Upon
this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or
feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both,
but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer
to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with.
Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful,
fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are
yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life and children,
as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches
they turn against you. And that prince who, relying entirely on their
promises, has neglected other precautions, is ruined; because friendships
that are obtained by payments, and not by greatness or nobility of mind,
may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot
be relied upon; and men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved
than one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation
which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for
their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which
never fails.
|
Nevertheless a prince
ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he
does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being
feared whilst he is not hated, which will always be as long as he abstains
from the property of his citizens and subjects and from their women. But
when it is necessary for him to proceed against the life of someone, he
must do it on proper justification and for manifest cause, but above all
things he must keep his hands off the property of others, because men
more quickly forget the death of their father than the loss of their patrimony.
Besides, pretexts for taking away the property
are never wanting; for he who has once begun to live by robbery will always
find pretexts for seizing what belongs to others; but reasons for taking
life, on the contrary, are more difficult to find and sooner lapse. But
when a prince is with his army, and has under control a multitude of soldiers,
then it is quite necessary for him to disregard the reputation of cruelty,
for without it he would never hold his army united or disposed to its
duties.
|
Nicolo Machiavelli (1515): The Prince