One may glimpse the future of Babylon by looking at Amazon. Toward Amazon every business model will ultimately flow. "Amazonians" (current Amazon employees) are perceived by the business as but organic cogs -- not unlike the machines they now employ so efficiently -- to be used up and spit out. The "purposeful Darwinism" of Amazonian culture and the personality traits it fosters and rewards actually appeal to me. They describe me.
For I am (still) in Babylon. And Babylon is in me.
The Amazonian culture promoted by Jeff Bezos is, essentially, a high-tech sweatshop now enriching him and those who (for the time being) share his ruthless quest for "success". (Bezos is the 5th richest man on earth.) There is no question that his "formula" works, but that it also de-humanizes human capital.
And why shouldn't it? The farmer who hires transient labor to pick his crops isn't interested in the personal lives of those who perform this service for him. He only wants his fruit picked in the most efficient, cost-effective manner. He would employ a machine if it could do the job better.
It is imagined we are all replaceable by machines in the ultimate "material world".
At the end of the day -- in blood, sweat and tears -- every Amazonian must worship at the altar of Baal...er, Bezos...or be pushed out.
This is the future of Babylon.
Invasive, all-surveilling technology will allow every business and organization to do what Bezos does. Every Babylonian enterprise will become a cut-throat culture, aimed at the bottom line, devoted to gaining market share, increasing profit and pleasing its customer base at all costs, including the health and well-being of its employees.
The Chinese now toil with this mindset: to sacrifice self for the good of the collective.
This is the Babylonian model: the servant is to be sacrificed to serve an impersonal master.
It is a culture starkly devoid of charity.
The Christian model, on the other hand, turns Babylon on its head: the master is to be sacrificed for the servant!
This human experiment is designed to prove (to each of us) which model is most successful. It enables us to chose whom we will have to be our god.
UPDATE: Jeff Bezos had this to say about the NYT's piece.
It is imagined we are all replaceable by machines in the ultimate "material world".
At the end of the day -- in blood, sweat and tears -- every Amazonian must worship at the altar of Baal...er, Bezos...or be pushed out.
This is the future of Babylon.
Invasive, all-surveilling technology will allow every business and organization to do what Bezos does. Every Babylonian enterprise will become a cut-throat culture, aimed at the bottom line, devoted to gaining market share, increasing profit and pleasing its customer base at all costs, including the health and well-being of its employees.
The Chinese now toil with this mindset: to sacrifice self for the good of the collective.
This is the Babylonian model: the servant is to be sacrificed to serve an impersonal master.
It is a culture starkly devoid of charity.
The Christian model, on the other hand, turns Babylon on its head: the master is to be sacrificed for the servant!
This human experiment is designed to prove (to each of us) which model is most successful. It enables us to chose whom we will have to be our god.
UPDATE: Jeff Bezos had this to say about the NYT's piece.
One of the early prophets, I think it may be Brigham Young, said that all this automation (at that time future science-fiction stuff) was so we could spend more time in the temple doing temple work.
ReplyDeleteI would not call cooking food, cleaning house and washing dishes -- nor serving in the temple -- "useless" chores. But, in the end, what does cleaning house provide that moth and dust doth not inevitably corrupt? And what good is done by sealing departed souls to the living damned?
ReplyDeleteUnless one is sealed to Christ, one is not saved. There is no salvation-by-proxy, none other name given by which mankind may be saved. The temple ordinances point to Christ. If repeating the lesson helps drive it home, so be it.
Well, I should have known that irony is one of those things that often gets lost in the servers, routers, and fiber-optic cables of the internet.
ReplyDeleteBut I do agree, the most value I have gotten out of the temple ordinances are the ways that they help point me to Christ.
Will, I thought I knew where you were going with this, but was pleasantly surprised by your simple, profound conclusion.
ReplyDeleteI know many people who have told me Bezos is their personal hero for what he's accomplished, and I think he's [unfortunately] a fitting hero for most Americans. In many ways, Bezos company exemplifies all we hold the most dear in our culture (Money, Competition, Being "better" than others, able to get people to do what you tell them to, being "right" often, in sort, worldly power).
It is always an evil person or evil organization that demands our loyalty. The purpose of loyalty is always to promote the selfish goals of the evil person or organization, and never to benefit the one pledging loyalty.
A righteous person will ask for love, not loyalty. Love cannot be demanded of anyone, it can only be sought through persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness, patience. Love can certainly be encouraged.
