What's So Bad About Babbling in Babylon? The "Tower of Babel" Story

The partially reconstructed Ziggurat of Ur, near Nasariyah, Iraq. Image: public domain from Wikimedia

Drawing of Etemenanki Babylon ("Tower of Babel") Stele. (Public Domain from Wikimedia. Originally from Die Tempel von Babylon und Borsippa : nach den Ausgrabungen durch die Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft, 1911 by Robert Koldewey
Nabopolassar (reigned in Babylon 626-6-5 BCE)
At that time my lord Marduk told me in regard to E-temen-anki, the ziqqurrat of Babylon, which before my day was (already) very weak and badly buckled, to ground its bottom on the breast of the netherworld, to make its top vie with the heavens.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etemenanki#cite_note-arg-3, quoting George, Andrew(2007) "The Tower of Babel: Archaeology, history and cuneiform texts" Archiv für Orientforschung, 51 (2005/2006). pp. 75–95. )
The rebuilding project was completed by Nabopolissar's son, Nebuchadnezzar II, who said that, in order to complete it, he "mobilized all countries everywhere, each and every ruler who had been raised to prominence over all the people of the world." (https://www.schoyencollection.com/history-collection-introduction/babylonian-history-collection/tower-babel-stele-ms-2063)
from: "Babylonian Idolatry in the Prophets As a False Socio-Economic System" by John D. Watts, in Israel's Apostasy and Restoration: Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison, edited by Avraham Gileadi (Baker Book House, 1988)
As no other city in the pre-Roman world, Babylon was looked upon as the city of destiny. Perhaps this came from her reputation for antiquity and mystique. Her history is remarkable. Babylon is mentioned in tablets dated to 2,500 B.C. She was recognized as a provincial capital in the Third Dynasty of Ur. By the following period she had apparently become the capital of a small independent kingdom. This kingdom grew, under Hammurabi, to control most of southern Mesopotamia. The rulers changed many times during the following millennium, but the religious mystique, symbolized by her gods and temples, represented power and rule. Babylon was known as the old, original empire.
Bel (also known as Marduk) and Nebo were this city's symbols. They represented the political, social, military, and economic system that produced successful empires from the days of Hammurabi on. They were symbols of imperial privilege, power, and wealth gained by violent seizure. They were also symbols of arrogance, pride, and unbridled ambition. Thus, the Assyrians represented themselves as heirs to Babylon's place in the service of Marduk. Cyrus and succeeding Persians did the same. The cult of Bel/Marduk, in sixth-century Babylon, represented a claim to the right of empire. It represented a social system of oppression and exploitation, a theory of the exercise of raw power that was incompatible with the worship of YHWH on any level.

Hegemony (Wikipedia)
Hegemony is the political, economic, and military predominance of one state over other states, either regional or global.
...
In theories of imperialism, the hegemonic order dictates the internal politics and the societal character of the subordinate states that constitute the hegemonic sphere of influence, either by an internal, sponsored government or by an external, installed government.
...
In the early 20th century, the Italian Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci used the idea of hegemony to talk about politics within a given society. He developed the theory of cultural hegemony, an analysis of economic class (including social class) and how the ruling class uses consent as well as force to maintain its power. Hence, the philosophic and sociologic theory of cultural hegemony analysed the social norms that established the social structures to impose their Weltanschauung (world view)—justifying the social, political, and economic status quo—as natural, inevitable, and beneficial to every social class, rather than as artificial social constructs beneficial solely to the ruling class.

"Come, let us build us a city and a tower." Many, many years were spent building the tower. It reached so great a height that it took a year to mount to the top. A brick was, therefore, more precious in the sight of the builders than a human being. If a man fell down and met his death, none took notice of it; but if a brick dropped, they wept, because it would take a year to replace it. So intent were they upon accomplishing their purpose that they would not permit a woman to interrupt her work of brickmaking when the hour of travail came upon her. Moulding bricks, she gave birth to her child, and tying it round her body in a sheet, she went on moulding bricks.

But God is less accessible in a man-made world. Surrounded by monuments of our own ingenuity, we grow deaf to the echoes of eternity. In the biblical tale, God’s voice is conspicuously absent. In the face of human arrogance, God withdraws to the most remote corner of the cosmos. Hence the desire to storm the heavens. The breakdown in communication can be restored by human effort.
…
The story mocks the very idea. To reach God there is no need to ascend to heaven. Twice the narrative stresses that God easily descends from on high. Not construction but contrition is what unites the human and divine;our inner state rather than a vast sacred precinct is what bridges the chasm.

We can see a plurality of language and culture not as a punishment but as a blessing. It is an affirmation of diversity and a rejoinder to destructive imperialist ambitions. It is also a beautiful illustration in which we can understand religious pluralism as part of the fabric of humanity. This interpretation rests on an understanding of language as a key factor in shaping culture.

The nineteenth century Rabbi Naftali Zvi Y'hudah Berlin (the Netziv) provides a compelling case for this understanding, seeing a causal connection between the tower builders' shared language and their dangerous hubris in building a tower to heaven. Uniformity of language, he taught, portended uniformity of thought. A common language implied a lack of diversity of opinion (Ha-emek Davar on Genesis 11:4). A colloquial expression in modern English illustrates his point. When everyone agrees with a point of view, we say, "We're speaking the same language!"

...

As Rabbi Jonathan Sacks put it, "Religion is the translation of God into a particular language and thus into the life of a group, a nation, a community of faith. In the course of history, God has spoken to mankind in many languages: through Judaism to Jews, Christianity to Christians, Islam to Muslims." (Jonathan Sacks, The Dignity of Difference [London/New York: Continuum, 2002], p. 55). By creating different languages, God created and sanctified cultural and religious pluralism. Just as our language conveys thoughts and truths that cannot be captured in another, so each faith communicates and embodies unique traditions. Particularity does not imply superiority. Rather, it reflects our global world of enduring and enriching diversity.