In Machiavelli’s opinion, men are fickle, ungrateful, selfish, and unpredictable. Machiavelli says, “Men have less hesitation in injuring one who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared, for love is held by a chain of duty which, since men are bad, they break at every chance at their own profit; but fear is held by a dread of punishment that never fails you.” This way of thinking is very safe, when you cannot predict the outcomes of your people you should be feared by them. I think that is a very smart way of thinking, because it is truly easier to betray the people that you love than the people that you fear. The people that you love are easy to betray, so why would a leader want to be loved and have the possibility of being betrayed, because he cannot balance both being loved and feared. He should choose to be feared, but be careful not to be hated. If a leader is hated then it is also dangerous for him, because the people would …show more content…
A loved leader is also easier to get betrayed by his men, if they think he cannot be cruel enough to take over another city they will be more likely to betray him. Machiavelli states that “This could not have resulted from anything else than his well-known inhuman cruelty, which, together with his numberless abilities, made him always respected and terrible in the soldiers’ eyes.” If you were to have a karate teacher that you do not fear you are always willing to fight him and try to beat him, but if you fear him, then you will not try to beat him, because you are afraid of him and what he can do. Machiavelli is trying to say the same type of thing about army leaders. If you fear your leader you will not try to betray him, you will show him with respect and loyalty. A loved karate teacher, you are not hesitant to fight, but a feared teacher you would not dare challenge. In the same light you do not betray your leader, you are hesitant and know your