As a leader, is it better to be feared or to be loved? This question is so important for a few reasons. The first reason that this question is so important is because it can not only help the leaders of today, but in ways, can help everyone. It shows that no matter what kind of leader you may be, it is good to ask yourself this question of whether or not it is better to be feared of loved. Also, finding the answer to this question will help everyone for either now or for the future. Everyone at some point in their lives are going to have to answer this question themselves.
This is important because you need to know how to treat your employees or any time type of leadership position you might have. Machiavelli says “far as being feared and loved is concerned, since men decide for themselves whom they love, and rulers decide whom they fear, a wise ruler should rely on the emotions he can control, not on the one he cannot. But he must avoid being hated. ” (Machiavelli 53) Machiavelli himself has trouble answering this question one way or another, but we need to answer this ourselves in order for us to succeed as leaders in the future.
I agree with the claim that it is safer to be feared than to be loved from Machiavelli. Machiavelli says “My reply is ought to be both loved and feared; but, 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. ” (Machiavelli 52) However, Machiavelli brings up a good point saying that it is tough to pick between the two because you want to have both as a leader.
Some of the reasons why it’s better to be feared than loved is because if the ruler is loved, the civilians could easily take advantage of him and trick him into some sort of bad situation for himself. The ruler needs to realize that if he is loved there is a greater chance for the civilians to want to try and revolt. Also, if you are a leader of an army, it is essential to be feared, so that you can keep your army together and unified. One new argument to make is that it is better to be feared because then everyone knows that they will be punished if they do something against the leader or treason.
These are some ideas of why it is better to be feared rather than to be loved. The first reason as to why a leader is better off being feared than being loved, is because the civilians could easily take advantage of the leader and trick them into some sort of bad situations. The ruler needs to realize that if he is loved there is a greater chance for the civilians to want to try and revolt. Being feared as a leader will mean that the civilians would not want to take a chance on the leader and test the leader.
However, this also can apply to our lives today, if a leader is feared, that means that the employees would be afraid of to make a mistake and therefore work harder to get everything right for their leader. If the leader was loved and not feared, than the employees would be fine with making a mistake and it might happen continuously. So in conclusion the first reason as to why it is better to be feared is because the civilians could take advantage of you as a leader if you are loved.
Another reason as to why it is better for a leader to be feared than loved, is because when a military leader needs to bring an army together and unified there needs to be some cruelty involved. “For it is impossible to keep an army united and ready for action without acquiring a reputation for cruelty. ” (Machiavelli 52) As a military leader, it is necessary for the leader to have some sort of cruelty in him. The leader should want to lead by example and being cruel to them is how they should want to fight. As a military leader, if you are loved, than the army might not have any passion or desire to fight and kill.
The members of the army might not be motivated enough to kill and dominate a battle if the leader is loved opposed to feared. So in conclusion, as a military leader, it is better to be feared than to be loved simply because of the passion and desire to win. Finally, the last reason as to why a leader would rather be feared than to be loved is because if they are feared than they know that punishment is coming for anything they do. Therefore, going back to previous ideas, this would reduce the ideas of messing up or revolting.
However, the fear of punishment itself, is enough for people to not want to cause any issues for the leader. “But fear restrains men because they are afraid of punishment and this fear never leaves them. ” (Machiavelli 52) However, there is difference between being feared and being hated by other people. Fear and hatred are different ideas, and therefore need to be controlled by the leader himself. So in conclusion, being feared is better than being loved for a few reasons and the last one is knowing that there is some sort of punishment waiting for someone who is misbehaving around town.
One clever and fair objection that someone might make about these reasons is when I was talking about the military leader, it would be better to be loved because the army would have someone who has inspired them to fight for. Their argument might be that if the leader is loved by the army, they would want to fight and die for him and their purpose. Also, they might argue that, if a leader is cruel, they would not want to fight for someone is cruel and mean to them.
Although, these arguments are clever and fair arguments, I disagree with these reasons as to why it is better to be loved. First of all, these reasons do not show up very much in history, where and army wants to fight specifically for their leader. However, most men fight so that they can please their leader because they fear him. Another reason for disagreement, is that if a leader is cruel, than you probably do not have a choice but to fight. They are also dying for him because he would treat them awful anyway if they were not fighting like men and