Analysis of Machiavelli´s The Prince

The political situation that prompted Machiavelli to write The Prince was that Italy wasn’t a unified country yet. It was a bunch of city states.

As such, it is very dangerous to impose a new order where one may face attack by hostile forces and have only “lukewarm” defenders of the new order. It is then necessary to examine how the prince will utilize his virtue. If he is to “beg” and ask others for help, he is then seen as week and cannot accomplish his goal. The alternative is to use “force”, to arm themselves, and to literally force those who do not believe in the new order to believe. After all, human nature is changeable and easily changed, but difficult to maintain in a certain persuasion, after which force is necessary to maintain it. And once created through great difficulty, it is then easy to maintain, as under the prince’s rule, the need for force will lessen, since those who would rebel are eliminated and the ruler gains reputation and respect from his subjects.

In 1513, Niccolo Machiavelli wrote “The Prince,” in which he discussed the characteristics that qualify a leader to have control of his people. Machiavelli claimed that a leader ought to associate with vices that have a positive impact to his rulings to avoid embarrassment, thus building a strong leadership. This claim is policy because it delivers the message of ruling. Machiavelli’s audiences are former rulers or anyone aspiring to become a leader.

As you stare down the barrel of a gun, you may find yourself encompassed by fear and unable to move. Niccolo Machiavelli believed that fear and manipulation were key to dominate men. In Machiavelli’s paper, “The Morals of the Prince”, he educates the reader on what it means to be an effective position of authority- a leader. In light of Machiavelli’s beliefs, this paper will argue that love is more useful than being feared in positions of power, using examples from the educational system, parents, and the law enforcement.

History 's most prominent leaders have shown extreme congruence. These leaders almost always hold reality over ethics. How can we classify lying and manipulative leaders as immoral when their duplicity is the very reason a society can maintain stability? This idea has of "means justifying the ends" has been a staple in History 's most prosperous of societies. Machiavelli 's novel The Prince was the first stab at understanding this human tendency of what is now known as Machiavellian. Machiavelli grasped the sad reality of our world and did not fall prey to other 's idealistic propaganda. Great leaders understand what the endless potential they hold, they can manipulate their followers to make best of what is possible and above all they understand sacrifice. Modern day Machiavellians and successful leaders think realistically and communicate through idealism. No matter the extremes of your belief, utilizing Machiavellian tactics have the capability to bring anyone to power.

“It is much safer to be feared than loved.” This quotation was just a specimen of the harsh and very practical political annotation of the legendary historian, Niccolò Machiavelli – philosopher, patriot, diplomat, advisor and statesman. He was born as the son of a poor lawyer in 1498, but he never let boundaries restrict him. He still received an excellent humanist education from the University of Florence and was soon after appointed as the Second Chancellor of the Republic of Florence.2 His political importance to Florence would soon give him the opportunity to write what is disputed as one of the most significant works in history, The Prince.

In the fourth chapter of Machiavelli's Prince, he doesn’t tell his readers the right or wrong ways to conquer a country, instead he spells out both options for leaders and their advantages and disadvantages. Machiavelli uses examples that were world famous. They are empires that shaped the world his readers lived in, and still shape the world modern readers live in. He uses names that would have been household names, Darius, Alexander the Great, the Turks etc.

Niccolò Machiavelli, established himself as a prominent Renaissance figure when his book The Prince, shared his political philosophies on how to gain and retain power. The “Princely Virtues” were a set of standards that discussed what he considered to be good and bad characteristics of a ruler. Ultimately, Machiavelli explained that morals were not always required to play a part in politics, which in contrast opposed many principles established by his predecessors. Some of the listed characteristics contest his views, meanwhile others disagree. According to Machiavelli’s opinions, always acting moral will ruin a person as the number of immoral people in the world outweigh the good. Machiavelli writes “Other things seem to be vices, yet if put into practice will bring the prince security and well-being,” (186). In this case, if a ruler has the desire to keep his status, he must learn not to be virtuous when it is required. From Machiavelli’s notion, four “positive” attributes a ruler should acquire are cruelty rather than compassion, egoism instead of philanthropy, greediness versus being open-handed, and finally, inflexibility in preference to being easy to deal with. Machiavelli stands by these rules, as he knows a feared leader is more beneficial than a beloved leader. For example, a compassionate, philanthropic leader implies generosity to the people. If the

