better to be loved or feared?
Machiavelli, that lanky Italian rapscallion, pondered in his epic power screed The Prince whether it was better for rulers to be loved or feared. He concluded that if you can't have both, you should ditch the love, because people treat you better when they're afraid of you.
But that was five hundred years ago. Modern techno-social innovations such as the portable toaster, the drive-in root-beer stand, and racially integrated public restrooms have produced a gentler world where higher emotions such as love can blossom in a man's breast without him being called a "sissy-pants" or a "Nancy boy," or even "One Who Drinketh From the Pink Goblet." It is also a world where the stark Manichaean dualities of 16th-Century Dago morality have crumbled under a wave of situational ethics and really good acid.
All options are possible simultaneously. It is good to be loved. It is good to be feared. Both can be bad, too. It all depends on who's doing the loving and the fearing. There are billions of humans whose love I wouldn't want; I don't mind if they fear me. But there's a handful of people I love, chosen ones who I hope never fear me. And on the flip side, I've often made the mistake of seeking love from people I should have feared. My advice is to try and make everyone love you a lot and fear you just enough. And if they refuse to love you, work that much harder on scaring them.
