Intro
After reading The Leviathan by Hobbes and the Machiavelli’s The Prince and the Discourses I would argue that the two authors have a similar view on how fear is politically relevant. What makes fear relevant to Machiavelli and Hobbes is that they believe that fear is necessary for a sovereign or a prince to stay in power. The two authors also believe that it is needed to keep the subjects in check and to keep them complacent. Today however there are people who question if fear is politically relevant today. To them I would say that fear still holds a lot of influence in how governments are ran as well as people holding their political position. There is one large being the international system and the way governments act. There are …show more content…
He believed that it was better to be feared instead of loved. “From this arises the question whether it is better to be loved more than feared or feared more than love. The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one of the two has to be wanting” (Machiavelli 61). This is overall view of fear but more importantly how would he relate to the current international system today. Machiavelli states “I conclude, therefore, with regarding to being feared and loved, that men love at their own free will, but fear at the will of the prince, and that a wise prince must rely on what is in his power and not on the power of others” (Machiavelli 63). To answer the question that was addressed who should fear that, it is clear that by these quotes that the prince is the one that needs to be feared and his subjects are the ones who should be in fear. An important factor that needs to be noted is that he believed in a negative anthropology and people are basically no good and he believes that fear should be used to keep the subjects in check. This also being his way to justify that being feared is more effective than being loved. Thomas Hobbs in the Leviathan had a similar take on the way fear is being …show more content…
“The Passions that encline men to Peace are Feare of Death; Desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a Hope by their Industry to obtain them. And reason suggesteth convenient Articles of Peace, upon which men may draw to agreement. These articles are the, which otherwise are called Laws of Nature” ( Hobbes 188). In Hobbes mind people will surrender their political will due to fear and then come to form a commonwealth. The fact that they do this is a way for the people stay safe. This is done by one person putting enough fear into a person where one person’s life is put in danger so they surrender their will. However fear can also be used to justify self defense according to Hobbes. “ For not ever Fear justifies the Action but the fear onely of corpoerall hurt, which we call Bodily Fear, and from which a man cannot see how to be delivered, but by the action. A man is assaulted , fear present death, from which he sees not how to escape, but by wounding that assauleth him; if he wound him to death, this is no crime; because no man is supposed at the making of a Common-wealth, to have abandoned the defense of his life, or limbes, where the Law cannot arrive on time enough to his assistance” (Hobbes 343). This simply means that once people are in a commonwealth they have the right to defend themselves if their life is being threatened and help cannot arrive in time. It is important to note that
After reading The Leviathan by Hobbes and the Machiavelli’s The Prince and the Discourses I would argue that the two authors have a similar view on how fear is politically relevant. What makes fear relevant to Machiavelli and Hobbes is that they believe that fear is necessary for a sovereign or a prince to stay in power. The two authors also believe that it is needed to keep the subjects in check and to keep them complacent. Today however there are people who question if fear is politically relevant today. To them I would say that fear still holds a lot of influence in how governments are ran as well as people holding their political position. There is one large being the international system and the way governments act. There are …show more content…
He believed that it was better to be feared instead of loved. “From this arises the question whether it is better to be loved more than feared or feared more than love. The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one of the two has to be wanting” (Machiavelli 61). This is overall view of fear but more importantly how would he relate to the current international system today. Machiavelli states “I conclude, therefore, with regarding to being feared and loved, that men love at their own free will, but fear at the will of the prince, and that a wise prince must rely on what is in his power and not on the power of others” (Machiavelli 63). To answer the question that was addressed who should fear that, it is clear that by these quotes that the prince is the one that needs to be feared and his subjects are the ones who should be in fear. An important factor that needs to be noted is that he believed in a negative anthropology and people are basically no good and he believes that fear should be used to keep the subjects in check. This also being his way to justify that being feared is more effective than being loved. Thomas Hobbs in the Leviathan had a similar take on the way fear is being …show more content…
“The Passions that encline men to Peace are Feare of Death; Desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a Hope by their Industry to obtain them. And reason suggesteth convenient Articles of Peace, upon which men may draw to agreement. These articles are the, which otherwise are called Laws of Nature” ( Hobbes 188). In Hobbes mind people will surrender their political will due to fear and then come to form a commonwealth. The fact that they do this is a way for the people stay safe. This is done by one person putting enough fear into a person where one person’s life is put in danger so they surrender their will. However fear can also be used to justify self defense according to Hobbes. “ For not ever Fear justifies the Action but the fear onely of corpoerall hurt, which we call Bodily Fear, and from which a man cannot see how to be delivered, but by the action. A man is assaulted , fear present death, from which he sees not how to escape, but by wounding that assauleth him; if he wound him to death, this is no crime; because no man is supposed at the making of a Common-wealth, to have abandoned the defense of his life, or limbes, where the Law cannot arrive on time enough to his assistance” (Hobbes 343). This simply means that once people are in a commonwealth they have the right to defend themselves if their life is being threatened and help cannot arrive in time. It is important to note that