Fear, Love, Hate
Liana R. Prieto (September 1997)
An effective leader must command the support and respect of the people he governs. The debate revolves around how to gain and keep power. Georges Duby depicts a man loved by the people in William Marshal: The Flower of Chivalry. In The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli presents the arguments for why it is better for a ruler to be feared. Ideally, a leader should be both feared and loved but such a balance is impossible to achieve. Fear, being stronger and more enduring, is the emotion on which a leader should base his control over the people.
Georges Duby paints an overly idealistic picture of feudal times where a special love bonds men and dictates their actions. His account is an adaptation of a poem written to commemorate the life of William Marshal. It details the rise of William Marshal from the son of a marshal, to famed knight, to nobleman. He was able to rise through the ranks of men by his chivalrous behaviour. The power Marshal amassed was based almost entirely on love and loyalty.
Marshal began to gain fame and power as a knight in the tournaments. Word of his triumphs spread. After winning a tournament he would, as dictated by the code of chivalry, celebrate the victory with his fellow knights and others spending the booty he had just won.
(Duby, 110) He was, of course, feared by those with less strength and ability in battle, but what kept his friends and followers loyal to him was his generosity. Still, love would often not be enough to keep Marshal loyal to his own king.
The Term Paper on To be loved or feared as a leader
Leaders in fields ranging from military and politics to business and even education have been posed with the choice of instilling love or fear among their respective followers. Traits like warmth and trustworthiness of a leader instill love among followers and fear of a leader originates mostly from his strength and competence. Although there are numerous other traits in a leader, warmth and ...
Twice Marshal and the young Henry revolt against the king. Both of them love their leader. Marshal continues to profess his love for the elder king after the revolt, however, this love is not enough to keep him loyal. The only thing this love provided for was the restarting of friendly relations after a conflict. Duby often refers to a special love between knights in these times, but this emotion did not keep them from challenging each others authority.
The feudal ethic is based on the assumption that everyone will abide by it, and this in itself is a fault. This set of rules dictates a complex, often contradictory, organization of loyalties that must be adhered to. Marshal opts to not act at one point because he had sworn loyalty to both parties involved in the conflict. Had he feared one of the battling kings he would have joined that king’s army regardless of his love for the other. Another problem is that of being overly magnanimous. A ‘good’ leader supposedly spends his wealth freely. His subjects will be happy until there is no more money to be spent. Loyalty that was bought through this generosity will quickly expire. Also, while a chivalrous ruler is emptying his treasury his neighbour may amassing wealth that could help him to conquer his neighbour.
A leader following Machiavelli’s model of the shrewd prince is feared and respected. The fear he inspires makes him much less likely to encounter and better prepared to combat insurrections. Machiavelli counsels rulers to do what must be done even if it is cruel, miserly or goes against a promise they have made. The key to keeping one’s subjects loyal is to act in such a manner while maintain a good appearance and reputation. If a leader goes from being feared to being hated it will lead to his downfall.
According to Machiavelli’s philosophy it is key to keep from being hated. He establishes that sometimes a ruler must act in a way that could inspire hatred; when he does, he must ensure that it will not be directed at him. By delegating his ‘dirty work’ to another and not actually executing an unsavory deed he will not incur hatred. One example Machiavelli gives of this is the French king who created the position of independent arbiter to satisfy the masses need for more power. The nobles hated the arbitrator but, the important thing is, they did not hat the king. (Machiavelli, 59) A leader must also keep in mind that it is not only an immoral deed, but a good deed as well, that could result in ill feeling towards him.
The Essay on Machiavelli Vs King George Iii
MACHIAVELLI VS. KING GEORGE III During colonial times, King George III was a tyrant ruler. He was unstable and constantly inflicted hardship upon the people of the American Colonies. King George III thought that imposing more demands on the colonists would allow him to reach his goals such as bringing in more money for the British government. Machiavelli, on the other hand, thought that a ruler ...
Machiavelli tries to establish a practical balance between the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ qualities of his prince. He must be cruel on some occasions to ensure order and unity. He must go against his word if keeping a promise would be detrimental. He must be cunning and decietful while appearing honest. He must not be so freehanded as to waste his and the nation’s money on frivolous things. He must abstain from anything that would make him appear cowardly. The leader must recognize that “some of the things that appear to be virtues will…ruin him, and some of the things that appear to be vices will bring him security and prosperity.” (Machiavelli, 49) Rulers must have the prudence necessary to determine when it is beneficial to act on morally correct principles and when they must go against them. No matter the motivation for his actions, he must always appear to be acting morally and purely for the benefit of the nation.
In an ideal world a chivalrous leader would be best. In the world in which we live a leader must model himself after Machiavelli’s prince in order to be successful. A ruler who gains a reputation for being willing to do whatever it takes to maintain peace and unity will not be challenged. By achieving this balance between vices and virtues a ruler will be loved by some, feared by all and hated by none.
Â
