f of this paper, freedom is more import-
ant than order at any cost, for both practical and theoretical
The ideas to be summarized and criticized in this paper will have to do with Machiavelli's argument that it is better for a leader to be feared than loved, better to use force and punishment than to work to earn the love and respect of the people through more humane policies and practices.
As Machiavelli writes, "It should be the desire of every prince to be considered merciful and not cruel, yet he should take care not to make poor use of his clemency. Cesare Borgia was regarded as cruel, yet his cruelty reorganized Romanga and united it in peace and loyalty" (Machiavelli 47).
In other words, Machiavelli is trying to argue that political reality is a black-and-white proposition, an either/or situation in which cruelty usually leads to "peace and loyalty" while love
from a leader leads to devastation. The question is whether
Machiavelli is correct in his premises or not.
He goes on to argue that "Indeed, if we reflect, we shall see that (Cesare Borgia) was more merciful than the Florentines who, to avoid the charge of cruelty, allowed Pistoia to be destroyed" (Machiavelli 47).
In other words, again, Machiavelli bases his argument on the premise that peace and loyalty are the desired results of
political leadership. And he argues that to bring about such results the best bet is cruelty from a leader who is willing to do whatever he has to do to stay in power and keep order in the country.
As Machiavelli goes on to say, "A prince should care nothing
for the accusation of cruelty so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal; by making a very few examples he can be more truly merciful than those who through too much tender-heartedness allow disorders to arise whence come killings and rapine" (Machiavelli 48).
Again, Machiavelli is arguing that the
...