Loyalty in America

LOYALTY IS A GRAND AND PROTEAN WORD, A WORD TO conjure with. Moralists praise it, politicians plead for it, philosophers ana lyze it. Loyalty is among the noblest of virtues, as any Boy Scout knows, and disloyalty the basest of crimes. Definitions of loyalty range from the doggerel sentiment of popular song and ballad to the meta physical profundities of Josiah Royce's categorical imperative: "Be loyal to loyalty." And yet we know little enough about it: its pro nouncement evokes images more dazzling than enlightening.

Nor has contemporary discussion contributed more to clarity than to confusion. Loyalty has become a pawn in the political struggle. When that fate overtakes any word, its later career is bound to be devious. Moreover, during the last few years some men have arrogated authority to assess the loyalty of their fellows, and many outrages have been excused in the name of loyalty. What those events reflect is public bewilderment on matters concerning the rights and obliga tions of citizens. The time is appropriate for an appraisal of the prob lem of loyalty.

But the discourse must be adapted to the subject. Although clarity and precision of thought are needed, it would be false wisdom to pre tend that a subject so abundant in meanings, so lavish in implications, could be reduced to severe forms and rigid categories. There is little reward to be won from a search for some presumed "essence" of loyalty. It would be equally debilitating to focus inquiry around some fixed definition, for then appears the danger of confusing words with actualities. Moreover, such enterprises too easily degenerate into dog matic defenses of one's asserted definition against all comers. The question with words is which is to be master-he who uses them, or they themselves.