When most people hear loyalty, the first thing they think is “unquestioned devotion to me or my decisions”. When I think about this, I think of a dog on a leash, obediently following orders.
The problem I have with this type of loyalty is that it does nothing but perpetuate the status quo. There are avenues in which this loyalty take good shape, such as when someone lacks discipline and needs someone to put them in place. I used to be this type of person, but never reacted well to the discipline that was sent my way, since it came from an unfamiliar place.
You still see loads of people like this today. I have two concrete examples that spring quickly to mind: Donald Trump, and KPOP fans.
The enemy from within
Donald Trump for years has been riling up a loyal and vocal fanbase. His influence cannot be stopped by fact checking, logic and reasoning, or even criminal prosecution. So long as he maintains his stance on the world, his followers undoubtedly support him and his mission.
Lately, with this latest re-election, it seems as though he’s reshaped how he views loyalty, now prioritizing the type I described earlier. He wants absolute yes men, the types of people who will serve his needs to the upmost decree, and in exchange, he will protect them from prosecution. He clearly describes the plans to overthrow the checks and balances that exist to deny a President complete unchecked power. He’s also been vocal about throwing out the criminal trials weighing against him, and vowing to be unbiased by threatening to kill off his those he views as opposition. More recently, he’s been on a tirade to call for unreasonable desires to essentially conquer Greenland or Canada.
This type of rhetoric was vehement in Nazi Germany, before World War II even started. Hitler would encourage his generals and military leaders to become unquestionably loyal, and would train them like wild animals to send off on his opposition. Stalin was also someone who employed this level of discipline on his followers to maintain loyalty. And even today, we have Putin killing off opposition leaders and enforcing loyalty, along with Kim Jong Un enforcing strict levels of propaganda on his people to avoid criticism.
Most American presidential candidates tend to talk to their audience and prospective voters as being loyal to them. They promise better conditions and supporting the needs of the people. Obviously the needs of people in a small town in Kansas would be completely different from those in New York. Trump is the opposite, granting absolution to those who are loyal to him. Whether he will is hard to judge, especially since a lack of fulfilling his old promises represented his previous tenure.
Stan them!
KPOP fans are no different. Many individuals assume that KPOP fans are loyal to their groups, and in many ways they are, from buying ludicrous amounts of merchandise, chanting to their songs, attending as many concerts as they can, streaming their songs religiously, and voting for them on music shows to push numbers and break records.
But just as KPOP fans are loyal to the band, they expect that same loyalty in return.
This can lead to some extremely confusing decisions when looked upon with a Western perspective. A recent example is Seunghan, who was removed indefinitely within days from the newly debuted RIIZE just a year ago. Back in October, his return was announced. Dedicated fans sent funeral wreaths and launched protests at the decision, and in a weird turn of events, Seunghan was removed from the group permanently. Why? Because Seunghan had a girlfriend, smoked a cigarette, and hung out with people at some point before he officially debuted.
The loyalty here seems twisted. While fans are unequivocally supporting their stanned groups, the companies do the same with the fans. As a result, odd vocal demands by the fans have created restrictions that are imposed on the idols in the prime time of their life, like extremely restrictive diets and an unspoken (in some cases enforced) ban on dating.
A point to the latter is when Sungmin, a longtime member of the group Super Junior, was indefinitely put on hiatus in the group when he announced his engagement. I won’t delve too deep into the story, but fans were unhappy with this announcement, partially due to unfortunate unforeseen circumstances in timing, but partially due to general aversion to dating or marriage from their favorite idols.
But this loyalty isn’t always consistently showcased in the same way, despite the vocal resistance from the fans being relatively similar in all cases. When Ryeowook, from the same group as Sungmin, got married recently, he remains as part of the group and all related activities. Baekhyun and Taeyeon both dated each other and were not removed from their respective groups.
To all KPOP readers out there, you’ve probably noticed I’ve exclusively mentioned examples from SM Entertainment, but this applies similarly to many other companies. In recent times though, the balance has been shifting. JYP for example has supported the dating rumors or bodyweight news that would come out within their group Twice. Jeongyeon remains active as an important part in the group despite having gained weight, and Jihyo has remained the leader and even debuted solo recently despite having dated Kang Daniel in the past. This is in stark contrast to comments made towards Kyla from PRISTIN or Karina’s apology needing to be issued after her relationship with actor Lee Jae-wook was leaked.
But the loyalty towards the fans remain strong. All conversations and promotional material for most music is tailored exclusively as gifts to their fanbase/prospective fans. They also offer a ton of fanservice aimed at satisfying their fans’ needs for attention. Boy groups are prospective boyfriends, and girl groups are prospective girlfriends.
