Is It Better to Be Loved or Feared as a Leader?

The first characteristic of a great leader is being loved by their people. By way of example Jane Simmons wrote “ an aggressive military leader, he was feared but also admired by people in other land.” Sulieman scared the people that he needed to scare but he was admired by the people he helped. Also in Amit carters queen Elizabeth I summary it says “she was thought of as a good and wise ruler who was truly thought of as a good ruler

A good leader shows others the proper way to act in everyday life. Good leaders help others with their challenges but they also acknowledge that they themselves have challenges in everyday life. A good leader is there to support and aid anyone at anytime. Even if that means getting up early to help before a long day or staying after a hard day and provide guidance those who need it a true leader will do it. Leaders put in the extra work to pick up the slack within the group if it is necessary. Leaders change groups into families. You can not be a leader over others if you first can not lead yourself in the proper way. The only thing different from leading yourself over leading others is that the actions you make while leading yourself only affect you, when you lead others, your actions affect you and others. The person has to be able to take responsibility over their own actions, respect themselves and show, do the work that is necessary and cooperate with

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.

Thesis: A leader is someone a citizen looks up to, someone to guide and give protection but most importantly someone who works for the benefit of the whole community. But what if a leader were to abuse such a power for own selfish purposes and to manipulate the community for the benefit of the leader? In the novel, The Handmaids tale and the film V for Vendetta, The head of the country lead a totalitarian state to keep the proletariats in line through

On the other hand, Lao-tzu admits that being the best leader, partly depends on how people feel about him/her. As he said in his book, “Next best is a leader who is loved. Next one who is feared. The worst is one who is despised.” (Lao-tzu 17) There are many examples of how successful leaders can be when they are being loved by their people. It is a natural act that affects them in being let to stay in power or not. Similarly, governments at the moment face this fact too and as we see throughout the world, governments are being overthrown because of their people’s distaste and hate. That is

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,

Throughout history, leaders have been key in the development of various governments and territories. A leader strives to enrich their people in any way they can, be it culture, intellect, or trade. Additionally, they work to make their land known and important, sometimes through the conquering of land.

When reading both of these stories, I was always hung up on what exactly I thought a good leader is. Lao-Tzu states in his work, “When the Master governs the people are hardly aware that he exists.” His proposal says that the ruler shouldn’t inform the people about all of his ideas, and that the less they know the happier they will be in the end. This idea of a leader, who is somewhat under the radar, completely contradicts Machiavelli’s idea, that a ruler must be feared to be effective. As I thought more about this I felt as if I was slightly more in sync with Machiavelli’s viewpoints. People today need to have an authority figure in which they fear so that they will obey laws. In a world filled with crime, more fear might lead to less law breaking. But is fear the only trait one should have to be an effective leader? In

In conclusion, being a leader that is beloved has a huge effect on being a better leader. For example, Augustus Caesar was so favored that his name was passed on through all the emperors all the way up to 476A.D. The roman citizen would hold festivals just in honor of Augustus. They loved Augustus which made Rome a happier place all in all. In the other hand Nero made Rome become a dark and violent empire. I believe that good rulers always work their hardest to please their people and have positive influences on them. People want a leader who incurages them and is always striving to help the empire grow

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.

Although the above paints a pretty bleak picture, many autocratic leaders are not hated and feared, but rather esteemed, and even loved. It depends on their own personalities - like anyone else, they can be nice people, or highly charismatic, or even willing to listen to and act on others' ideas - on the organization itself (in the military, most soldiers want someone firmly in charge), on the quality of their decisions, and on the needs of the people they lead. If they're generally decent and not abusive, make good decisions for the organization, and fulfil the parent-figure or authority -figure image that most people in the organization are looking for, they can be both effective and well-respected.

There are several reasons I believe it is important to keep the leader from becoming too tyrannical. One of which is that the whole reason we broke away from England was because we wanted to get away from a system of government in which a single person rules

Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be

Niccolo Machiavelli stressed 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…for love is held by a chain of obligation which, men being selfish, is broken whenever it serves their purpose; but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never fails.” He felt that a true leader must be cunning and deceptive, winning the hearts of his people through power and influence. If he could not be liked, he could at least get by knowing he has intimidated these below him into submission. However rash or cruel this may seem, Machiavelli’s argument is not one to be countered easily.

affective ruler should be loved and feared at the same time. But since its hard to be