Literary Comparison: 'Too Big to Fail' and 'The Prince'

He discusses that the prince have military knowledge, love and fear, trustworthiness, and good and bad reputations. He deeply believes in the art of war. "...a prince must not have any objective nor any thought, nor take up any art, other than the art of war and its ordering and discipline; because it is the only art that pertains to him who commands. And it is of such virtue that not only does it maintain those who were born princes, but many times makes men rise to that rank from private station; and conversely one sees that when princes have thought more of delicacies than of arms, they have lost their state." He also writes about whether it is better to be loved or feared, stating that it is best to be feared, but not hated. Love can change in an instant, and it is better to always have control, even if the prince must be feared. Patriotism and dedication to the state was also a very important aspect. In conclusion, Machiavelli strived for power and strength by any means possible. Through violence and fear, the end result would be worth it to him.

Machiavelli recommends the rulers to follow the good qualities, unless needs to protect himself from a vice who would not lose the state for him or be prudent enough to escape a vice who would lose the state for him.

Machiavelli stressed that no art can deliberately aim at a negative result. As a realist, Machiavelli was concerned with reality and not how things could be. He was significantly influenced by his own failures in public life.

Machiavelli’s interpretation of human nature was greatly shaped by his belief in God. In his writings, Machiavelli conceives that humans were given free will by God, and the choices made with such freedom established the innate flaws in humans. Based on that, he attributes the successes and failure of princes to their intrinsic weaknesses, and directs his writing towards those faults. His works are rooted in how personal attributes tend to affect the decisions one makes and focuses on the singular commanding force of power. Fixating on how the prince needs to draw people’s support, Machiavelli emphasizes the importance of doing what is best for the greater good. He proposed that working toward a selfish goal, instead of striving towards a better state, should warrant punishment. Machiavelli is a practical person and always thought of pragmatic ways to approach situations, applying to his notions regarding politics and

Instead, realists hold that there is some basic idea about nature and requirements of morality, or moral intuitions that guide us (Beitz, 17). Even among realists, there are some with more extreme positions about morality and ethics in international relations. Machiavelli argues that morality can be broken when necessary in order to maintain the state, or perhaps even expand the state. To this end, the prince should be amoral and self-aggrandizing (Beitz, 21). Machiavelli is not justifying unwarranted cruelty, “The prince should not deviate from what is good, if possible, but be able to do evil if constrained” (Beitz, 21). Rulers are permitted to break the shared idea of morality when they are doing so in order to protect the state from intrusion or vulnerability in international relations. Machiavelli posits perhaps the most rigid realists perspective on international relations. The basic notion is that governments and individuals that have different moral responsibilities and individual responsibilities value morality much more than the state.

A Colossal Failure of Common Sense was one of many books to be published in the aftermath of the Financial Crisis of 2007. After seeing the global economy stall in the face of massive losses in word financial markets, many Americans sought to better understand the crisis and its causes. This book, written from the perspective of a financial market insider, provides a glimpse into the world of global finance and also seeks to explain how the players in this world were involved in the crisis. In the words of the author Lawrence McDonald, “My objective in writing A Colossal Failure of Common Sense was twofold. First, to provide … a close-up, inside view of how markets really work…..And, second, to give… as crystal clear an explanation as possible about the real reasons why the legendary Lehman Brothers met with such a swift end”1. By writing about his personal experience at Lehman Brothers and recounting stories from within the famous investment banking firm, Mr. McDonald largely succeeds at his first goal. However, the elements of personal biography and the chronological order of the book make it difficult for the reader to fully appreciate all of the varied causes of the financial crash. I believe that the main value of reading this book is in understanding these causes, with Lehman Brothers acting as a microcosm of the greater financial universe. As such, in this review I have isolated elements from Mr. McDonald’s book which highlight how the crisis

Machiavelli explains how his methods are different than the more traditional ideas of others. He doesn’t want to sugarcoat anything and he intends to give useful advice and to explain what is really happening rather than what everyone has thought up and imagined.