The Hydra’s Head
Unquivering loyalty does not make sense to me. It blinds those whom you are loyal to from reality, and often times only serves a need without tackling the right problems that the need stems from. Sometimes, a tired person does not need a day off, they need food.
But what is it like when loyalty is not properly received? What if that person rejects food and denies your support? What if they expected you to give them the day off?
The way loyalty works in the corporate world is pretty simple, and highlighted heavily by Elon Musk during his takeover of Twitter. When he walked in with that kitchen sink, it wasn’t long before he gave his staff an ultimatum: work like crazy in the direction I’m steering this ship in, or get lost. He would go on to fire iteratively 80% of his staff, especially those who did not walk freely following said ultimatum.
I’ve even seen this in my former job. When a CEO was not serving the demands of their boss, they were removed and another person took their spot instead, not once, but three times during my short tenure.
Loyalty is replaceable. Someone will align with you no matter what. And if loyalty is what is demanded from a person, loyalty will be found. Trump intends to do precisely this when inaugurated.
Misconceptions
I’ve always prided myself on my form of loyalty, as strange as it may seem. It’s actually very simple.
If you say you need something, and I’m not loyal, I will abide by it with minimal enthusiasm. I wont go out of my way, and I’ll do the bare minimum. I do this because I see no value that I would offer. It’s rare to see me in this position, because at some point I’d just leave for greener pastures.
But if I am loyal, my first response would be “why?”. My goal is to align with your need, and understand its roots. I will then either follow through completely aligned, shooting for the stars to make it happen, or I would argue against it to highlight alternative approaches/problems/needs/etc. This is because when I’m loyal, I care, and I go above and beyond showing it.
Often times resistance is viewed as distrust. It’s viewed as disrespect and demonstrating a lack of loyalty. I firmly believe that if everyone agreed with whom they’re loyal to unequivocally, you’d end up gambling on their outcome and trusting that it’s the right thing blindly. When things go bad, you end up seeing your faith questioned and trust broken. And when that happens, it’s very hard to mend.
Loyalty is a dance. It takes two to tango. I work with you to align on the common understandings, findings, and conclusions, whether it was your conclusion, my conclusion, or a new one we found together. How we get there is more important to me as well. That relationship gets me aligned with them more closely, and it begins to feel like a partnership that I will protect no matter what.
In my career, I’ve often questioned the decisions of my superiors, and I’ve not been shy about sharing that. When it came to a potential “mandatory office policy” following COVID, I shared my story of how remote work empowered me to argue against it, despite how uncomfortably personally I had to be to get the argument appropriately brought through. When it came to investing in AI, I offered alternative lucrative opportunities that I had more certainty would bring in an ROI when the mission was to generate income, along with highlighting the short term and long term consequences of their vision (and mine). I do this not to disrespect them. I do this to strengthen us, and ensure we’re on the right path.
If you’re not with me, then you’re my enemy
It comes down to learning how deal with agreements and disagreements. In a modern day and age, filled with abundant opportunity, people and strategies, a lot of people still spend their time deciding that if someone isn’t filling the right need for them, they’ll satiate that need elsewhere.
You see this a lot in Tinder dates. If you don’t meet their immediate criteria, there’s a strong chance they’ll overlook you. The same is what you see in jobs in tight budgetary conditions. They prefer those that align with their vision as opposed to those who contest it, fearing that it’ll create noise or slow them down.
This immediate ability to resolve the disagreements through abandonment has made the first form of loyalty a lot easier to find. It’s provoked radicalism, it’s encouraged the formation of social bubbles, and allows people to continue to reject facts or ideas that they choose to not align with, in spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
If it’s not broken don’t fix it
But Elon Musk has four hugely successful endeavors (on the surface). SpaceX is directly competing with NASA and accomplishing great feats. Tesla has long held market dominance over electric vehicles. And he has led PayPal to become the grand success that it is today. Moreover, Starlink is having more power over countries than many even know.
Why would Elon change his methods if they’ve clearly worked in his favor? Why wouldn’t Trump be so invigorated with his new view on loyalty if the other failed him in the past? Why wouldn’t KPOP companies bend to the will of their fans if it nets them strong profits/revenue? And why would you not fire people who you deem as not loyal if that helps reinvigorate spending?
Loyalty means different things to different people with differing needs. At the end of the day, if their needs are met, then their loyalty works for them. The beauty of life is that there isn’t a right answer, and there are millions of approaches to the same problem that all have evidence of working. You just gotta pick what’s right for you.