Four Girls and a Guy

Welcome to our blog for our University College World Politics class!!!

Monday, September 18, 2006

To Be loved or feared?

Sorry I am computer illiterate and I just published my title by accident. Anyway I thought a very interesting point that Machiavelli brought up in the Prince was the question “is it better to be loved than feared, or vice versa?” (p.51) His response to this was that “since it is difficult to accomplish both at the same time, I maintain it is much safer to be feared than loved if you have to do without one of the two” (p.51). My question is why does a ruler have to go with one or the other? Machiavelli was explaining how to be the best ruler thus I don’t think he should have settled. He should have said that a good ruler would know in the right situations when to be nice and when to be feared.
One could possible relate this to Hitler in the early stages. He said that he would not invade any other countries except Poland. He could have said, “I am going to take over whatever country I want.” However, he had a plan and it required creating a good peaceful relationship with the countries of Europe. To be loved by Europe Then when the time was right he invaded the rest of Eastern Europe and the world began to fear him.
However, if one takes Machiavelli’s point that one should be feared then Stalin would be a great example. When he died he was deemed to most feared person on the planet. So if one wanted to be a powerful leader I guess killing off thousands of your own people is the way to go.
Concluding Machiavelli has a great point and it still relates to resent history however, I believe that a successful ruler should be able to deviate between when to be feared and when to be loved.


Post a Comment

<< Home