Throughout history there has always been some sort of a class struggle. The rich always seemed to get richer while the poor barely managed to get by. One of the main things that contributed to the ever-expanding gap between the rich and the poor was greed. Whether it was the greed for money or for power, greed was certainly a driving force. More recently, the greed of several, rich and powerful individuals helped to cause one of the largest financial collapses of modern times. The purpose of this paper is to establish some of the key players in the economic crash of 2008, and to show some common

Machiavelli believed wicked means were to be used to achieve a virtuous outcome. In his eyes, a successful ruler was able to balance ethical virtue with harsh, sometimes even merciless pragmatism.11 If this meant partaking in the most ruthless acts of murder, brutalizing,

Machiavelli’s focus on pragmatism and realism seems to eliminate a worry about ethical concerns. For example, Machiavelli’s pragmatism, “distinguish(es) between cruelty well used and cruelty abused. ” (Machiavelli 30). One may argue Machiavelli’s distinction smuggles in a level of morality. In reality it is clear that this distinction is focused on the preservation of power in order to allow, “their subjects … to let bygones be bygones” (Machiavelli 30). Machiavelli makes no moral distinction between the cruel actions he merely makes a distinction upon what will best allow a ruler to maintain power. In The Discourses the emphasis of good policy being that which creates stability again ignores morality finding that new rulers should “remake everything else in the state from scratch” to do this they should, “make the rich poor and poor rich.” (Machiavelli 131). He even gives substance to wicked deeds finding they involve, “a certain nobility” (Machiavelli 132). This dramatic level of apathy to the right of the individuals or what are good actions demonstrate his emphasis of preservation of stability over morality.

Machiavelli’s views were drastically different from other humanists at his time. He strongly promoted a secular society and felt morality was not necessary but stood in the way of a successfully governed state. He stated that people generally tended to work for their own best interests and gave little thought to the well being of the state. He distrusted citizens saying, “In time of adversity,

Machiavelli considers society an immoral place. According to Machiavelli as stated in The Discourses on Livy, “for as men are, by nature, more prone to evil than to good”. The Prince is a manual for being a successful ruler in an immoral society. Often times that success is met by committing immoral acts. Machiavelli, an outsider to the inner workings of government gives what he thinks are the critical tools to being a successful ruler in modern society. “Sometimes you have to play hardball” is a saying from today that I relate to his philosophies.

In modern society it is a mistake to think of the world as a complete optimist. In the grand scheme of things it is natural to think and to do what is in one’s best interest. Machiavelli expresses these ideas by illustrating how to take power and properly rule a society in his book titled The Prince. His ideas are persuasive because they apply to the society we live in today. He explains that in a world where no man is perfect one has to be pragmatic with his morals and take action when needed to put one’s self ahead.

In the wake of the recent financial crisis, many commentators attempted to analyze the roots of the conflict from a political or economic perspective. Anthropologist Karen Ho, a veteran of Wall Street as well as an academic, attempted to understand the reason that Wall Street behaves the way it does in her 2009 anthropological study of American finance entitled Liquidated: An ethnography of Wall Street from a cultural perspective. The central paradox with which Ho begins her book is: " the economy experienced not only record corporate profits and the longest rising stock market ever, but also record downsizings," further concentrating the wealth in America (Ho 2009: 1-2). But how can corporations grow richer as the American public as a whole grows poorer? Corporations no longer view themselves as responsible for taking care of their employees, creating good products, or serving their original mission. Instead, the focus is on generating shareholder wealth (Ho 2009:3). Shareholders, not the larger public, have become the symbolic and real focus of firm strategy. The shareholder "symbolized and 'stood in' for the whole of the corporation and became the sole locus of concern and analysis" during the time Ho conducted her study in the late 1990s and continues to this day (Ho 2009:175)

At the height of the 2008 financial crisis, Mr. Lawrence G. McDonald wrote a book on the fall of Lehman Brothers, entitled "A Colossal Failure of Common Sense." This book is a risk manager 's guide to the right and wrong moves on Wall St., and explains why investors must stay ahead of policies coming out