What must be understood is that the throne is always in jeopardy and someone is always there to try to knock the prince off his pedestal. This is a prime understanding that a prince must have, and fuels the infamous argument by Machiavelli that it is better to be feared than loved. Machiavelli explains that, for the most part, love is very subjective and eventually will subside unless further concessions are made to appease his subjects. In addition, people only care about their personal conveniences and a prince would have to overextend himself if he were to be loved by all. Fear, however, is not subjective and has a universal effect on all his people. Fear can be attained by sporadic violent acts. The acts must not be continuous because that could possibly lead to hatred by some. A distinction must be made between the feared and the hated. If the ruler is hated, an uprising may ensue or public sentiment could push different leadership to the forefront, therefore jeopardizing the ruler's power. So, it is important to let the people have their honor and esteem. This can be accomplished through rewarding the subjects for their good deeds such as land grants. In many ways, the ruler must be careful that he does not show any sort of favoritism and alienate other subjects. Thus, fortune and love go hand and hand, while fear is the much more prudent move by the ruler. .
As was previously brought forth, Henry Thoreau's political views vary considerably from those of Machiavelli. Thoreau, in many ways, believes strongly in the individual. He has confidence that individuals will act appropriately if not restrained by society. This propels his accusation that it must be a violation of conscience to break a law. He argues that justice must be pushed to its limits to truly establish laws. Laws should be a reflection of morals, rather than fences placed down by society. That is why laws must be broken in order to establish whether laws are good or bad.
