...Is leader better loved or feared? Even though feared leaders will ultimately always produce a result, being a loved leader you can get your followers to want to do what you ask of them because being feared will produce only the results that you want, being loved will likely produce results that exceed your expectations and being a loved leader will get you honest feedback from all those behind you. So should a leader be feared or loved by those who follow them? History has shown that results can be achieved either way. However, will the ones who follow stay loyal once the outcome has been achieved? Historic leaders such as Hitler in Nazi Germany or present day leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-il have gained leadership and kept it using fear and oppression as their tactic. Other leaders such as JFK of the United States and Ghandi as a leader of his peace movement in India were both loved by all those who followed them. They both lead their nations to happiness and prosperity. Even though these two methods are complete opposites they were both successful in their own ways. It is my opinion that leaders who are loved are able to convey ideas and achieve purpose more effectively when it comes to the interest of the people they lead. It is important for a leader to be loved, admired, and respected. How can one be sure that those who claim they are loyal will truly be loyal when put into a situation where it is tested? When a leader has proved their love and are then loved in return...
Words: 843 - Pages: 4
...In the excerpt from Prince, Machiavelli depicts two types of leaders: those who are loved and those who are feared. Machiavelli states that it is “ much safer to be feared than loved” but is that necessarily true? Many leaders throughout time that have been successful were liked by their people. When was the last time you associated being loved with war? Never but when was the last time you associated being feared with war? These obstreperous people under the feared leaders would rather not be constantly fearing what their leader might do. Eventually, they will stand up for themselves and revolt. Leaders, such as John F. Kennedy, who were generally loved are in a better situation than those leaders who are feared. John F. Kennedy — the 35th...
Words: 645 - Pages: 3
...The Pursuit of Love Erin Dougherty THE 206 2/2/16 The Pursuit of Love In today’s society, being liked and receiving approval from others is held at upmost importance. From an early age, we crave the affection and love of others, and try to avoid upsetting or making others angry. Some people go as far as pretending to be someone that they are not because they would rather be loved for their false persona instead of hated for being themselves. Machiavelli would argue that while it is good to be loved, it is better for a prince to be feared, and while it is important to avoid a reputation of being weak, it is more important to avoid being hated by your people. It is important to note that being loved and being feared are compatible with each other; however; being feared and respected should take priority over being loved and revered. Machiavelli says that is good to be loved because it makes being a prince more pleasurable, and makes it easier to maintain peace and order in the kingdom. If a ruler is loved by his people, his subjects are endeared to him, and are in full support of his rule of their land. They praise his work, and hail him as a great ruler. A loving prince and subject relationship will make the work of the prince more rewarding and pleasurable. The prince will not have to act as “the bad guy,” and avoid the ruthless and cruel reputation that is often associated with rulers who conquer new territory. Additionally, the prince will not have to deal...
Words: 1324 - Pages: 6
...Martincek MBA 560 – Ethical Leadership and Sustainable Organizations Introduction Niccolo Machiavelli was an Italian political philosopher, writer, and humanist who is recognized as the founder of modern political science and political ethics. Michaivelli was diplomat in Florence for 14 years but when the Medici family returned to power in 1512, Machiavelli was dismissed and briefly jailed. While in jail, he wrote a handbook called “The Prince”, which was a guide for politicians on how to rule. This book influenced the minds of other politicians, inspiring the term “Machiavellian” and establishing Machiavelli as the “father of modern political theory”. In “The Prince”, Machiavelli presented the question whether it is better to be loved or feared, which has been debated since the book came out. Machiavelli Background Machiavelli was born on the May 3, 1469 in Florence, Italy. The young Machiavelli always had the desire to occupy political office. In 1494 Machiavelli obtained a job as a diplomat after the Medici family was exiled from rule and held this post for 14 years. He also gave advice on military tactics, successfully organizing infantry forces in specific Italian campaigns and establishing a Florentine militia. Machiavelli was jailed in 1512 after unsuccessfully attempting to organize a Florentine militia against the Medici family, who had returned to power. While in jail, Machiavelli desperately wanted to return to politics and his goal was to win the...
Words: 1139 - Pages: 5
...In his book “The Prince”, Machiavelli was teaching a young ruler how to hold on to his power in a time of political instability. He did not advocate random, self-serving cruelty, such as the acts that Macbeth performs. He instead suggested that one take charge by making an example of a few enemies or rebellious citizens, and then slowly begin to reward those who are loyal: "Injuries must be inflicted all together so that, swallowed less, they injure less, and benefits have to be bestowed little by little so that they can be savored better." Machiavelli clearly believed that fear alone could not help a prince to stay in power. He knew that ideally, the people would support their leader out of love. However, this is another way his ideas have...
