When examining the totalitarian government of 1984 by George Orwell, a direct connection can be drawn to the motives and ideals associated with Niccoló Machiavelli’s The Prince. Machiavelli’s support of the political necessity as a means to remain in power resonate with the government whose aim is to “extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought” as a way to ensure complete political orthodoxy within the country (193). Specifically, Machiavellian thought plays an important part in 1984 as its ideas on reputation, revolution, avoiding hatred, and the use of fear to control a populace are used by INGSOC in order to maintain complete control throughout the story. In the following paragraphs, the connections between these two works above will be elaborated on in an attempt to show the Machiavellian influence of the government in 1984. In the writings of both 1984 and The Prince, revolution and ideas surrounding it are presented as major themes. In 1984, the idea of revolution is present in INGSOC’s existence from both the past to the present. Initially, INGSOC is described as coming to power through a popular uprising revolting against the horrors of the previous capitalist system. This is important as having the support of the people from the beginning drastically increases the Party’s power. Machiavelli puts it perfectly when he states that, “he who attains princely rule through the favor of the people finds himself there alone and has no one, or very few, around him who are not ready to obey him” (41). So it seems then that the Party was able to rise to such preeminence off the relative support of the people after the revolution against the previous social system. As time progressed however, the government... ... middle of paper ... ...ns to release or redirect their negative feelings and emotions towards the Party before they can become actions. So by use of the Two Minutes Hate and other methods, the Party succeeds in reflecting and diminishing any hate towards it, therefore making sure it remains in a permanent position of power. After investigating the text in both George Orwell’s 1984 and Niccoló Machiavelli’s The Prince, a staggering connection can be found. When closely observed, the ideas presented by Machiavelli in his search for the ideal prince are in fact directly analogous to the motives and actions made by INGSOC in 1984. Machiavellian thought plays an important part in 1984 as its ideas on reputation, revolution, avoiding hatred, and the use of fear to control a populace are used by INGSOC in order to maintain complete control throughout the story. Works Cited 1984, The Prince
Between the poem, ¨ No one died in Tiananmen Square¨ by William Lutz and the novel, 1984 by George Orwell there are multiple similarities. Subjects such as their government, their denial of history, and the use of doublethink and re-education are all parallel between the novel and the poem. For instance, both the governments have a highly strict government. Their governments are so controlling of their people that they use brute force in order to help re-educate them. For example, in 1984 the main character, Winston Smith was trying to go against their government, The Party, and because he tries to do so, he is placed in The Ministry of Love and brutally beaten by the man whom he assumed was a part of the Brotherhood, O'Brien. O'Brien claimed
Niccolò Machiavelli was a man who lived during the fourteen and fifteen hundreds in Florence, Italy, and spent part of his life imprisoned after the Medici princes returned to power. He believed that he should express his feelings on how a prince should be through writing and became the author of “The Qualities of a Prince.” In his essay, he discusses many points on how a prince should act based on military matters, reputation, giving back to the people, punishment, and keeping promises. When writing his essay, he follows his points with examples to back up his beliefs. In summary, Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of a Prince,” provides us with what actions and behaviors that a prince should have in order to maintain power and respect.
North Korea, China, and even Cuba are similar to 1984. They try to control their people just the same as in 1984, and just like in Jonestown. The only people who were free in 1984 were the Proles. The community in Jonestown began as everyone wanting to be there, and then as conditions worsened the people wanted to leave. They were not allowed to, much like 1984. The people in both situations are similar, in that they are oppressed by their governments, but only the people in Jonestown are given the ability to think they are even able to
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.
“Bathes Roland (1977) “The explanation of a work is always sought in the man or women who produced it.” The values, beliefs and attitudes of George Orwell’s can easily be seen in the novel 1984, as no text is neutral. These values attitudes and beliefs are communicated in the novel through socio-cultural context and by the use of certain discourses, ideologies, and historical influences. The invited reading of 1984 is that absolute power is problematic as evidenced by a totalitarism regime.
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.
