Our current political system seems to be built around Machiavelli’s principles on how to obtain and gain political power. We must take into account that Machiavelli’s “Qualities of a Prince” associates more to government officials and those in political power instead of pertaining to the common people; he divides the concepts of political prosperity and morality. American politicians are encompassed with Machiavellianism, a “cynical disregard for morality and focus on self-interest and personal gain.” We allow this to occur for some particular psychological reason because we’ve become convinced that there is a differentiation between politicians lying to us and lying for us. According to Democratic strategist Jamal Simmons, “I think most presidential
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.
In the television series, House of Cards, a position in Congress is the basis of the show and the main character, Frank Underwood, thrives for his goals of personal achievement and working his devious plans into a profit for himself and ultimately achieving anything he wants no matter what it takes. Frank Underwood is an extremely intelligent congressman, who lives in Washington D.C. representing his home state of South Carolina, but has always put his self first. At the introduction of the show he states, “I see two different types of pain, useful pain, that helps you grow, and useless pain that does nothing but cause suffering”. These sorts of pain, but more importantly the meanings, explain a specific part of his distinctive morals that carry his actions along and show how he works with certain people or conflicts. His eminent colleagues of the U.S. legislative branch, specifically congress, perception of Frank is that he does whatever he can to make the government stronger while his intellectual perception is the contrary. While his colleagues trust him, it is hard for Frank Underwood to show a virtuous personality, enough to have full faith and trust especially regarding a huge decision he makes to murder a member of the Legislative branch. This internal situation, mirrors the philosophy (shown in the book, “The Prince”) of the political Philosopher, Niccolo Machiavelli, who has provided many with the conflicting opinion of modern times political contemplation. The scene in the last few minutes of “House of Cards: Chapter 11” exemplifies Frank’s means for consequentialism by, the fact of achieving his ultimate maxim or intended end. There is no skepticism that Frank’s actions do not follow solitarily consequentialism but ther...
In the text, The Prince, by Niccolo Machiavelli, he gives his own opinions on how a leader should rule. He believes princes can’t act perfect all the time and an impeccable prince only exists in the imaginary world. It’s unrealistic for a prince to have all good qualities but a prince should know when to act cruel and when to act superior. President Richard M. Nixon would be a good fit compared to Machiavelli's prince. In the film, Nixon, by Oliver Stone, I have seen President Richard M. Nixon do many cruel things throughout his presidency. When he wasn’t president yet, his only focus was on campaigning and hoping to become president, no matter what it took. He didn’t care or contemplate about other people’s feelings. Nixon relates to Machiavelli’s
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
Written almost 500 years ago, Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince” brings forward a new definition of virtue. Machiavelli’s definition argued against the concept brought forward by the Catholic Church. Machiavelli did not impose any thoughts of his own, rather he wrote from his experience and whatever philosophy that lead to actions which essentially produced effective outcomes in the political scene of Italy and in other countries. While Machiavelli is still criticized for his notions, the truth is that, consciously or subconsciously we are all thinking for our own benefit and going at length to achieve it. On matters of power where there is much to gain and a lot more to lose, the concept of Machiavelli’s virtue of “doing what needs to be done” applies rigorously to our modern politics and thus “The Prince” still serves as a suitable political treatise in the 21st century.
Machiavelli’s The Prince was written more than 500 years ago and it is “one of the most influential and controversial books published in Western literature.” (Article A) It was about Machiavelli’s political philosophies and the basic principles of what he believes a politician or “prince” should be. The three main ideas of the Prince were “Liberality and Stinginess”, “Cruelty and Mercy: Is It Better to Be Loved Than Feared, or the Reverse?”, and “How a Prince Should Keep Their Promises” and for the most part many of his concepts should or are already instilled in our government.
In Machiavelli’s, The Prince, he listed seven of the characteristics that he thought a leader had to have to be a good leader. However, some of these tenants had conflicts concerning the lack of thought towards actual human nature. One of the tenants specifically said,”Virtue can ruin a person, and vice can bring success.” This statement seems logical when you first look at it, but, as you delve into the actual meaning of the tenant, you realize it is more complex and misleading than before.
Niccoló Machiavelli (1469-1527), Italian political thinker and historical figure best remembered for his masterpiece, The Prince (written in 1513, but published posthumously in 1532). Machiavelli is considered one of the great early analyzers of political power.
Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli was born May 3, 1469. He was an Italian writer, politician, and philosopher who’s considered very influential in modern political science. He was secretary of the Second Chancery in the Republic of Florence from 1498 to 1512, when the Medici, with help from Pope Julius II used Spanish troops to defeat the Florentines. After the Medici took power, they accused Machiavelli of conspiracy against them and soon after he was captured and tortured.