Words: 789 - Pages: 4
...any chance they get. When a prince gains his royalty through the help of the people he must work to gain their friendship. Machiavelli said this was easy, because they only thing the people ask for is to not be oppressed. He must take them under his wing and protect them from the nobles. Machiavelli stresses the importance of keeping the peoples friend ship, because without it a ruler “has no remedy in times of adversity.” A prince must keep a good relationship with the people. In times of war, a prince will be counting on the aid of the people. Without a good relationship from the people he will have no one to fight the war. He could try telling to nobles that they are going to fight it, but they will probably think that the prince is no better than them so they will tell him no. A prince needs to make a plan, and find a way to make the people always part of a circumstance and dependent on him and his power. If the people continue to reply on the prince, then they “will always be faithful to...
Words: 1013 - Pages: 5
...of political leaders and their intricate relationship with society indeed validate itself within both texts. However, both Lao-tzu and Machiavelli approach this issue from almost entirely opposite positions, though sharing minute similarities. Lao-tzu appears to focus the majority of his attention on letting problems or situations take their course, and consequently good would prevail. On the contrary, Machiavelli advocates the necessity for a successful leader, or prince, to take control of his deeds, and the skills or qualities necessary to maintain power. Since both writers propose a question as to what is in essence the same dilemma, effective leadership, it becomes almost natural literary etiquette to contrast the two in an effort to better understand what qualities a prosperous leader must possess. Despite each author’s contrasting approaches to rhetoric, they agree that a ruler should avoid being hated and despised, but disagree in areas such as government involvement in citizens’ everyday lives. In comparing Lao-tzu and Machiavelli in terms of governing standards, many may doubt that they are comparable in any aspect. Though their comparability is limited, one in particular is that...
Words: 1499 - Pages: 6
...As a leader, is it better to be feared, or revered? Lynn Dean Excelsior College Abstract With every generation of leaders, the ageless debate surfaces; as a leader, is it better to be feared or revered? Leadership attributes, skills, and styles are the driving forces to lead others to successful mission accomplishment. Good leadership is based on these fundamental, unchanging qualities, such as competence, character, and a profound sense of responsibility. Styles of leadership may vary over time or may evolve with changing circumstances, but these bedrock qualities are foundations of a leaders' substance. Profiling historic leaders shows how these qualities are embodied by these leaders. Even with these qualities being present in all successful leaders, they can still be perceived as either feared or revered. It stands in good contention that successful leaders, whether feared or revered possessed the same qualities. The differences in the perception, is in how the leaders deployed their leadership philosophies. Many leaders are revered by their followers, and feared by their enemies, as where other leaders are feared by their followers. Keywords: Leaders, leadership. As a Leader, is it Better to be Feared, or Revered? Machiavelli believed that a great leader should be feared rather than loved. A midstream conservative approach is to say that it’s better to be both loved and feared, but we know in all reality that this is a nearly unattainable...
Words: 3631 - Pages: 15
...Historical and political thinkers have pondered the question, whether it is better for a leader to be feared or to be loved, for centuries. Two writers, ancient Chinese philosopher Lao-Tzu and Italian Renaissance writer Niccolo Machiavelli, have presented considerably different opinions on how a ruler should run his, or her, country. In the "Tao the Ching", Lao-Tzu believes it is better for a leader to be loved, however in Machiavelli's "The Qualities of the Prince", he believes it is better for a ruler to be feared, without being hated. While contemplating the question, whether it is better for a leader to be feared or to be loved, there are several bases of comparison to analyze when arriving at a conclusion. One of the bases of comparison...
Words: 307 - Pages: 2
...Machiavelli, the well-known philosopher of the Italian Renaissance, poses this question in this famous book excerpt The Morals of the Prince: "is it better to be loved than feared, or vice versa?" Machiavelli answers his own question, arguing that a prince is much safer being feared than being loved. Inducing fear upon his subjects with cruelty will keep them united and loyal. Those who are fearful of a person of any authority are more inclined not to cross the boundary of disrespect, for fear of punishment. Without a doubt, being loved is desired and has a greater value compared to being feared. Love has the power to nurture, support and ultimately, liberate; fear restricts, denies and imprisons. Personal growth and human achievement thrive on love, while fear hampers and destroys potential. Many people who aspire to be feared actually are fearful people themselves. They command respect rather than earning it, but they desperately want it all the same. To allow ourselves to be loved we have to also allow ourselves to be vulnerable. If we are very fearful people then we may feel that we need to form a protective emotional barrier around ourselves and shut out love. When this happens we may come across to others as cold and unfeeling. At the same time we may want to have as much control as possible, including control over other people. Being loved is not about having to abandon discipline, or being soft and fuzzy. For me, love means that the support, instruction, good example and encouragement...
