An Analysis Of Machiavelli's The Morals Of A Prince

761 Words2 Pages

In the many sections Niccolo Machiavelli writes he constantly compares to extreme qualities, one of which is ideal, the other real. These extremes include love(ideal) vs fear, clemency(ideal) vs cruelty, generous(ideal) vs stingy, and integrity(ideal) vs lying. In comparing these different traits Machiavelli highlights the merits of opposing characteristics and (specifically)when it is effective to act in certain ways. He argues that a balance of both are vital as to prevent a prince from dipping too far into a pool of inescapable extremism. The following excerpts display the author’s contrast-centered style: “ Thus, it's much wiser to put up with the reputation of being a miser, which brings you shame without hate, than to be forced—just …show more content…

Most glaringly Donald Trump aligns with the majority of the author’s version of a desired person of power. Trump is famous for his sternness over genteelism, fear instead of love, flexible thinking in order to achieve desired results (largely due to his history in business which requires creativity, not downright integrity), and his support of the “stingy” conservatives since he doesn’t not want to tax excessively. The one thing Trump isn’t that Machiavelli would caution against is being too forthright and not practicing a degree of clemency in the heat of moments. On the other hand, Bernie Sanders would not align with the even half of the characteristics of Machiavelli’s ideal prince. Sander’s campaign rests on the idea that he is “one of us [regular people]” and that he is a good guy. However, basing your campaign solely off love and character just doesn’t work as it cannot reckon issues we face such as ISIS, the economy, and immigration. Sanders is overly humanist so he allows for many unrealistic policies, even if in the end it serve to enlarge the issue at hand and cause more harm to his own US citizens. Moreover, Sanders also is not machiavellian in aiming to drastically redistribute wealth, the author specifically cautions against taking a man’s livelihood quote “... he [a prince] should not confiscate people's property, because men are quicker to forget the death of a father than the loss of a patrimony. Besides, pretexts for confiscation are always plentiful, it never fails that a prince who starts living by plunder can find reasons to rob someone

Open Document