Machiavelli Essay The Prince written by Niccolo Machiavelli, focuses on how human nature’s evil tendencies affect how a leader must rule. Machiavelli views human nature as inherently evil, and states leaders must be feared rather than loved, in order to keep their people peaceful. It is better to be feared than loved because of human’s natural evil actions. Leaders should be feared because they must have control of their military and should not worry about morality when ruling to be a strong leader. Humans are inherently evil because they take advantage of people and are self-centered. Machiavelli states that man is “ungrateful” and “changeable” in their everyday life (Machiavelli, 35). Machiavelli also states that man is “eager for gain” …show more content…
Machiavelli believes a prince must be cruel to his military, since it is the only way to keep his armies “united and fit for any action”(Machiavelli, 35). When it comes to the military, Machiavelli believes a leader must be feared to the point of cruelty because his armies will otherwise take advantage of him. This tactic shows in Hannibal’s army, which, even though it was quite large, there was “no discord” which resulted from Hannibal’s “well-known inhumane cruelty”(Machiavelli, 35). By bringing this example into his work, Machiavelli proves that a leader must be cruel in order for his military to be well known and strong. If a leader were to not be cruel or feared, his military would rise up against him and overthrow him if they disagreed with an order. Machiavelli believes in punishment all at once, stating “if [a prince] does need to take anyone’s life, he does so when there is proper justification and a clear case”(Machiavelli, 35). By saying this, Machiavelli backs up his statement, showing that leaders can use punishment in order to be feared, but use it in moderation, especially in order to not be hated. The evil nature of mankind calls for a strong leader, and if he is not using punishment to his advantage, the military would think they can do whatever they want, and ultimately take advantage of their weak leader. Machiavelli believes a prince must be feared by his military in order to have a strong military, but not be …show more content…
Machiavelli brings in a comparison between a fox and a lion, and how a prince must learn to take the best qualities from both animals. Machiavelli states a prince must be “be a fox” in order to “recognize the traps” and a lion to “frighten the wolves”, and by no means should a leader be truthful when “to keep it works against himself and when the reasons that made him promise are annulled”(Machiavelli, 36). Machiavelli proves here that a prince must not be afraid to be untruthful and break his promises in order to stay in power. Due to the evil nature of mankind, a leader must adapt to his surroundings, whether that be through being truthful or lying in order to make sure he is not taken advantage of. For example, Alexander VI “never did anything else and never dreamed of doing anything else than deceiving men...nonetheless, his deceptions always prospered as he hoped, because he understood well this aspect of the world”(Machiavelli, 36). By deceiving men into doing what is best for the price, the prince is able to be sure his people only get the best, and do not get screwed over. If a leader were to always by truthful and never use deception to get what he wanted, he would be easily tricked into doing things that are harmful to his people. His people would get mad and revolt against him, since they would be angry about their situation, and the leader would be thrown out. Therefore, a leader must not keep his promises
Machiavelli strongly believes that a prince should be involved in the military and understand all military matters. A prince must always be concentrated on war. Whether his country is at war or not, he must always be prepared. He must continuously be training, mentally and physically, and know the terrain around him. Machiavelli believes that a prince who does not attain these military related qualities will fail as a leader. In addition, during times of war, a successful prince should always question all outcomes of possible battles and prepare himself for the future by studying past wars. Studying the
In his work The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli explores the complex relationship between a ruler and his people, but ultimately comes to the conclusion that the people, because they are crucial to the well being of the country, are to be manipulated in order for a country to thrive. In order to manipulate effectively one must keep the people oppressed, but not to the point of inspiring hate, and only when that balance is achieved is when a ruler can successfully manipulate their people.
The idea of man being an evil being, by nature, is expressed in Machiavelli’s book The Prince. He has written that a Prince should break his promises to his subjects because man is evil and will break their promises to their prince (Prince). I do not agree with this theory because I think that man will make his own decision based on whether or not he is good in character. I believe that a leader should tell the truth and win the support of the public by being known as doing this. Machiavelli seems to have the idea of preparing for the worst and thinking in terms of the worst. This is a preventative measure that will benefit anybody who has evil intentions.
