Title: Machiavelli and ‘The Prince’: Why Was it ‘Safer to be Feared than Loved’? | History Hit
Headings: Machiavelli and ‘The Prince’: Why Was it ‘Safer to be Feared than Loved’?
Machiavelli and ‘The Prince’: Why Was it ‘Safer to be Feared than Loved’?
Isabel Sobowale
Crumbling dynasties and religious extremism
A change of fortune – again
The Prince
Brutally realistic perceptions of power
The perfect leader
Necessary evils
Machiavelli in our time

Content: Machiavelli used Cesare Borgia, Duke of Valentinois, as an example. However, he argued that leaders must take care to avoid inspiring unnecessary hatred. Cruelty should not be an ongoing means to oppress the people, but an initial action that ensures obedience. He wrote,
“If you must injure a man, make your injury so severe that you need not fear his revenge”. Any cruelty must be to wholly demolish the opposition and deter others from acting similarly, otherwise the action is futile and may even incur revengeful acts. Machiavelli in our time
Joseph Stalin epitomised the ‘New Prince’, who Machiavelli described, somehow unifying love and fear whilst simultaneously pursuing his ambitious political plan for Russia. Ruthless in his conduct, moderate estimates suggest that he was directly responsible for the death of 40 million people. Indisputably, Joseph Stalin terrorised Russian civilians in an almost unprecedented manner. Banner of Stalin in Budapest in 1949. He systematically eliminated all opposition, crushing anyone who threatened the stability of his regime.