Niccolo Machiavelli (1513):
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, it 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.
vs.
Desiderius Erasmus (1516):
Oct 13, 2011If you can be at the same time a prince and a good man, you will be discharging a handsome service. If you cannot, then yield the chance to be prince, rather than become a wicked man merely to enjoy it. It is quite possible to find a good man who would not make a good prince; but there can be no good prince who is not also a good man. Yet the ways of some princes have slipped back to such a point that the two ideas of “good man” and “prince” seem to be the very antitheses of one another. It is obviously considered foolish and ridiculous to mention the idea of a good man in speaking of a prince. But you cannot be a king unless reason completely controls you; that is, unless under all circumstances you follow the course of advice and judgment. You cannot rule over others, until you yourself have obeyed the course of honor.
Those expressions of a tyrant, “Such is my will,” “This is my bidding, “Let will replace reason,” should be far removed from the mind of the prince. And far more that other one which already has come into the open malediction of men, “Let them hate, if only they fear.” It is the mark of a tyrant and womanish, too - to follow the unbridled will of your mind; and fear is the poorest surety for a long duration of office.
Let this be the permanent policy of the prince: to harass no one, to help everyone, especially his own subjects; to tolerate evils, or else to remedy them, as he will judge expedient for the common good. Whoever does not take this attitude toward the state is a tyrant, not a prince. If anyone would call you a tyrant and a robber, instead of a prince, would you not be greatly aroused and prepare severe penalties for him? You would, and rightly so, for insult is bitter and should not be borne under any condition. I wish you would think this over: “How much more abusive is that charge to one who is willingly the sort of man that he is charged with being.” For it is a more serious matter to be a thief than to be called one, and it is more hideous to violate a maiden than to upbraid her for her sin.
If you want to be called just what you are, then see that you conduct yourself in such a manner that you enjoy an excellent reputation, and you will follow the surest road. For that is no true praise which is extorted through fear or is paid by flatterers. It is bad when the reputation of the prince and its protection lie in silence imposed through threats. Although your own age may maintain perfect silence, posterity wiII surely talk. Who was ever so formidable a tyrant that he could check the tongues of everyone?