A famous aristocrat named, Niccolo Machiavelli, wrote the book, “The Prince (1513), his most celebrated work, was a general treatise on the qualities the prince (that is, ruler) must have to maintain his power” Jacobus (84). Within this essay, he writes about the “Qualities of the Prince,” which is a guide for princes and future princes to follow, in order to be successful and keep their power. Machiavelli is very practical in his way of thinking, and doesn’t recommend princes to be good, on the contrary he suggests for them to be very practical. He states they should ensure power by direct and effective means. Modern politicians are likely to succeed by following most of Machiavelli’s recommendations. One

Machiavelli did not seek to change the worldview of leadership when he composed The Prince in 1513. However, The Prince later became widely praised and criticized for its ruthless and immoral tactics for a ruler to gain and hold power. Machiavelli wrote The Prince as a guide to gain power; he wrote it in a blunt way without flowery language so that anyone who read the book would understand exactly what was required to gain and hold absolute power. One of the main focuses of the book is an explanation of the characteristics of an ideal prince and how those defined traits can help one hold and maintain power.

The ideas of Machiavelli were documented in his publication ‘ The Prince’ and continued to live in politics as a way of gaining and keeping leadership. The word ‘Machiavellian ‘has somewhat negative connotations with a dictionary definition of "the employment of cunning and duplicity in statecraft or in general conduct" . Rather than a judgment of Machiavelli per se it is useful to judge the ideas presented, to him it was the practicalities of leadership that were of greater importance than the ideals of how it ought to be, this meant that the means justified the ends and that a leader should do what it takes to reach these ends. These ideas would be used by many leaders and continue to be so, they have application within a representative

Niccolo Machiavelli and Karl Marx developed theories concerning wealth and poverty in our society, as well as different types of governments. For instance, Machiavelli supported a capitalist economic system, unlike Marx, who embraced socialism in the society. Machiavelli wrote a book "The Prince" that explained how to be an effective leader. The theme of the book is "the end justifies the means." A person could or should do whatever is necessary to achieve the desired goal. According to Machiavelli, there is no concept of a perfect ruler, but only effective or ineffective leaders. Therefore, he claims that there are no fair fighters, but only losers and winners. Contrary, Marx embraced democracy as good practice for the government. This paper will analyze whether Marx would buy Machiavelli 's thought that states "desired ends justify undesirable means" (Weng 1).

When reading Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince, one can’t help but grasp Machiavelli’s argument that morality and politics can not exist in the same forum. However, when examining Machiavelli’s various concepts in depth, one can conclude that perhaps his suggested violence and evil is fueled by a moral end of sorts. First and foremost, one must have the understanding that this book is aimed solely at the Prince or Emperor with the express purpose of aiding him in maintaining power. Therefore, it is essential to grasp his concepts of fortune and virtue. These two contrary concepts reflect the manner in which a Prince should govern while minimizing all chance and uncertainty. This kind of governing demands violence to be taken, however this

The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli presents a detailed analysis of how to acquire political power and maintain it. The author discusses how great men should conduct themselves and the desired principles of a princely government. Utopia by Sir Thomas More illustrates what the character Raphael Hythloday, its narrator, suggests to be the perfect human society found in the island of Utopia. This essay looks at why Machiavelli thinks a prince needs to have virtù in order to rule well, and whether Fortuna can actually foster the prince’s virtù. It will also look at the extent to which Utopia provides an argument that a leader has to have virtù in order to govern well. The essay will explore if there is any proof in Utopia that Fortuna plays a role in fostering virtù.

In the book, The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli thoroughly explains the lifestyle a proper prince should uphold and the skills/actions he should keep in his arsenal, if the time ever comes. I’ve chosen chapters 15, 16, and 17 to further my claims on whether or not these ideas should be used in today’s government. Chapter 15 mainly focuses on the things for which men, but mainly princes, are praised or blamed for in an everyday society. Chapter 16 touches on how often one should be generous and liberal. Finally, chapter 17, the most controversial chapter of Machiavelli’s book discussed among many, tells the famous line of whether it is better to be loved