Loyalty To True Ideas Instead Of Irrational People

Loyalty to people as long as they are themselves loyal to true ideas is the most sincere, stable, and rational kind of loyalty.  Indeed, it is the only valid type of loyalty, for other kinds are arbitrary, unearned, emotionalistic, or contradictory.  Loyalty is praised and supported more often than not out of a subjective desire for self-gratification than anything else, as many people will directly or indirectly admit when they might not even realize someone else is probing this side of them.  When irrationalistic loyalty is embraced, betrayal of almost any kind might be seen as an ultimate sin, but even those who blindly praise loyalty for the sake of loyalty, which is already idiotic at the start, will almost inevitably contradict themselves at some point.

Do white supremacists (or any other kind of racial supremacists) deserve loyalty from family members or friends who see right through their asinine fallacies?  Do misandrists or misogynists?  What about people who on every philosophical and personal level amount to utter hypocrites, selfish, stupid, and inconsistent?  How could irrationalists possibly deserve loyalty when irrationalism is at the heart of all stupidity, assumptions, hypocrisy, emotionalism, apathy towards truth, and every other destructive attitude or false idea?  Loyalty to them in the sense of protecting them from valid criticism or just blindly caring for them based on emotionalism are betrayals of reason and reality.

Almost no one who condemns betrayal really thinks all betrayal is evil when it gets down to it.  They just emotionalistically react to the thought of betrayal in some cases or simultaneously believe that all betrayal is evil while supporting those who break away from certain factions or allegiances.  They would probably not condemn the likes of Nazi defectors or similar people, for example, even though they supposedly condemn all betrayal.  Each time they endorse a whistleblower who exposed corporate exploitation or an abuse victim who stops defending their abuser, they would deviate from their own ideas!  It is as if they forget their own beliefs that would be easy to introspectively recognize the moment it becomes inconvenient for them, or as if they are so desperate to hide their stupidity that they just pretend this contradiction is not there.

How could the mere ideological betrayal of irrational people be irrational or the breaking away from evil ideologies or people be evil itself?  Such things would be impossible!  It takes a great deal of avoidable irrationality to confuse the betrayal of something like an affair or an abusive action towards a loved one for general betrayal.  Just because some forms of betrayal are irrational or sinful does not mean others are.  The emotionalistic fervor around the word betrayal and/or the idea behind it has driven some people to think of all betrayal as the same without identifying the glaring differences.  Without emotionally or socially ignited reactions, it would be easy for almost anyone to understand this objective fact.

There is a very simple way to not be delusional on the subject of betrayal: do not believe that all betrayal is wrong while believing that there are exceptions or that some cases of betrayal are not really betrayal at all.  Any change in allegiance either is or has the potential to become a betrayal of sorts, even if it is not a situation where most people would think of the word itself.  Someone who goes from irrationalism to rationalism has betrayed irrationality, but this cannot possibly be irrational.  Someone who turns their allegiance away from evil people has betrayed the former relationship they had, but this could not possibly be evil.  Why would people so blindly pretend like the opposite is true?