Endymion Vs. Baron

Those private citizens who become princes through fortune alone do so with little effort, but they maintain their position only with a great deal; they meet no obstacle along their way since they fly to success, but all their problems arise when they have arrives…such men depend solely upon two very uncertain an unstable things: the will and the fortune of him who granted them

Niccolo Machiavelli (1810) asks whether it is better for a prince to be loved or feared in The Prince. The purpose of this essay is to argue that it is better for a prince to be feared than loved since the duty of a prince is to remain in power by any means necessary, using the example of Tsar Ivan. Supporting evidence of conflicting viewpoints will be analysed and evaluated throughout to help reach this judgment. The use of contemporary examples: President Trump and Colonel Gaddafi will also be considered to address this question. The study of Tsar Ivan will be instrumental in asserting this hypothesis, showing that for a prince, it is much more important and better to be feared rather than loved.

Author and philosopher, Niccolo Machiavelli, in the excerpt from his book, “The Morals of the Prince”, describes the different ways of being a successful prince. Machiavelli’s purpose is to show readers how hard he life of a prince really is. He adopts an informative tone in order to convey to his audience that princes are only human and they will be criticized for every little thing. Machiavelli effectively convinces his audience of what makes a good prince through the use of formal diction, appealing to ethos, and appealing to logos.

To understand political power aright, and derive it from its original, we must consider what estate all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of Nature, without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man (...)

In conclusion, political leaders across the world are often noted for their accomplishments during times of crisis in the minds of the people and within the books written about such events. Although political leaders must have certain skills and abilities in order to fulfill the tasks given to them once they enter office, those skills are simply tools to be used against the challenges faced. How political leaders face the challenges and how the challenge is initially solved, such as how they benefit the people at large by their actions, is what they are remembered the most

Recently, everyone has begun to wonder the same thing: why are so many leaders so… corrupt? Why do they care only about a miniscule group of people, throwing aside morals altogether? The feeling of power creates a superiority complex, letting power go to a leader’s head and giving them the desire and means to execute terrible things. This is a problem because many people in our world acquire their power because others believe they can improve the world. Once power takes control, they become corrupt. It is essential for the public to understand this because otherwise, people in power will gain this complex.

The Prince, a book written by Niccolo Machiavelli, was seen as a text about its coherent perspectives and noble concepts of Leadership. There is a term called “Machiavellian”. This term refers to “the belief that a ruler is justified in using any means necessary to stay in power”. Many people can point out many corrupt scandalous government officials that use deception and dishonesty to maintain their power or title. This

As individuals gain power, their higher authority often strives for an easily controlled and often manipulated

From the vantage point of the present, it is easy to look back at the tenure of any great leader and draw conclusions about just what it was that made him/her great. We can examine the circumstances under which their leadership flourished; piece together what we know of their character and personality traits; delve into the factors that may have driven them; and dissect their leadership style all in an effort to pinpoint the source of their success. The ‘Great Man’ theory, popular in the 19th century and now thoroughly debunked, held that leaders are born, not made; suggesting that men like George Washington, Martin Luther King Jr., and Winston Churchill were born with the innate capacity to change the world (Landis,

Although written nearly two centuries apart, The Republic by Plato and The Prince by Machiavelli offer important views on political philosophies of rulers. Plato writes of a perfect society where status as ruler is naturally selected through innate abilities. These abilities are used to sustain the society, better it, and preserve it. Machiavelli writes of a society where anyone can be a prince; which for our purposes is a synonym for ruler, if they follow his instructions. These instructions are to ensure a new ruler can take control of new lands and maintain order in them for the sake of conquering and expanding power.

Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince examines the nature of power and his views of power are still somewhat in existence today. I'll discuss this in this essay, emphasizing the following theses. Machiavelli discusses power over the people, dictatorial power, and power with people, shared power. While it is possible for power with to attain greater prevalence in society, it will not completely eliminate power over. In The Prince, Machiavelli discusses two distinct groups of people, the political elite, including nobles and other princes, and the general public. Today in the United States, the first group, the political elite, includes political leaders, religious leaders, business leaders and the leaders of

Histories have seen many of those gigantic powers who have no mercy on human being, people who used the concept of Machiavelli. Our brain is not a machine and working with food, water and air, they are not all the same. Each one is created in a way genetically and the initializes of someone’s life integrated. Thinking about and expressing meaning for the existences around is I different, so as this is happens, each one takes the prince’s ideology in their way. And I think most of who used it, beginning from the dictators and democratic reached a way, but for some lost the track and reached a dead-end, and for some reached the evaluation of their acts.

The reality is depicted in a litany of powerful, clever men, who misuse their abilities for their own personal ends - which are chiefly, the acquisition and maintenance of power. Their goal is public acclaim, cynically acquired through a popularity based on the

"One 's only rival is one 's own potentialities. One 's only failure is failing to live up to one 's own possibilities. In this sense every man can be a king and must therefore be treated like a king".4