Changing Interpretations of The Prince and Niccolo Machiavelli

Nixon became the thirty-seventh president of the United States in 1969 and served until he resigned in 1974. He remains the only U.S. president to ever resign from office (JSTOR reference). Many historians believe Nixon was a modern representation of Machiavelli’s teachings during his presidency; and some have even gone as far as to call Nixon the “Machiavellian prince of the twentieth century” (Rink). However, the extent of his Machiavellian behavior is arguable. For he only reflected a minimal assortment of qualities to that of Machiavelli’s prince. For example, Machiavelli continually stressed the need for rulers to maintain a good public appearance in order to avoid being hated. In chapter seventeen of his book Machiavelli writes, “It is far better to be feared than loved if you cannot be both; but you must avoid being hated. Fear is useful. Hatred is counterproductive” (book reference). However, Nixon ultimately failed at this task. He was not feared or loved by the public. He was overall disliked by his people; and he has been harshly remembered as “the most hated president in history” (book reference). Furthermore, Machiavelli also writes, “A prince must watch that he does not become afraid of his own shadows. His behavior must be tempered by humanity and prudence so that excessive distrust does not make him unbearable” (book refrence). Ironically, one of Nixon’ most prominent character flaws, and arguably the most prominent flaw in his presidency, was his paranoia—which eventually led to his demise as a leader. Overall, the lack of Nixon’s adherence to Machiavelli’s policies can be linked as the most probable cause of his

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.

While some other great political thinkers sat around and dreamed about their perfect little utopias in the clouds, notably Socrates and Plato, Machiavelli was analyzing the most powerful men of his day. He observed and recorded how men flocked the sheep to exactly where they were wanted by their shepherd. He watched as the wolves preyed on the sheep and noticed that there was no philosopher king around to prevent it. He accepted that we as humans are corrupt and that we can’t all be Marcus Aurelius, king of

Machiavelli concentrated more on the way things should be and how to manipulate them for his own personal gain rather than for the betterment of the state. He was well-known for being a political thinker who believed that outcomes justified why things happened. A key aspect of Machiavelli’s concept of the Prince was that “men must either be caressed or annihilated” (Prince, 9). What Machiavelli meant by

Machiavelli writes the ‘Prince’ while away in exile which by most people, is interpreted as his manual or guide on how to rule. It is quite clear that he demonstrates political interest and advocacy in his work through the many stories of past rulers he shares as examples of what to do and what not to do. An example of a ruler who came from a lower position, meaning no riches or status, was Agathocles (son of a potter, who became the King of Syracuse) (Machiavelli [1532] 2006) which is similar to the status of the man Plato speaks of, Socrates. However, Machiavelli speaks for power politics and the importance of the ruler being in total control since “a wise prince should establish himself on that which is in his own control and not in that of others” ([1532]

Before Machiavelli wrote The Prince, he was a respected Florentine diplomat. When Machiavelli lost his title, he wrote this work for Lorenzo de’ Medici, the governor of Florence at the time in hopes of obtaining his stature again. Machiavelli’s sole purpose was for Lorenzo de’ Medici to accept his ‘offering’ and give him back his title. Machiavelli says, “I have not sought to adorn my work with long phrases or high-sounding words or any of those superficial attractions and ornaments with which many writers seek to embellish their material, as I desire no honour for my work but such as the novelty and gravity or its subject may justly deserve” (4). Machiavelli clearly states that he in no way was writing this for anyone but Lorenzo nor did he intend on receiving any literary acknowledgment. This proves that The Prince could also have been an informative writing because he was not telling Lorenzo how to run a government or treat his people. However, when he did present the information in his work, he backed up his arguments and had many examples to show that his tactics had been proven to work or would work in future

For most citizen’s well known by the name, Machiavelli produces a resemblance of brutality and raw reckoning. The commonplace of the Prince, Machiavelli’s most established work, is seen as lectures to dictators and unrighteous people searching to increase and keep power. Merriam-Webster determines Machiavellian as “ using clever lies and tricks in order to get or achieve something: clever and dishonest.” Machiavellian foreign affairs were more distinctly described by Harvey Mansfield in the opening to his explanation of the Prince where he wrote: “ The essence of this politics is that you can get away with murder: that no divine sanction, or degradation of the soul, a twinge of conscience will come to punish you.”

A family of monarchy which tortured Machiavelli for months causing him great suffrage and sorrow. He writes to Lorenzo “May I trust, therefore, that Your Highness will accept this little gift in the spirit in which it is offered: and if Your Highness will deign to peruse it, you will recognize in it my ardent desire that you may attain to that grandeur which fortune and your own merits presage for you.” This enough is confusing because if this is the same principality that caused so much suffering why dedicate a book to let their reign continue into longevity? As to add to this confusion, Machiavelli explains how a prince should use cruelty and violence correctly against the people. To use cruelty and punishment all at once so that the people learn to respect you by fear. He includes that if you had a choice on either being loved or feared, be feared for love can change as quick as it came. Fear of punishment, people would avoid and be subservient. He also goes on to put out that a prince must be cunning like a fox yet strong and fearsome like a lion. To use Realpolitik, morality and ideology left out for the world is not these things as you should not be as well. Furthermore, Machiavelli explains what must happen when a new ruler overtakes a new city and the people in it. “And whoever becomes the ruler of a free city and does not destroy it, can expect to be destroyed by it,

Sullivan, Vickie B. The Tragedy And Comedy of Machiavelli. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000. Print.

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).

Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince examines the nature of power and his views of power are still somewhat in existence today. I'll discuss this in this essay, emphasizing the following theses. Machiavelli discusses power over the people, dictatorial power, and power with people, shared power. While it is possible for power with to attain greater prevalence in society, it will not completely eliminate power over. In The Prince, Machiavelli discusses two distinct groups of people, the political elite, including nobles and other princes, and the general public. Today in the United States, the first group, the political elite, includes political leaders, religious leaders, business leaders and the leaders of

Niccolo Machiavelli is a very pragmatic political theorist. His political theories are directly related to the current bad state of affairs in Italy that is in dire need of a new ruler to help bring order to the country. Some of his philosophies may sound extreme and many people may call him evil, but the truth is that Niccolo Machiavelli’s writings are only aimed at fixing the current corruptions and cruelties that filled the Italian community, and has written what he believed to be the most practical and efficient way to deal with it. Three points that Machiavelli illustrates in his book The Prince is first, that “it is better to be feared then loved,”# the second

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.

Machiavelli desired and had a talent for government work ever since childhood. His intelligence and passionate political interests were powerful reasons for the attention from Florentine politicians. For this reason, he was once known as “Machia,” a pun on

Those private citizens who become princes through fortune alone do so with little effort, but they maintain their position only with a great deal; they meet no obstacle along their way since they fly to success, but all their problems arise when they have arrives…such men depend solely upon two very uncertain an unstable things: the will and the fortune of him who granted them