..
IS IT BETTER FOR A LEADER TO BE FEARED THAN LOVED?
This paper willargue that iy is better for a leader tobe loved than feared. There will be arguments, objection and reply to the objection in this paper. Twotexts is used as source for this essay, one is Machiavelli’s Prince and the other is Cicero’s On Duties. In my opinion being loved is better for leader. There will be two arguments concerning with the thesisstatement. One is that a leadershouldbeloved because if people hates leader, there can be a revolution and the leadershould also have authority in the state. I will also consider the differentapplicability of this idean in monarchies and in democrasies. In this paper I want to state that by love a state can be governed for centuries but by fear with the change the leader authority can be damaged.
In my opinion it is good for a leader to be loved in state however the leader should also be authotarian . Because if the leader has no authority in the state he cannot rule people. If there is both love and authority it is best for a leader to rule the state in good conditions. If public is afraid of the leader that fear can easily turn into hate. Then it is not good for a state if leader is hated by public. People cannot be easily ruled and there can occur chaos in the state. If a leader is cruel than it is very hard to rule the state for the leader coming next to him. Love is more important for a leader because if leader is loved therecan occur an order in a state but if leader is feared there can bea chaos in state all people want the leader to be changed. Machiavelli thinks that if a leader is not even clement he shouldalso be seen as he has clemency:” I say that every prince ought to desire to be considered clementand not cruel. Neverthless he ought to take care not to misuse this clemency.”(Machievelli, chap. 17) So I see that there should be clemency in ruling the state and this clemency causes stability in state. Yet a leader should adjust the balance of love and authority because if there is no balance leader cannot have the control of the state. Machiavelli also thinks that a prince should always have the control himself but he thinks that it is better to make it by fear but I don’t agree. If leaders of a state are loved for long times there will be an order in the state and the state will be stable for a long time this good for both leaders and for the people living in the state. “ Fear is a poor guardian over lenght of time; but goodwill keepsfaithful guard forever.”(Cicero, book II, 23) So we see that Cicero also thaught thata leader can have authority by love for a long time.
A possible objection can be given this argument, if a leader is not feared he cannot have authority in ruling the state. People love the leader according to their will but leader can control that in which way people are afraid of him so it is better for the leader to be feared to take the control of the state. “ for love is preserved by by the link of obligation which, owing to baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage, but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.”(Machiavelli, chap. 17) so we see that if people even love the leader they can also change their mind against him for their advantage so the leader loses the control and this position it is notbetter for a leader to be loved than feared.
A reply can be given to this objection. If a leader ruler a state well then he is loved, for example if a leader is a just man and ruling the state in that way he is loved by the public. If there is something good for the people they do not change their minds against leader. If a leader is feared, that fear can turn into hate and if it increases there can even be a revolution in the state so it is not good for a leader to be feared. If leader makes something cruel to people he is feared and maybe he takes the control of the state but it cannot continue for a long time. If a leader has the control by a restraint regime when the leader changes the newleader loses the authority. For example in the Ottoman Empire the emperor Murat IV took the control by cruelty. He had some laws and if a man breaks that laws he is punished in a bad way. There were some prohibitions, for example alchool and tobacco was forbidden and if a man was seen drinking alchool he was killed. It was forbidden to be out of houses after the last pray of the day. By these prohibitions emperor took the control and he was feared but after his death there was a chaos his order was damaged andpeople again behaved in the way that they wantbut if he was loved by the public his order would not be damaged after years from his death. “ that is the strongest to secure not only safety, but also influence and power, so that fear may be absentbut love preserved.”(Cicero, book II, 24) The authority by fear is not stable but the authority by love is stable so I believe that to be loved is better for a leader.
In monarchies it is more important for a leader to be loved than in democrasies. Because in modern democracies there are written constituons and laws so the leader does not directly rule the state he or she also obeys the laws and rules the state according to them. In generally in democracies leader is loved by public because public chooses their leader. In monarchies the situation is different than democracies because there is no written rules and the ruler is directly the leader. So it is in the leader’s powwer to be loved or feared. In monarchiesif there is arevolt against leader because there is no authority. If a leader is loved it is easier in monarchy to control the state because he is the only authority so if the authority is lovedpeople obey him easily. So I believe that it is good for a leader to be loved. Otherwise if leader is feared and as a result he is hated there can be a revolution against leadership.
In conclusion I can say that if a leader has authority and he is loved by the society he can rule people in a good way and people will be happy in the state. If leaders are loved by people there will be stable governing for long years because if the authority is provided by the love it continues for long years.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Machiavelli, Prince. Chapter XVII
- Cicero, On Duties. Edited by M. T. Griffin and E. M. Atkins, Cambridge University
Press, 2002 Cambridge
…
|
warnerblade.com 