I think that some context is needed in analyzing this
quote. The entire quote reads as follows:
And here comes in the question whether it is
better to be loved rather than feared, or feared rather than loved. It might perhaps be
answered that we should wish to be both; but since love and fear can hardly exist
together, if we must choose between them, it is far safer to be feared than
loved.
In this, a couple of
realities present themselves. The first is that Machiavelli forces a fundamental choice
in being "feared" and "loved." The paradigm offered is that both are the ultimate
ideal. Yet, he is writing about reality, and in a realistic state, ideals are almost
impossible to achieve. With this in mind, the ruler must understand that conditions
will be present in which a choice will probably have to be made. Additionally,
Machiavelli argues that in its most basic form, both emotions negate the other. One
cannot fear and love in the same proportion, with the same intensity, simultaneously.
To this end, there is challenge present. Understanding that a choice has to be made,
Machiavelli says that the ruler has to be feared above all in order to quell threats and
dissension to their power and to ensure complete loyalty on the part of the subjects.
It is here where Machiavelli is seen at his most practical in articulating how the game
of politics is a business rooted in pragmatism.
No comments:
Post a Comment