University of Guelph
Fear as a Technology of Governance:
The Modern Application of Niccolo Machiavelli's Political Theory
Maxwell Murphy
PHIL1010: Social and Political Issues in Philosophy
Dr. Jason Robinson
March 18, 2024
850 words
Prior to the work of Niccolo Machiavelli, in theory, the concept of politics was almost
entirely interwoven with the principals of ethics. In ancient philosophy, politics developed as a
component of ethics, being defined as the moral behavior of individuals within collective
organizations. Machiavelli had written “The Prince” as a guide for how a leader ought to rule
through his political realist lens. Machiavelli's focus was not on crafting an idealistic
hypothetical utopia, but rather a practical application of his principles. Machiavelli was the first
to propose the separation of contemporary ethical practices from traditional politics when he
introduced his political theory concerning amorality’s role within effective government.
Machiavelli argues that in a pragmatic context, political leaders should not be constrained by
traditional moral standards, and in specific circumstances have a moral obligation to partake in
unethical practices if the ends justify the means. This consequentialist theory in which the
ultimate measure of whether the conduct of an authority is ethical resides in the outcome of those
actions places a strong emphasis upon the maintenance and security of that authority.
Machiavelli believes that political stability is imperative to the well-being of the state, a strong
government can protect and provide for its citizens and that any means of maintaining control
over the population and institutions of the state are justified. Machiavelli's philosophy recognizes
the inherent flaws of human nature, consequently, a leader must remain vigilant to prevent
rebellion and destabilization if he hopes to preserve social order. Throughout “The Prince”, an
emphasis is placed upon the strategic use of fear upon the populous as a mechanism of upholding
the status-quo. Machiavelli's political theory outlines what I believe is still commonplace today,
with fear being the primary technology of governance within modern society.
Fear can be an incredibly powerful tool in the hands of a ruler; the actions of individuals
are far more likely to be motivated by self-interest than by benevolence. For bureaucratic
institutions, public fear is a necessary condition for the viability of government1. The reliability
of this tool depends on the essential evolutionary nature of fear in humans as a means of survival.
Telling people not to be afraid is giving them advice they cannot take2. Any person incapable of
experiencing fear as a means of protection from potential dangers places themselves in a position
of mortal jeopardy. Individuals will prioritize their own safety and well-being above all else.
When faced with the prospect of punishment or harm, people are motivated to comply with the
wishes of those in power to avoid negative consequences. In times of political instability or
upheaval, fear is often fueled by uncertainty and insecurity for the future. Citizens who feel as if
they are vulnerable to losing privileges, possessions, or status as a result of political dissent are
encouraged to support strong leadership and maintain the status quo by aligning themselves with
the rulers' interests, even if it means sacrificing personal freedoms or ideals. Modern
governments consciously recognize that the manipulation of this fundamental aspect of human
nature is an essential condition of effective governance, and through fear-mongering, they can
suppress rebellion and maintain authoritative rule. American sociologist David Altheide remarks,
"People do want to be 'saved and freed,' but they want to be saved and freed from fear, and this is
what makes the [mass media's] messages of fear so compelling and important for public policy
Higgs, Robert. “Fear: The Foundation of Every Government’s Power.” The Independent Review
10, no. 3 (2006): 447–66.
1
Higgs, Robert. “Fear: The Foundation of Every Government’s Power.” The Independent Review
10, no. 3 (2006): 447–66.
2
and the fabric of our social life"3. It is not necessarily a requirement that fear must be solely
directed at the government; it can stem from the dangers the government claims to protect
against. While some threats leading people to seek government protection may be genuine, many
public fears are influenced, if not entirely manufactured, by government stimulation. Whether
the fear is directed towards the government itself, real threats, or perceived ones, the government
consistently seeks to exploit public fear for its own gain4. Bureaucratic opportunists manipulate
existing fears and fabricate new ones for personal gain, citing various “epidemics” and “crisis”
often exaggerating or mislabeling societal issues for the purpose of exploiting the “Therapeutic
State”5. Both the government and private sector extensively contribute to generating and
disseminating fear. Moreover, during times of war, individuals who fear for the nation's wellbeing, even its survival, will lead them to relinquish wealth, privacy, and liberties to the
government more readily than they would in times of peace. Investigative Journalist Seymour
Hersh reported that American organization, The Rendon Group, had been paid close to $200
million by the CIA and Pentagon to spread Warmongering anti-Saddam propaganda during the
Iraq war6. By exploiting popular fear, modern governments can seize control over significant
portions of the economy and society at the expense of individual rights.
The emphasis on the strategic use of fear in Machiavelli's political theory remains
relevant in contemporary politics. Governments and private entities alike exploit public fears to
advance their agendas, often at the expense of individual rights and liberties. Machiavelli urges
3
Altheide, David L. 2002 (p. 15-16) Creating Fear: News and the Construction of Crisis. New York: Aldine de
Gruyter
4
Higgs, Robert. “Fear: The Foundation of Every Government’s Power.” The Independent Review 10, no. 3 (2006):
447–66.
Thomas Szasz, The Therapeutic State (Prometheus, 1984).
James Bamford, “A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America’s Intelligence
Agencies,” Choice Reviews Online 42, no. 04 (December 1, 2004)
5
6
rulers to pursue the necessary ethical stability that is missing in modern governance where the
ends no longer justify the means.