Loyalty Is Overrated
Oh really? You mean cheaters and traitors are better than loyal people? How come?
Let me ‘splain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up 
.
What is this loyalty thing anyway? Merriam-Webster teaches us that loyal means:
unswerving in allegiance: as
- a : faithful in allegiance to one’s lawful sovereign or government
- b : faithful to a private person to whom fidelity is due
- c : faithful to a cause, ideal, custom, institution, or product
Faithful in allegiance to the lawful sovereign
Let’s say there’s this king, King 1, ruling over a prosper and happy kingdom. Our friend John Doe 1 is a soldier in this king’s army, loyal to his king. He’s grateful that this king rules so well that his family and all families have bread, cheese, bacon and onion every day, and there’s never a shortage of whiskey in the tavern. The smoke from barbecues often clouds the Sun. Oh. My. God. That’s a happy nation if I ever saw one. Such abundance wouldn’t be possible without the king’s diligent management. John Doe 1 is proud to be in his king’s army, and his loyalty is 100 on a 1 to 10 scale. He’ll happily die right now to save his king’s life.
Now then, this kingdom has its neighbors, which are not so good at administering their resources. They work hard, but they’re poor because of high taxes and King 2’s bad management. They always drool and sigh when the Eastern Wind brings to them the smell of fresh barbecue from Kingdom 1.
King 1 pities the poor neighbors living under the dictatorship of King 2, so he decides to release them, in the name of democracy (in his kingdom, the people chooses the king by vote). He summons his army and makes a grand speech about freedom, democracy, abundance and human rights, therefore lighting the flame of justice in his army’s heart. And to war they ride.
But wait! John Doe 1 feels (as do most of his comrades) that something’s wrong. He doesn’t want to kill the soldiers from Kingdom 2. Why should they pay with their lives for… err… what are they paying for? This is bullshit, he thinks. But he and his peers are bound by loyalty and honor to serve King 1. Should they be loyal, or just drop it? Maybe the king should try some more diplomatic solutions. What are the diplomats getting paid for anyway? But, you see, he must remain loyal. In a disciplined army, a disciplined soldier will obey the order, not discuss or think twice about it. His king has ordered, and so it will be done, for it is the right thing to do. Or is it? Loyalty sounds a bit like cowardice in this particular scenario, doesn’t it?
Faithful to a private person to whom fidelity is due
OK, so if that didn’t convince you, here’s another loyalty scenario. John Doe 2 and Jane Doe 2 are very much in love. The romance they live is so perfect, they are so happy, that we are all gathered here to join together this man and this woman in holy matrimony. They swear loyalty to each other, for better or worse and all that. As the years go by however, the romance slowly succumbs to convenience. John Doe 3, her fitness instructor, asks her out one day. Shyly she refuses. John Doe 2 also must contain his impulse to ask his secretary if she’d like to be more than his secretary. Loyalty “saves” their marriage, but it takes its toll: their freedom. Their happiness. Bound by loyalty, they refuse new intimate connections which would bring them joy, renewed love and wonderful sensations. After all, why should two people break free and be happy, when they can stay unhappy and be loyal?
Faithful to a cause or ideal
This one is almost too easy . Inquisition is loyal to the church. Doctors advertising meat consumption are loyal to public health (though all recent serious studies show that meat and dairy cause cancer, heart failure and all other diseases). Mafia members are loyal to their cause to “protect” the neighborhood. Death to the infidels: kamikaze bombers are loyal to their faith. It. Is. Obvious: loyalty has no place in this world.
Conclusion
Loyalty often means to hurt and/or get hurt, to kill and/or get killed. There is always another way, but because it requires some courage which people lack, it is dismissed in the name of loyalty. Some will say that loyalty requires courage (see some examples in the paragraph above), but they actually confuse courage with ignorance and/or cowardice. It is therefore safe to say, my friends, that loyalty is highly overrated nowadays; q.e.d.
Bible Explained: Mark 4:25: Whoever Has, Will Be Given More
Now listen up friends. The Bible teaches us that
“Whoever has, will be given more; whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.”
(Mark 4:25)
Now, what’s that supposed to mean? God is supposed to be all fair, this principle can’t be true. Oh, but it is, my friend: the rich get richer, money draws money. The poor get poorer, buried under piles of bills, credit cards, mortgages etc. So, where is God’s fairness?
Everybody heard of the Law of Attraction, right? (if you haven’t, it’s about time you should ) Well, this bible verse proves that the Law of Attraction was discovered a very long time ago, and Jesus Christ had it figured out. And I will demonstrate this.
Whoever does not have…
Imagine someone, John Doe 1, who lives in a small rented apartment, has a job that he doesn’t like and doesn’t pay that much either. He barely has enough money to pay all his bills, and his landlord has to “remind” him to pay the rent all the time. He can’t afford to eat out, go to the movies etc. He thinks: “When will things be right for me? Why can’t I get a raise? I never have enough money. I can’t ask a girl out, I can’t go on vacation, I’m trapped. I work so hard and my boss gets rich, nobody appreciates me.”
Obviously, John Doe 1 does not have. So, even what he has will be taken from him. Every month he’ll be more depressed. He’ll blame the economy, the authorities, the politicians. His scarcity can only deepen. Where do you think he’ll be in five years?
Whoever has…
Now, imagine someone else, John Doe 2. This guy also lives in a small rented apartment, also has a job that he hates and is also underpaid. He also lives paycheck to paycheck and can’t afford to go out. But this guy thinks: “Wow, I am so lucky! I have a steady flow of money, even if it’s not much yet, and I have a place I can call home. I might have been fired with this crisis thingy and whatnot. I might have been sick with this swine flu thingy and whatnot. I am truly blessed. Now, let’s see what’s to be done if I want to ask the new copy girl out.”
Obviously, John Doe 2 has. So, he will be given more. He will figure out a way to get more money for a date with the copy girl. And he will always be grateful. His abundance can only thrive. Where do you think he’ll be in five years?
Conclusion
Although apparently John Doe 1 and John Doe 2 have the same situation, same health, same income, one of them has and will be given more, and the other doesn’t have and he will be taken from.
This is the very essence of the Law of Attraction, concentrated so very nicely in this Bible verse, q.e.d.