Importance Of Ruler In The Prince Niccolo Machiavelli

However, Machiavelli's implies that a leader who strives to be loved would avoid punishing his people; hence this leader is vulnerable to a transgression by his people since there are no repercussions for opposing his rule. The example of Scipio he used portrays this perfectly as his army rebelled due to his kindness. The absence of repercussions for opposing a prince hence can lead to their authority being undermined, which suggests that it is better for a prince to be loved rather than feared. However, this ignores that people can be blinded by their love for a leader, robbing them of their ability to transgress in the way that he describes; the supporter of President Trump demonstrates this perfectly.

Machiavelli led us to a question that was continuously in disagreement. That question was “Is it better to be loved than feared, or vice versa” (p.392)? Machiavelli thought that one is to be loved & feared. Nevertheless, at the same time it’s tremendously hard to achieve being both loved & feared. Machiavelli believed that if one had to do without one of them that it would be a safer to be feared than to be loved. For example if a ruler was more loved than feared then if you served their men’s interest & were also devoted to them they would promise you their blood, possessions, lives, & children until you needed help because once you needed help you were on our own. If you’re more feared than loved then when you’re in trouble your

If someone is loved as a leader, they have a certain image to uphold. If people disagree with their choices, they may try and get that person out of office. This is shown in The Tragedy Of Julius Caesar during Brutus' funeral speech for Caesar, he solemnly confessed "as he was/ valiant, I honor him: but, as he was ambitious, I/ slew him." (III, 2, 23-24) Brutus is saying that even though he loved Caesar, he killed him, because he was too ambitious. This means the ambition ruined Caesar's image to Brutus, causing Caesar's death. This is important because if people rule by fear, they won't have an image to uphold, and that can prevent their rule from ending prematurely. Moreover, love can make people neglectful towards major decisions that the leader makes.

Throughout The Prince, Machiavelli encourages the idea that a fear leader is a good leader. Machiavelli makes the point that a good leader knows that it is, “far safer to be feared than loved” (Machiavelli 43) because love allows for weakness. It is easy to keep people under control and in line when they fear their leader because they do not want to have to face consequences that come with “doing wrong”. When a leader is loved, some many look at this as a weakness. Those who fear their leader are is less likely to curate rebellions and revolts because they know that their leader is not afraid of applying punishment. When a ruler is too kind to their subjects it leaves them vulnerable and they are easily taken advantage of, which threatens their position. For a good leader should, “desire to be accounted merciful and not cruel”, and needs to,

Machiavelli thought that a ruler should be feared because it causes the citizens to not revolt against them.(Doc 1) That statement is not true because the Enlightenment caused a democracy instead of an absolute monarchy. With an absolute monarchy, Machiavelli didn’t want the citizens to have any freedom and wanted them to fear the ruler, but the democracy government changed that. The ruler did not have full control over everyone anymore. The ruler was also not feared and no one revolted against them. This proves that a ruler doesn’t have to be feared in order for citizens not to revolt.

If a leader must choose to be feared or loved what should they choose? On one hand being feared gives that leader control over society because the people fear punishment from the leader. Feared leaders usually have a strong military force and presence. On the other hand if a leader is loved they will have control over the people because society agrees because they listen to the society's ideas. A loved leader will be forgiven by the people when they make mistakes they will also have more trust from the people. Being loved as a leader is much better than being feared.

However, Hobbes and Machiavelli both illustrate the danger if fear is not dealt with properly. For Hobbes, if the sovereign doesn’t provide security to the individuals, then fear will emerge once again amongst them. This will lead to a state of total chaos where once again no one can do anything as they all must defend for their lives. Machiavelli states that if a prince utilizes fear incorrectly, it will eventually lead to their downfall. If they are hated or despised especially by the common people, then anyone can overthrow him as they would be admired and

A society with a ruler that is feared is more organized and peaceful than one with a ruler that is loved. People could argue that in 1984 the people of Oceania love Big Brother, but he still maintains strict control. Yet it only appears as if the people love him, Big Brother and the government of Oceania are actually ruling by fear and manipulation. Fear stops the people from doing things that are against the government's best interest. Being loved by your people will not prevent them from robbing and breaking the law, if they do not fear any punishment, there will be nothing at all stopping them.