As is the case with many periods in human history, the people of the early modern period in Europe often fantasized about an “ideal society.” They spoke often of places like Cockaigne and Utopia, where life was virtually perfect and far easier, particularly for the poorer, lower class portions of the population. It is of utmost importance to note what, exactly, made such places so perfect in the minds of these people because these details are quite revealing and useful to modern historians in gaining a better understanding of several different aspects that characterized this period. In fact, one may argue that the beliefs and ideas as to what makes up an idealized society reveal the perceived problems of the real world in Europe. Perhaps the
“To ignore good, evil, religion, morality and immortality”. Machiavelli said you have to adjust to his actions in order to strengthen his state One thing that stood out to me was the question weather it is better to be loved more then feared. That is a great question he bought up. I think every politician wants to to be loved more then feared but, it is much safer for a leader to be feared then loved. As he talked about rather being feared he knows what decisions are going to be okay to make and not decide to harsh on one. The prince talks about how easily it is to be feared and also being hated at the same time. I think if anyone is running for something or plays an important role in society there is always going to be a greater chance in love you will get taken advantage of to a certain extent as if you are feared. If you are very loved by the people that are going to be voting for you or supporting you, its easier to make the wrong decision and your people can turn their backs against you. If that happens, you can then go from loved to hated. Then again it is important to be loved as a leader, the people will trust you more and I think you will have a batter chance at getting people doing more fulfilling
The first duty of a prince is to maintain power and acquire more. What does this mean? What is duty and what is power? If the princes of Machiavelli’s time followed his advice and searched only for power, what does this mean for the people? The first priority of a prince or ruler should be to better the people and to protect them. Machiavelli stated that ones duty, as a prince is to be as powerful as can be, but as a ruler the first priority should be the people, and as a prince, to be selfless, good, and wise.
Arguably, the most Machiavellian leader to ever exist would be Joseph Stalin. He abided by three major Machiavellian methods that were stated in the Prince: the ends justifies the means, crush any opposition, and displaying a false character. Stalin had a plan for Russia and did everything in his power to achieve that plan. He wanted to transform Russia into a industrial superpower, a military superpower, and a political superpower. To achieve his goals he committed many horrible crimes against humanity. To be more specific, Stalin killed more than sixty million people during his reign. He was a selfish cold-blooded, heart less, and evil leader; human life was nothing to him. What caused him to develop such evil traits? It all started from his childhood. Born in Georgia in 1879 to a poor and highly chaotic family, Joseph Stalin did not have a easy childhood. Throughout his childhood, Stalin always felt inferior to other educated people; as a result, he grew a hate towards them. Surprisingly, at a young age Stalin was given a opportunity to study to be a priest, but later was expelled and joined a variety of radical revolutionary circles, particularly Marxist groups. Stalin then joined the central committee in 1912. After the October Revolution of 1917, Stalin entered the Soviet cabinet as a people’s commissar. Displaying excellent leadership skill, Stalin was elected general secretary of the committee. Lenin, the current leader at the time, died, which presented a great opportunity for Stalin. As Stalin started to build momentum, he allied with Bukharin and betrayed his past friends Kamenev and Zinoviev. They attempted to derail Stalin’s rise to power but failed miserably. To strengthen his power, Stalin did what The Prince taugh...
Niccolo Machiavelli was a middle-class and humanist-educated Florentine diplomat, philosopher, and writer who lived during the Renaissance in the late 15th and early 16th centuries. Although bestowed with the title of the father of modern political theory, Machiavelli has been, and continues to be widely misunderstood and misinterpreted (Kreis). The term “Machiavellian,” and it is in the dictionary, is defined as subtle or unscrupulous cunning, deception, expediency, or dishonesty (Dictionary). In acknowledgment of the enduring impact of Machiavelli on society, psychologists have identified a distinct personality style that is characterized by manipulativeness, cynicism about human nature, and shrewdness in interpersonal behavior, and named this syndrome after Machiavelli (“48”). Machiavellianism is described as a manipulative strategy of social interaction and personality style that uses other people as tools of personal gain (“48”). In this excerpt from The Prince, Machiavelli’s most recognized and popular discourse on morality and power, the author discusses and compares numerous aspects of the necessary attributes of a successful ruler. While he debates the pros and cons of vice and virtue, Machiavelli presents a compelling case for the adroit application of vice, in the event that princely virtues will threaten the sovereignty of authority.
The current disillusionment with politics shows all too well that Machiavelli has, in a sense, won. We assume that morality and religious convictions do not play an important role in politics. We are only beginning to reap the fruits of that victory.