Public (reaction) opinions of leaders is vital as this can choose how effective their rule is, being lenient on those who commit crimes or showing off compassion here and there can make those who follow to simply disobey them knowing that any consequences they do will not be met with harsh punishment. As an example of what it is to be an effective “ruler”, people of authority, like one’s own parents can have this effect of balance between “cruelty” and clemency. For example if a child disobeys their parents for stealing things, the parent can remove their privileges and “fear related to a threatening request” (Smith, Martin, McMahon, and Nursten 660) can …show more content…
It only requires that one’s awareness of the risk of apprehension and punishment suffices to induce one to obey.
The fear of getting caught or what’s to come is what makes people to become obedient, not the punishment itself (kavka 603). While Machiavelli says that any ruler must rule by dishing out punishment, and that will gain for people to obey their rule, it’s the fear of what a ruler might do for insubordination. The question of it is whether to be fear or to be loved is answered in chapter 17 of The Prince; the effectiveness of instilling fear into a rulers subject can greatly allow the m to rule unopposed, solidifying their rule. As punishment and death are often connected when being an effective ruler it is a way to ensure people to obey. Obedience of that nature comes by dread of any punishment given to them for disobeying their rulers law and what will happen towards them. Although being a cruel leader is the best option to rule others, hatred tends to arise with those under a ruler’s leadership leading to rebellion, assassinations, or even death for the ruling person. While kindness may always be seen as the moral option to become a good ruler,