Machiavelli's view of Human Nature
...[...]if he wishes to maintain his name for liberality, to impose heavy taxes on his people, become extortionate, and do everything possible to obtain money. This will make his subjects begin to hate him, and he will be little esteemed being poor, so that having by this liberality injured many and benefited but few, he will feel the first little disturbance and be endangered by every peril. If he recognises this and wishes to change his system, he incurs at once the charge of niggardliness” (46). If a prince cannot successfully assure man without the risk of being found out, then it is best not to try at all because the prince will stay loved (Machiavelli 46-47). Another of Machiavelli’s questions about human nature that being loved brings forth is “[...] is it better to be loved more than feared, or feared more that loved” (48). His reply to this question 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 48). Men are unappreciative to actions of love through a simple friendship. A friendship that is bought rather than earned is more prevalent to both (Machiavelli 47-49). Machiavelli says, “Men have less scruple in offending one who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared; for love is held by a chain of obligation which, men being selfish, is broken whenever it serves their purpose; but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never fails” (48). If a dangerous situation may rise, it is easy to break a bond of love without thinking twice about it. But if the fear of punishment is in effect, man will stay committed no matter what the situation may be. Although, if fear is not brought about the right way it can lead to hatred. The actions a prince can take that are most likely to breed hatred are taking property of another or taking his women (Machiavelli 47-49). Machiavelli gives an example of this “[...]for men forget more easily the death of their father than the loss of their patrimony” (48). If either of these actions must be taken there better be a convincing reason or promise from the prince (Machiavelli 47-49). When dealing with people a prince will always break his promises when the reason he made the promise is no long relevant (Machiavelli 49-50). In Machiavelli’s eyes “[...] a prudent ruler ought not to keep faith when by doing it would be against his interest, and when the reasons which made him bind himself no longer exist. If men were all good, this precept would not be a good one; but as they are bad, and would not observe their faith with you, so you are not bound to keep faith with them” (49). Promises are not something on which to rely since men obviously do not keep them. The most success comes to a prince who is clever, convincing, and able to trick others into their way of thinking (Machiavelli 49-50). As Machiavelli says, a prince must be both a lion and a fox “[...] those that have been best able to imitate the fox have succeeded best. But it is necessary to be able to disguise this character well, and to be a great feigner and dissembler [...]” (49). While disguising the characteristics of the fox and the lion, a prince should also appear to be compassionate, trustworthy, kind, honest, and an earnest ruler (M...