War Is Peace. Freedom Is Slavery. Ignorance Is Strength. The party slogan of Ingsoc illustrates the sense of contradiction which characterizes the novel 1984. That the book was taken by many as a condemnation of socialism would have troubled Orwell greatly, had he lived to see the aftermath of his work. 1984 was a warning against totalitarianism and state sponsored brutality driven by excess technology. Socialist idealism in 1984 had turned to a total loss of individual freedom in exchange for false security and obedience to a totalitarian government, a dysutopia. 1984 was more than a simple warning to the socialists of Orwell's time. There are many complex philosophical issues buried deep within Orwell's satire and fiction. It was an essay on personal freedom, identity, language and thought, technology, religion, and the social class system. 1984 is more than a work of fiction. It is a prediction and a warning, clothed in the guise of science fiction, not so much about what could happen as it is about the implications of what has already happened. Rather than simply discoursing his views on the social and political issues of his day, Orwell chose to narrate them into a work of fiction which is timeless in interpretation. This is the reason that 1984 remains a relevant work of social and philosophical commentary more than fifty years after its completion.
Machiavelli discusses assertive and bold ideas in “The Prince,” revealing his radical and courageous nature. His treatise is deceptively self-soliciting, because he disguises his extreme notions behind a veil of feigned expertise. His frank approach makes him appear confident and deserving of the utmost respect; however, he cautiously humbles himself by pouring immense flattery for the ruling prince into his work and, in doing so, assures protection for himself and his notorious ideas.
Machiavelli is undisputedly one of the most influential political philosophers of all time. In The Prince, his most well-known work, he relates clearly and precisely how a decisive, intelligent man can gain and maintain power in a region. This work is revolutionary because it flies in the face of the Christian morality which let the Roman Catholic Church hold onto Europe for centuries. Machiavelli's work not only ignores the medieval world's ethics: The Prince suggests actions which oppose the four most basic of Christianity's Ten Commandments.
Machiavelli stated “..., if the prince is reasonably assiduous he will always maintain his rule, unless some extraordinary and inordinate force deprives him of it; and if so deprived, whenever the usurper suffers a setback he will reconquer.” 1 Here Machiavelli proclaims that the natural prince will have the peoples support as long as the princes ambitions are moderate. Machiavelli also states that the natural prince will have less reason to cause the people to hate, when he states “ The fact is that the natural prince has less reason and less need to give offence; and so it follows that he should be more loved; ” 1 Now Machiavelli shifts his focus toward new states. Machiavelli states that new principalities are far more difficult to sustain than hereditary principalities for many reasons. Machiavelli claims that conquering new states is the most dangerous and difficult mission
Living in a tumultuous era, filled with political and religious conflicts, warring city-states, and a continent ruled by a government who used the church to control and conquer, an exiled Machiavelli wrote the book The Prince to give politicians a basis on how to rule a nation and as a way to continue to make a statement in Florence’s politics. The book itself was unlike the regular “mirrors for princes”, in a sense that instead of telling the prince how to be morally sound it told him how to be effective as a ruler. Within the book there were three characteristics that were expressed that can be considered of high importance for every prince/ruler. These three were every prince should rather be feared than to be loved, study war and always be ready for it, and that in the case of two states in war always pick a side and never stray away from it. These characteristics were present in a strong and merciless ruler who used the three features above to govern over an entire country. Joseph Stalin might be seen as a mass murder, but his achievements and contributions to Russia proved that by being feared rather than loved, studying war and perfecting it, and his ability to choose his allies in war, would ultimately lead to the prosperity of his nation.
...ver, according to Machiavelli, these short-comings are justified since they preserve the state’s overall goal. In addition, if administrators at both local and national levels act in accordance with the state, this preserves the functionality of society as a whole. Not acting in accordance with the will of the state causes turmoil to erupt and a chink within the everyday businesses of life. Thus, it is consideration of these points that Machiavelli’s philosophy would purport that the tyrannical grip of the state ought to reign supreme in contemporary society.
The novel 1984 by George Orwell presents the readers an image of a totalitarian society that explores a world of control, power, and corruption. The main idea of government control presents itself in the novel by protecting and listening to the people of Oceania. However, Orwell suggests giving too much power to the government is a mistake because eventually the decisions they make will not be about the people anymore but rather themselves. In 1984, the power and corruption the party has is overwhelming for the people. There are no ways around the beliefs of the Party, the party attempts to control and eventually destroy any mental or physical resistance against their beliefs. The agenda for the party is to obtain mind control over its people and force them to adore their leader. The methods the Party uses to achieve its goal are: the use of constant propaganda and surveillance, the rewriting of history, and Room 101.
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 has long been required reading for everyone intrested in politics and power. In The Prince Niccolo M