Kayla Southworth
Professor Tshimanga-Kashama
CH 202-1204
February 12th, 2015
Prince fearing In Niccolò Machiavelli’s “The Prince (CA. 1516)” he writes about princes and how it is better for them to be feared than loved while avoiding hatred. Emanuel Sieyès “What is the third estate? (1789)” is a pamphlet he releases talking about how the varying estates are different and cant form a solid government from which he then comprises that the third estate makes up the majority of the French; where the third estate then needs to become something where he then states what should be done for that third estate to become something. Unjust is widely viewed as being something that no one wants to be deemed as and within reading “The Prince (CA. 1516)” …show more content…
This is seen when he states “One can make this generalization about men: they are ungrateful, fickle, liars, and deceivers, they shun danger and are greedy for profit…” (Machiavelli 10). In stating this he is saying that men do not care about the prince because the prince is not their first priority like wealth is. It is there that he goes on to state in his piece that being loved would not maintain order, while instilling fear would. This is seen when he states “For love is secured by a bond of gratitude which men, wretched creatures that they are, break when it is to their advantage to do so; but fear is strengthened by a dread of punishment which is always effective” (Machiavelli 10). By stating this Machiavelli is saying if a prince is to caring they will be taken advantage of where if they were to be feared they would be remembered as a power that maintains order. It is from there that he goes on providing examples of how fear is to be more advantageous for a prince as the princes subjects that he spoke of stayed loyal from which he then concludes his piece proclaiming without the doubt that fear is better than love. In that, proving that Machiavelli believing a prince must be feared to maintain power and keep society going shows that Machiavelli …show more content…
This can be seen when he states “If the privileged order were abolished, the nation would be not something less but something more” (Sieyès 156). In stating this he is proclaiming if the French were to rid of the hierarchy they would be better off. It is from there on that he goes on to state how the Frenches government is preventing prosperity for the French citizens from which if they were to get rid of that type of government they would flourish as a society. This shows a stark contrast from Machiavelli’s view of a prince not being able to do anything unjust because his entire piece gives reason for why the third state should take over and provide justice to their society. Therefore, by putting his pamphlet together in this fashion proving that Sieyès highly disagrees with Machiavelli’s view of a
Professor Tshimanga-Kashama
CH 202-1204
February 12th, 2015
Prince fearing In Niccolò Machiavelli’s “The Prince (CA. 1516)” he writes about princes and how it is better for them to be feared than loved while avoiding hatred. Emanuel Sieyès “What is the third estate? (1789)” is a pamphlet he releases talking about how the varying estates are different and cant form a solid government from which he then comprises that the third estate makes up the majority of the French; where the third estate then needs to become something where he then states what should be done for that third estate to become something. Unjust is widely viewed as being something that no one wants to be deemed as and within reading “The Prince (CA. 1516)” …show more content…
This is seen when he states “One can make this generalization about men: they are ungrateful, fickle, liars, and deceivers, they shun danger and are greedy for profit…” (Machiavelli 10). In stating this he is saying that men do not care about the prince because the prince is not their first priority like wealth is. It is there that he goes on to state in his piece that being loved would not maintain order, while instilling fear would. This is seen when he states “For love is secured by a bond of gratitude which men, wretched creatures that they are, break when it is to their advantage to do so; but fear is strengthened by a dread of punishment which is always effective” (Machiavelli 10). By stating this Machiavelli is saying if a prince is to caring they will be taken advantage of where if they were to be feared they would be remembered as a power that maintains order. It is from there that he goes on providing examples of how fear is to be more advantageous for a prince as the princes subjects that he spoke of stayed loyal from which he then concludes his piece proclaiming without the doubt that fear is better than love. In that, proving that Machiavelli believing a prince must be feared to maintain power and keep society going shows that Machiavelli …show more content…
This can be seen when he states “If the privileged order were abolished, the nation would be not something less but something more” (Sieyès 156). In stating this he is proclaiming if the French were to rid of the hierarchy they would be better off. It is from there on that he goes on to state how the Frenches government is preventing prosperity for the French citizens from which if they were to get rid of that type of government they would flourish as a society. This shows a stark contrast from Machiavelli’s view of a prince not being able to do anything unjust because his entire piece gives reason for why the third state should take over and provide justice to their society. Therefore, by putting his pamphlet together in this fashion proving that Sieyès highly disagrees with Machiavelli’s view of a