The most astounding aspect of The Prince is Machiavelli’s view that princes may indeed, be cruel and dishonest if their ultimate aim is for the good of the state. It is not only acceptable but necessary to lie, to use torture, and to walk over other states and cities. Machiavellianism is defined as “A political doctrine of Machiavelli, which denies the relevance of morality in political affairs and holds that craft and deceit are justified in pursuing and maintaining political power (Def.)” This implies that in the conquest for power, the ends justify the means. This is the basis of Machiavellianism. The priority for the power holder is to keep the security of the state regardless of the morality of the means. He accepts that these things are in and of themselves morally wrong, but he points out that the consequences of failure, the ruin of states and the destruction of cities, can be far worse. Machiavelli strongly emphasizes that princes should not hesitate to use immoral methods to achieve power, if power is necessary for security and survival.
Machiavelli believes that a government should be very structured, controlled, and powerful. He makes it known that the only priorities of a prince are war, the institutions, and discipline. His writings describes how it is more important for a prince to be practical than moral. This is shown where he writes, "in order to maintain the state he is often obliged to act against his promise, against charity, against humanity, and against religion" (47). In addition, Machiavelli argues that a prince may have to be cunning and deceitful in order to maintain political power. He takes the stance that it is better for the prince to be feared than loved. His view of how a government should run and his unethical conduct are both early signs of dictatorship.
For all of Machiavelli’s ruthlessness and espousal of deceit, he knew the value of authenticity and relying on his administration. A true leader cannot achieve greatness alone. Machiavelli says that the prince is the state, and the state is the prince. This means that whatever vision and principles the leader holds in the highest regard, they must be known to the state so that they can be realized. He believed that no matter how a prince was elected, his success would depend largely on his ministers. Collaboration between a prince and ministers would create an atmosphere of harmony and camaraderie, highly reducing the chances of rebellion. Without the support and cooperation of the people, military action is not possible, expansion is not possible and most importantly, governance is not possible. If a leader does not satisfy the needs of the people, they have the power to overthrow him through strength in numbers. Thus, a leader depends just as much on the people as they do on him. A leader must be able to convince the people to buy into his visio...
While “every sensible prince wishes to be considered, merciful and not cruel”(pg. 35), one should learn to be merciful in moderation. Not doing so can lead to unintended effects where if you are too “good” it can lead to being taken advantage of, or to “uprisings and civil war” because then you will be looked at as a pushover by your citizens and other neighboring countries. Therefore if you were to be cruel, people will fear you enough to, in theory, not go against you and stay united. But I think this concept seems more like a dictatorship, which thrives on citizens fear, and I don’t think it should be instilled in our government considering that most dictatorships end poorly and lead to more uprisings and civil war than with a merciful leader. And this is why the question in this section on whether it is better to be feared or loved also comes up. Machiavelli believes that a prince should find a balance of being both feared and loved and in general just try to escape hatred. If you are loved by your people, rarely will they betray you, but it is also good to be feared by other nations so that you are not looked upon as a target. So in this section of the prince I think the concept of ruling only on fear should not be used, however I do think that a leader should try balance being loved and
Niccolo Machiavelli stressed 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…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.” He felt that a true leader must be cunning and deceptive, winning the hearts of his people through power and influence. If he could not be liked, he could at least get by knowing he has intimidated these below him into submission. However rash or cruel this may seem, Machiavelli’s argument is not one to be countered easily.
Many empirical things can often still be debated and refuted by experts, but there is a general admittance to the idea that power is the root of many evil things. In all fairness, we must admit that a many evil things can in their essence, be great. And that is one of the many theories advanced by Niccolo Machiavelli in his well-known work, The Prince. The Prince serves a dual purpose of both teaching a person how to attain power, but also how to retain it. Incredibly enough, history has proven most of Machiavelli’s findings and theories to work well, while some have failed to effectively secure power for the rulers who did, in fact try them. His work, does obviously highlight one main fact, which is, that power is a well sought-after attribute, and most who attain are willing to do whatever is necessary to keep it.