The concept of fear as a tool and as a condition is present throughout the Prince. In what is likely his most famous quote, Machiavelli argues that “…it is much safer to be feared than loved…” (1950, p. 61). This implies that inspiring fear in one’s subjects is of great importance to the Prince, and that once again the means of doing this are secondary to the end goals. He also argues that the Prince himself should have a healthy amount of fear, both of his subjects and external threats, and that this fear will allow the Prince to preserve himself and therefore the state which he presides over (p. 67). Socrates would disagree with this fundamentally, for him it is not true that “…where there is fear there is also reverence…”, he would argue that in fact fear and reverence stand in sharp contrast to one another (Plato, 1987, p. 35). Using fear as a tool would not enable one to reach the ideal that Socrates espouses. He also addresses fear as a condition of a ruler by saying that a man should not consider life and death when making decisions, but again should only look to whether his actions are good and just. For him “…to be afraid of death is only another form of thinking that one is wise when one is not…” (pp. 59-60). Both Machiavelli and Socrates see fear as a part of human nature, but where Machiavelli sees fear as a weapon, Socrates sees weakness. A Prince that lived in a state of fear, while also using fear in order to gain and

The way that I see how dictators and tyrants led people in ancient times and modern times was that they either was force to accept them as their leader or actually accepted them. In ancient times, it was normal to have a leader because the leader is supposed to protect them from the other countries that they possibly ran from. Sometimes even if the people feared their leader, there was nothing they could have done about it since most were possibly poor. Some just accepted it even if they didn’t want to because it brought people to show up to their city to live and it gave merchants much more money than what there was before. The dictators and tyrants promised the people in both ancient and modern that they would protect them if they were to

A ruler needs to maintain a positive public image and please as many of the population as possible. It is impossible to please everyone whether you are an effective or ineffective ruler, but maintaining the support of the majority of the masses is of paramount concern in being a successful leader.

While being feared may not solve long-term problems or may lead to rebellion, a strong, intimidating ruler will bring the best results within a limited time frame. To be loved requires one to gain the trust of the people and to prove one is worthy of it; a task usually fulfilled over a long spam on time, years or maybe even decades. In the 1930 and 1940s, a certain government party in Germany came to rule through harsh persuasion and intimidation. They had the love and approval of

Machiavelli’s political advice would help a politician in a modern democratic society. The main idea that Machiavelli is trying to get across is this: A ruler must seem kind, considerate, and have all the positive characteristics that their subjects want them to have - but at the same time, the ruler can’t be afraid of being seen as horrible if in the long run, it will preserve the country/civilization/etc. Machiavelli says: “A prince, therefore, must not mind incurring the charge of cruelty for the purpose of keeping his subjects united and faithful.” It is much better to kill one person than to allow that person to go around and completely destroy a community or civilization. Basically, it is better to be seen as cruel and save a country than to be thought of as kind and let it crumble. Machiavelli thinks that being seen as the ‘perfect’ ruler is great, but trying to keep that image and letting the civilization collapse is the improper thing to do. Machiavelli also says “Is it better to be loved more than feared, or feared more than loved? The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved.” This is true, as he goes on to explain. Fear will get people to do things, but love won’t always get the same results. All of these advices would help a politician in a modern democratic society. To get people to vote, the politician has to seem very sincere, kind, generous, and everything that the people of the society want. Even after the politician achieves whatever position they wanted, they need to keep up their image and continue to seem like the ideal person. However, when the time comes, it is necessary to do cruel things, and things that some people won’t agree with. But this is necessary to keep the city, state, or even country strong and functioning properly. If the president was feared and loved at the same time, it would be ideal. People would do as he asked and

Machiavelli has a political thinker perspective view. He was a philosopher that behaves badly, being evil to see as well as power it was. “It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.” He believed on these because of the way he saw the world, this quote was developed by his political, military and governance services. He believed that love was stronger than fear. But in the way he structured that quote is that love ends, no matter what it ends, it can be strong but at last you have anything. We can fall easily in love, we can love easily, love comes and goes, you can choose to whom you love, but fear is totally the opposite, fear is much more predictable, is even stronger, you can have eternal fear for someone or something as

In the text, The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli talks about the power that a leader must imply over the followers in order to maintain the control. Machiavelli states that there are certain ways in which people in leadership maintain the power; one of them is to avoid being sentimental toward other people; another way is that leaders should be able to take control over people by using cruelty, and making people to fear, but acknowledging that there must be a limit in which people use this cruelty. As long as The Prince ( or any other ruler) is helping the people to benefit themselves from his leadership, he is making the correct use of these ways to maintain the power. However, there could be doubts over the power that an individual implies over the people, since people could look for the weaknesses that this individual possesses. So, in order for a ruler to maintain the power he/she has to avoid being sentimental, use cruelty in a moderate way, and benefit the followers as he proceeds with the leadership.