Machiavelli's The Prince
Since the beginning of civilization man has continually been faced with the complexity of creating a peaceful and unified existence for all, without resistance or violence. People have been trying to develop a system of how to rule effectively while acting ethically and morally to avoid chaos and destruction. However, as history has shown us this has not been an easy endeavor and very few rulers have been able to accomplish this. "This leads us to a question that is in dispute: Is it better to be loved than feared, or vice versa?" (Machiavelli, 51) An effective ruler would be one that relies upon fear without hatred, rather than love, as described by Niccolo Machiavelli in his book The Prince.
In a perfect world all people would be good-hearted, …show more content…
"But fear restrains men because they are afraid of punishment, and this fear never leaves them. Still, a ruler should make himself feared in such a way that, if he does not inspire love, at least he does not provoke hatred. For it is perfectly possible to be feared and not hated." (Machiavelli, 52) If there were no consequences for bad behavior, people would have no reason to act any differently. It is not that punishment in itself creates hatred, but it is how the people are punished that will determine the fear or the hatred they have for their ruler. For example if one is caught stealing and then punished by having to serve some time in jail, that would cause them to fear you and to abide by the law. On the other hand if the punishment were death it would cause the people to hate the ruler for being so un-just and immoral. When a ruler becomes hated they lose all respect and control over the people, for they will reach a point that they can no longer endure the cruelty and rise against you. "Indeed, one of the most effective defenses a ruler has against conspiracies is to make sure he is not generally hated. For conspirators always believe the assassination of the ruler will be approved by the people." (Machiavelli, 57) When people feel as they have been oppressed and abused for to long they will revolt and not think twice about getting rid of the ruler they are discontented with. For once …show more content…
That way you will not have to commit new atrocities every day, and you will be able, by not repeating your evil deeds, to reassure your subjects and to win their support by treating them well. He, who acts otherwise, either out of squeamishness or out of bad judgment, has to hold a bloody knife in his hand all the time.
A hated, thus unsuccessful ruler would be one that would not know his limits, and continue to use violence to obtain desired results. A wise ruler would be one who could look ahead and see when it is necessary to do harm so that he can know exactly what needs to be done, how to do it, and when to do it. Most importantly the ruler must have the ability to stop once what he has set out to do is accomplished. Violence and evil doing must be used sparingly to prevent the populous from hating
In a perfect world all people would be good-hearted, …show more content…
"But fear restrains men because they are afraid of punishment, and this fear never leaves them. Still, a ruler should make himself feared in such a way that, if he does not inspire love, at least he does not provoke hatred. For it is perfectly possible to be feared and not hated." (Machiavelli, 52) If there were no consequences for bad behavior, people would have no reason to act any differently. It is not that punishment in itself creates hatred, but it is how the people are punished that will determine the fear or the hatred they have for their ruler. For example if one is caught stealing and then punished by having to serve some time in jail, that would cause them to fear you and to abide by the law. On the other hand if the punishment were death it would cause the people to hate the ruler for being so un-just and immoral. When a ruler becomes hated they lose all respect and control over the people, for they will reach a point that they can no longer endure the cruelty and rise against you. "Indeed, one of the most effective defenses a ruler has against conspiracies is to make sure he is not generally hated. For conspirators always believe the assassination of the ruler will be approved by the people." (Machiavelli, 57) When people feel as they have been oppressed and abused for to long they will revolt and not think twice about getting rid of the ruler they are discontented with. For once …show more content…
That way you will not have to commit new atrocities every day, and you will be able, by not repeating your evil deeds, to reassure your subjects and to win their support by treating them well. He, who acts otherwise, either out of squeamishness or out of bad judgment, has to hold a bloody knife in his hand all the time.
A hated, thus unsuccessful ruler would be one that would not know his limits, and continue to use violence to obtain desired results. A wise ruler would be one who could look ahead and see when it is necessary to do harm so that he can know exactly what needs to be done, how to do it, and when to do it. Most importantly the ruler must have the ability to stop once what he has set out to do is accomplished. Violence and evil doing must be used sparingly to prevent the populous from hating