal. But then, they’re in denial.