A Tale of Two Leaders

Come Follow Me (Alma 43-52)

The beginning war chapters of Alma rival any film about intrigue, treachery, patriotism and heroism you might be currently binge-watching on Netflix.

Mormon tells the gripping tale of two leaders as foils to contrast each other in their character, desires, and works. One is his son's namesake - a man who put his country first and could see clearly through deception and demagoguery. One was the demagogue himself - an all-too-typical wannabe dictator - self-serving, cunning, and ruthless.

Captain Moroni portrays a type of Jesus Christ: while not sacrificing his own life as our Savior did, he lived his life willing to do so if necessary to defend his country. Amalackiah portrays a type of Satan - living constantly in a state of entitled umbrage, supposing himself denied his due by others far less deserving.

Mormon abridges this part of the record almost more as a well-trained author rather than an inspired historian and prophet. The contrast could not be more clear - the fruit of obedience to God's law leads to service, sacrifice, and freedom. The fruit of disobedience is selfishness, using others to serve selfish ends, and bondage for anyone foolish enough to hitch his wagon to that inevitably briefly bright star.

The ongoing game of "How Does the Book of Mormon Look Like Today?" continues, and for those of you playing along at home, look at the same patterns of the adversary from millennia ago, and how they eerily resemble patterns you've most likely watched in the news recently. Every time, Moroni's response centers on "the cause of Christians"- the righteous use of agency which needs to be protected from tyranny.

Amalackiah used demagoguery to "stir up" the people. His only cause was himself: he wanted the power to rule. The definition of demagogue: "a leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace."

Moroni's response to Amalackiah gaining popular influence was to remind the people what they stood to lose if he became king: their liberty, their right to worship, and their families.

While equally impassioned, Moroni reminded his people of what they were fighting for - not what they were fighting against:

"And it came to pass that he rent his coat; and he took a piece thereof, and wrote upon it - In memory of our God, our religion, and freedom, and our peace, our wives, and our children - and he fastened it upon the end of a pole." (Alma 46:12)

Amalackiah saved his own skin and left his followers behind when he could see he had lost momentum in his cause (Alma 46:29), and through treachery and fraud, quietly executed a coup among the Lamanites by assassinating their chief commander and then their king. As he went, he continued to make the issue about personalities and people - villainizing the entire Nephite nation to create an enemy to drive emotion and gain support.

Moroni - even before the detailed descriptions of banks of earth and watch towers and weaponry - was "preparing the minds of [his] people to be faithful unto the Lord their God" (Alma 48:7) - teaching them correct principles to inspire a desire to govern themselves which was stronger than their desire to have a king.

Demagogues create an enemy and stir up emotions against that enemy.

Patriots defend principles - because correct principles lived and honored protect those they love.

Amalackiah used the sword to gain selfish ends. He died by the sword, as Jesus promised (Matthew 26:52). Moroni used the sword to defend his neighbors, his family, and his homeland for unselfish ends:

"...the Nephites were inspired by a better cause, for they were not fighting for monarchy nor power but they were fighting for their home and their liberties, their wives and their children, and their all, yea, for their rites of worship and their church." (Alma 43:45)

As you read the rhetoric of the ancient despot and patriot, see if there are any similarities in today's touted causes.

Fighting against people for a selfish end? Or fighting for the things you love the most?

Fighting against people and personalities? Or fighting for principles?

The fight hasn't changed, only the actors have. The causes haven't changed. But perhaps, thanks to the perennial focus groups, the rhetoric has been repackaged to sound more appealing. The warning of J. Reuben Clark, Jr. is as prescient today as when he wrote;

"... in the whole history of the human race, from Adam until now, Tyranny has never come to live with any people with a placard on his breast bearing his name. He always comes in deep disguise, sometimes proclaiming an endowment of freedom, sometimes promising help to the unfortunate and downtrodden, not by creating something for those who do not have, but by robbing those who have. But Tyranny is always a wolf in sheep's clothing, and he always ends by devouring the whole flock, saving none. So it is today." (President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., Church News, September 21, 1946)

So it was in 73 B.C. So it is in 2024.