I had a conversation recently with someone who explained that loyalty is a great thing — that loyalty picks up where love is not. For instance, this person explained that when a couple "falls out of love" then loyalty keeps them together. But in my opinion, demanding this kind of loyalty is evil, and therefore the correct way to mend relationships is only with love: persuasion, patience, long-suffering, love-unfeigned, reproving at times with sharpness but always following with an increase of love, etc.
What a crappy society we live in where our heroes — our "masters" — exhibit so little kindness and decency and only represent power, wealth, and control over others.
John the Baptist noticed the Jews were a generation of vipers. We americans are likewise a bunch of sons-of-bitches.
Loyalty doesn't ask what is true or light. Loyalty says "my side, wrong or right!"
ReplyDeleteI have to put in my "plug" for loyalty! I've recently asked someone very close to me to remain "loyal".
ReplyDeleteWe go through life depending on others. Sometimes we are paired, attached at the hip, as it were.
Have you ever ran one of those "three-legged" races? It requires quite a bit of concentration and teamwork!
Marriage is a lot like that. Each person stumbles and falls (in some way). And perhaps even love suffers a dearth now and then. That's when loyalty kicks in. We "owe" it to each other to "stick with" each other -- to pitch in and stick up for those who've pitched in and stuck up for us. Why? Because "if you're not one, you're not mine".
That doesn't mean we should be complicit in evil. But nurturing the wayward FROM evil often requires walking WITH them: being with them, hanging out with them, loving them, even when they are unloveable.
That's what Jesus did.
By that notion, this quote makes a lot of sense:
"Our job is to love others without stopping to inquire whether or not they are worthy." -- Thomas Merton
Demonstrating loyalty goes a long way toward doing that. I have found no sermon on the mount countermanding that injunction. Just the opposite. Being "loyal" shouldn't mean covering for, excusing, or denying the wrongs of others. It means "sticking with" those even who have fallen. It means not jumping ship or abandoning the team just when things look their darkest and most bleak. It requires no small measure of selflessness and charity.
Loyalty ought not be exploited. Its possession is a rare and heavenly gift.
Will,
ReplyDeleteNo.
Log,
ReplyDeleteWas it loyalty or charity that Mormon demonstrated when he "stuck with" the Nephites, leading them into battle in a hopeless cause?
Was it loyalty or charity that motivated Moroni to plead for the Gentiles, that they might have charity?
Was Moses charitable or loyal to the wayward Israelites when he spake to God: "Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin—; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written"? (Exo. 32:32).
Was it loyalty or charity that turned Joseph back to Carthage and his fate?
Loyalty is tolerance and patience, perseverance and long-suffering, wrapped in a cloak of charity and fellowship. It does not excuse or ignore the sins of others, but suffers them, and does not easily abandon those in need.
In a word,
Yes.
Will,
ReplyDeleteYou're justifying yourself.
What are you justifying?
ReplyDeleteYou were unwilling to let people make decisions based solely on their values and their desires - so you attempted to impose the bonds of loyalty, which is nothing more than "you owe a duty to me."
Why did you do that? Because you are unwilling to eat the pains of the consequences of those decisions. Paternalism, in other words.
And you know it. Anytime you have to say "I'm right because...", you're wrong.
"Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?"
ReplyDeleteI have been studying the differences between Zion and Babylon a lot lately. I like this perspective, and think that we should use a spiritual perspective to talk about modern economic topics a lot more often.
ReplyDeleteI have been working on writing a comprehensive study of everything the Book of Mormon says about economic topics, particularly economic inequality. I would be eager to hear thoughts from any of you.
http://unconventionalinquiry.blogspot.com/p/what-does-book-of-mormon-say-about.html
It is wrong to demand loyalty. It is right to freely offer it.
ReplyDeleteThe nature of "teamwork" requires "sticking with the team". Few, if any, would come if they knew they were going to be abandoned on the field at the first sign of trouble. In some things, you "sign up" for the long haul. In others, only for the moment. Loyalty says "These are my people. I will not abandon them...even though they may let me down."
Swear not at all, as it is said.
ReplyDeleteAnyways, you get to make your own choices. If loyalty is your polestar, well, see how that ends. Choose who you're loyal to very carefully. Because if you're consistent in your loyalty - that is, firm, unshakable, never-to-let-go - and you choose to be loyal to someone who ain't going where you want to be going... well, you have forsworn yourself, haven't you? But, then, if loyalty is your polestar, maybe they are going where you want to be going.
ReplyDelete