Words: 338 - Pages: 2
...Adrianna Goodrich Hour 3 The Prince Essay In Machiavelli’s “The Prince” he approaches the question “Is it better to be feared or loved.” Love endures a bond which anyone can break to their advantage giving more reason for a leader to be feared. Any leader should be feared, because compassion destroys order, cruelty comes with a price, and love is limited. Sympathizing order leads to chaos. If you sympathize people and show them compassion they expect more. Caligula was a popular leader at first, because he freed citizens from imprisonment, and got rid of harsh sales tax. As shown he is compassionate towards his people. Once the people have less to do that piles more work for you. Being compassionate is okay, but not with order. Everyone needs rules to live or even a little guidance. Machiavellian is a word meaning craft and deceit to maintain authority and to carry out a ruler's policies. With maintaining order you need the right attitude to do so....
Words: 538 - Pages: 3
...may be viewed as uncaring or unreliable, but to ourselves we know that we had to make a decision that could hurt someone but at the same time our decision could help that same person or persons. Making a promise and not being able to keep it for one reason or another, is one of the few topics that Machiavelli writes of in his essay “The Morals of the Prince”. He also tells why he believes a prince should be feared rather than loved, and why a prince should be stingy and not generous. He wants us to know how a “perfect” prince should act and behave so that the prince will be viewed upon as a great prince. Summary Machiavelli writes about how he believes a prince should act and behave to be considered a successful prince, one that is loved and feared, liberal and stingy, one that knows when to keep his word and when to break it. In his essay, Machiavelli writes “a prince who wants to keep his post must learn how not to be good, and use that knowledge, or refrain from using it, as necessity requires” (218). When writing about how it is better to be feared than loved, Machiavelli knows that there must be a balance between the two that the prince must find. He also writes how that same balance must be found between being liberal and stingy and writes how prince must also know when to...
Words: 1138 - Pages: 5
...George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Julius Caesar, These individuals were considered by many to be three of the most successful leaders in history, who were loved by the people they led. But is it better to be loved, or feared? Other people throughout history have been successful on the other side of the spectrum; people who lead by fear. Leaders such as Genghis Khan, and Attila the Hun, were widely feared by the people they ruled. However, this did not get in the way of their success as leaders. In fact, that same fear may have benefitted them. There are many pros and cons to both ways of ruling. For example, you can be loved by your people and only do things that benefit everyone, but your actions will prevent you from advancing in any way. You cannot gain a new territory, or take control of a new resource without a cost to others-There is always an expense. Now let's say that you decide to use fear to your advantage and rule with an iron fist. It will without a doubt provide many short term wins in the beginning and make your people happy, but eventually you may have control of more land than you can manage. You may have also made more people and/or countries unite against you than you can handle. A major advantage of ruling through fear is that...
Words: 538 - Pages: 3
...Niccolò Machiavelli is a prominent civic humanist and political theorist of the 16th century. He served as an official of the Florentine Republic for many years following the French invasion of 1494, during which the Medici family fell from power. He had responsibilities in diplomatic missions and military affairs. This did not last long, however, as the Medici family soon regained control of Florence almost two decades later. Machiavelli was then arrested and tortured under accusations of plotting against the family. He was left without a job after his release and wrote various works during this newfound free time, his most famous being his political treatise, The Prince (1513). During the time Machiavelli wrote The Prince, Italy was not a unified country. Instead, it was a collection of city-states, each with its own court and ruler, each attempting to gain power over the others. Due to a lack of consolidation among its city-states, Italy also became a target for outside invaders and suffered from constant warfare. After the fall of the Medici in Florence, Machiavelli served as an ambassador and secretary to the Republic of Florence. When Florence fell into the hands of the Medici family once again, Machiavelli narrowly escaped execution and was exiled. Machiavelli lost his government position and disgraced in the countryside outside Florence. Machiavelli intended for this novel to be a sort of guide: a handbook for princes who have political power and wish to maintain it...
Words: 668 - Pages: 3
...THE SUPERIOR FORM OF GOVERNANCE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THE VIEWS OF NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI AND LAO TZU Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Bachelor of Arts in Political Science College of Arts and Sciences San Sebastian College- Recoletos, Manila August 2013 Vincent Roland R. Managuelod Ray Joshua B. Valdez INTRODUCTION In Politics there are many schools of thought that form the basis for the policies used in the operation of the government. These schools of thought vary greatly in purpose and belief, with many of these schools actively opposing one another. Ultimately, whatever beliefs these schools of thought may hold, and whatever actions these beliefs may lead them and the state their purpose is to shape the state into what they believe is ideal and beneficial for all. Of the many ideologies which are followed by statesmen, varied they may be, the ultimate goal is to create a society according to their ideals. In this study we will be discussing two thinkers whose schools of thought have had a significant impact on political philosophy today. The first is Niccolo Machiavelli. A philosopher, politician, diplomat and historian whose works have made his name a by-word for pragmatism and ruthlessness not just in politics but in everyday life. His most famous work, the Prince, advocated the separation of personal morals to that of one’s political morals, and the emphasis not on ideology but on what would be the most beneficial...
Words: 3850 - Pages: 16
