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’s The Prince, guided me to become a better leader. Some consider him as an opportunist or manipulative, while others like me see him as a great influence in the history of politics. Moreover, I learned four leadership lessons from his book and applied them to my life. I chose these lessons because I feel that they are ultimately important for anyone ruling a country or trying to become a successful leader. For instance, to be feared is key to ruling, princes must avoid making themselves hated by powerful people, choose wise advisors, and read to become wiser.
In the Prince, Machiavelli argues that the idea of truth in the government is only a method to manipulate the unsuspecting public. A leader does not need to be truthful as long as the public believes he is. Politics during Machiavelli’s time was much harsher than that of Socrates and his work reflects his cynical history. While Socrates experienced a major change in his home government during his lifetime, Machiavelli witnessed multiple periods of governmental turmoil.
In secular democracies, power is necessarily derived from the will of the governed. That power is then entrusted to a leader, who Machiavelli would understand to be a "prince". Inherently, his book, The Prince, has been close at hand for most politicians for centuries, as it provides general, historically proven advice for principalities and republics on how to govern and maintain relations with their most important resource and the very core of their power, which would be the people themselves.
The Prince, a book written by Niccolo Machiavelli, was seen as a text about its coherent perspectives and noble concepts of Leadership. There is a term called “Machiavellian”. This term refers to “the belief that a ruler is justified in using any means necessary to stay in power”. Many people can point out many corrupt scandalous government officials that use deception and dishonesty to maintain their power or title. This
“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.
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
Relying on the needs of the society of that time, Machiavelli comes to the conclusion that the most important task is the formation of a single Italian state (Machiavelli 15). Developing his thoughts, the author comes to the following inference: only a prince can become a leader capable of leading people and building a unified state. It is not a concrete historical personality but someone abstract, symbolic, possessing such qualities that in the aggregate are inaccessible to any living ruler. That is why Machiavelli devotes most of his research to the issue of what qualities should the prince possess to fulfill the historical task of developing a new state. The written work is constructed strictly logically and objectively. Even though the image of an ideal prince is abstract, Machiavelli argues that he should be ruthless, deceiving, and selfish.
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
In the text The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli works to create a political system that recognizes failures in human nature and attempts to manipulate them in creating stability. Machiavelli proposes a concept of the Prince and the
Machiavelli would not agree with this system of government he would say that there should only be one in charge of the government that makes decisions for the people and the land. Machiavelli would agree with the fact of having advisors such as a bencheater talking with a mayor but being limited when they can speak ?Yet he should question them about all matters?welcome the more freely they are spoken.?(Machiavelli 88). In certain case the prince should have a strong and trustful advisor or minister that it loyal to the prince and the prince only. ?Now, as to the means by which a prince may learn the character of a minister?.the result will always be disastrous to both.?(Machiavelli 87)
First let us discuss the ideas of Niccolo Machiavelli in is piece “The Prince”. Machiavelli has a very independent controversial way of thinking and portraying his ideal form of governance in this text. The ideal and most effective from of governance for him is not in that of a republic but instead he insists in an autocratic regime. He argues that republics and other forms of government are too weak because of the corruptness of human nature. This book is written as a guide on how a prince should run his state or nation based on how and when he would come into this power. One of his main concerns in which he has been criticized for is his disregard to follow moral values so as to properly run the state, as well as
Machiavelli establishes in his work The Prince that there are two types of government; either republics or principalities, and The Prince will focus on principalities. He states that principalities come in two types; hereditary principalities, and new principalities. Government power therefore comes from fortune or strength, by a state 's own army or along with the army of another. Government requires a strong ruler who uses coercion, but who also knows how to be cunning; someone who can be both “a lion and a fox”. Machiavelli never discusses elections or accountability among leaders, therefore his model is created from manipulation. Locke, in his work The Second Treatise of Civil Government takes a completely opposite stance, denouncing absolute rule and defining political power as the right to make laws for the protection and regulation of property; these laws are backed by the community, for the public good. He favored the social contract between the state and society, and encouraged the concept of dual accountability. The main similarity in opinion over rulers between both theorists claimed elites should be in charge of the state. Machiavelli believed government to be
Nowadays, it is politically impossible to commit to paper a "training guide" for leaders. There are innumerable detractors to any possible stance or strategy a leader might adopt. As a result of this, all "training" must take place behind closed doors, far from the prying eyes and ears of the news media or the public. But this has not always been the case.
Machiavelli’s lowering of politics creates an impact on the way ordinary subjects and citizens behave, a prince, according to Machiavelli, should be loved but most important to him, this sovereign should be feared, citizens need to obey and follow regulations and be faithful to the ruler, they are expected to honor and fight for their sovereign, in general, Machiavelli does not go into so much detail about the duties of the people, but he explains that by teaching the prince how to manage the system, he is working for the sake of people, as Machiavelli explains, a prince should follow two policies in which one of the two explains how a sovereign must keep balance and unchanged laws when conquering new territories, “not to change their laws or impose new taxes” (Machiavelli’s The Prince, page 8) what he means by this is that a sovereign should respect customs and traditions, the way people