# Machiavelli's The Prince. Need some insight before I read it. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 28, 2005, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machiavellis-the-prince-need-some-insight-before-i-read-it/296592 "2005-03-28T11:40:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machiavellis-the-prince-need-some-insight-before-i-read-it/296592/21 "2005-03-29T14:20:50Z")
> [@Frostillicus](#): > > “It is better to feared than to be loved”. Discuss. As **Smiling Bandit** pointed out that’s not the complete quote. Machiavelli states that it is best to be feared _and_ loved, but if you must choose (because it difficult to combine the two) pick fear. For Machiavelli, a people’s love and admiration was a fickle thing. I think I’ll back off my statement on ethics a bit. Machiavelli was describing the exercise and retention of power. What was best for a Prince (peace and prosperity) could, by extension, be good for those under him, but the primacy of the Prince’s interests speaks to a disregard the good of others aside from himself. ---
**Author:** ![Humble\_Servant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/47e85d/32.png) [@Humble\_Servant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Humble_Servant)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machiavellis-the-prince-need-some-insight-before-i-read-it/296592/22 "2005-03-29T15:05:16Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > It goes further than that – Strauss believed philosophers **should** write esoterically – because that’s the only way to be safe (look what happened to Socrates), but also because true wisdom is properly the province of an elite and should be kept out of the hands of the masses. From [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo\_Strauss#Political\_ideology:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Strauss#Political_ideology:) Strauss is an extremely controversial figure–people differ about just how far the esoteric thing goes. I would say he went farther than I’m willing to follow (not every work is esoteric), but I agree with him to the extent that I think one should read original sources with open minds. This thread was spawned by **duffer** ’s request for insight before he reads The Prince–Strauss would say that **duffer** should go read the original for himself (and maybe he should learn the Italian if it’s really important), the secondary sources and opinions of academia be damned. That said, I think the Wikipedia piece has some of its emphasis wrong–Strauss was all for academic excellence, but I think trying to describe it in a “class” warfare way is incorrect. Also, I know that Strauss has been politicized by the neocon thing (but he’s dead! and all he wanted to do was read Plato!), but the Wikipedia piece is, I think, long on the political and short on Strauss’s ideas. But, as noted, he is a controversial figure and people are going to view him differently. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machiavellis-the-prince-need-some-insight-before-i-read-it/296592/23 "2005-03-29T15:13:45Z")
If you feel it has it wrong, then correct it. It’s wiki after all. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Humble\_Servant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/47e85d/32.png) [@Humble\_Servant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Humble_Servant)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machiavellis-the-prince-need-some-insight-before-i-read-it/296592/24 "2005-03-29T15:19:05Z")
Yes, yes, but it’s not completely wrong, and I’m not sure where my asbestos knickers are. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machiavellis-the-prince-need-some-insight-before-i-read-it/296592.md?page=1)