It is difficult to determine Niccolo Machiavelli?s and Thomas More?s view on human?s nature. Each took a different approach to the topic. Through Utopia, Thomas More attempted to change man?s thinking by creating an ideological society. Niccolo Machiavelli, through The Prince, attempted to teach man how to deal with human nature. With this in mind, Machiavelli?s concept is much more realistic than More?s; therefore Machiavelli better represents human nature. Machiavelli?s view of human nature in The Prince, presents, on the surface, a view of governing a state drastically different for his time. Machaivelli believed that the ruling Prince should be the sole authority determining every aspect of the state and put into effect a policy which would serve his best interests. With this, Machiavelli uses the prince as man, and the state as the man?s life. These interests were gaining, maintaining, and expanding his political power. Though in some cases Machiavelli may seem harsh and immoral, one must remember that his views were derived from concern of Italy?s unstable political condition in the 1500s. Machiavelli seems to be teaching the common man how to live his life so that their life is good and prosperous. Machiavelli generally distrusted citizens, stating that ??since men are a sorry lot and will not keep their promises to you, you likewise need not keep yours to them? (Machiavelli 651). Furthermore, ? a prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promises? when, ?such an observance of faith would be to his disadvantage; and when the reasons which made him promise are removed? (651). Machiavelli did not feel that a Prince should mistreat the citizens. This suggestion once again to serve the Prince?s best interests. If a Prince can not be both feared and loved, Machiavelli suggests, it would be better for him to be feared by the citizens within his own dogma. He makes the generalization that men are, ?? ungrateful, fickle, simulators and deceivers, avoiders of danger, greedy for gain; and while you work for their good they are yours? (649). He characterizes men as being self-centered and not willing to act in the best interest of the state,? and when it (danger) comes nearer to you they turn away? (649). Machiavelli reinforces the Prince?s need to be feared by stating: ??men are less hesitant about harming someone who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared?
Although Machiavelli gives numerous points on what it takes to excel as a prince, he also shows some raw examples of how he feels a prince should act in order to achieve maximum supremacy. First, when he says, "ought to hold of little account a reputation for being mean, for it is one of those vices which will enable him to govern" proves Machiavelli feels mighty adamant about his view that being mean will help a prince achieve success (332). It is absurd to imagine the meanest prince as the most successful. Also, when Machiavelli states, "our experience has been that those princes who have done great things have held good faith of little account, and have known how to circumvent the intellect of men by craft" revealing his attitude to manipulate people into fearing and respecting the prince (335). Also, Machiavelli shows that for a prince to be successful, he must not think about good faith.
...ch route to take on his way to power, keeping his rule, and how to maintain his military. The ultimate goal for a Prince is to maintain his position and reign, and a Prince can cheat, steal, and lie in order to accomplish that goal. Machiavelli seems to favor a Principality over Republics in this case because a Prince will be safer in a hereditary Principality due to the subjects being more accustomed to the blood of the Prince. Machiavelli’s straightforward advice on the art of warfare is to use your own military and that a Prince should always study the art of war. The ideal situation between a Prince and his subjects is to be feared rather loved, so that there is order. There is a difference between being feared and hated, and as long as the Prince doesn’t take a subjects property, women, or execute a subject without a proper cause.
The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli isn't about one man's ways to feed his power hungry mindset through gluttony, nor is it just explaining altercations between a nation's states. This writing is regarding to how one's self-confidence can make them become powerful in a society and also, the way morals and politics differ and can be separate in a government. Originally, Machiavelli wrote The Prince to gain support from Lorenzo de' Medici, who during the era, was governor of Florence. As meant as writing for how a society should be run, this book has been read by many peoples around the world who want to have better knowledge of the perfect stability of beliefs and politics required to run a good civilization.
Machiavelli's views have been misinterpreted since his book was first written, people take him in the wrong way, and are offended by what he says. Careless readers take him in a completely wrong way, such as they think that he believes that the end justifies the means, that a leader should lie to the people, and that a ruler has to rule with force. In actuality, Machiavelli means no such thing, he says that there are times when the common good outweighs the means, and the morality of a rulers actions. He also says that you cannot be loved by everyone, so try to be loved and feared at the same time, but of the two, choose to be feared. The Prince is considered to be one of the most important of nonfiction literature written in the history of mankind. It gave an accurate and truthful description of the method of governing.
Although, Machiavelli argues that an ideal ruler must be cruel, feared and unjust in order to maintain power in his paper, "The Prince", this is not necessary true. An ideal ruler must be assertive, just and filled with integrity to maintain power, prestige, and the loyalty of those he governs.