Machiavelli In The Prince And A Bronx Tale

Prince, Machiavelli describes an image of what he believes an ideal prince should be. He explains his ideas on how to conquer and rule with the peoples’ loyalty and respect. Machiavelli argues in chapter five that the way to take over a free state is initially to destroy it and by destroying the city, the citizens have no other choice but “let [the] prince win and maintain his state” by following his commands. Later Machiavelli describes what he believes leadership is. Leaders, he explains, are followers in many ways. All leaders are imitating great rulers in history. A leader who truly wishes to achieve glory does so by his own talent. Anyone can inherit a kingdom, but not anyone can rule it with natural leadership. Machiavelli also explains that a leader should not try to buy his subjects, because they will only be temporarily loyal. A prince needs to eliminate his enemies and do so all at once. Even if a prince does not succeed in ruling by his own skill in his lifetime, he is still setting a good foundation for future princes. The next chapter explains the level of evil needed in order to rise to power. He gives a clear insight into the pros and cons of obtaining power by evil means and how to use evil in ways that will be beneficial. Machiavelli believes very strongly in manipulation. If a prince can unleash all of his evil and destruction at one time, the people will forget and move on

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 targets the prince mentioned above with his unconventional advice in the excerpt, “The Morals of the Prince,” from his book, The Prince. The statement

Machiavelli believed that humans are evil. He thought that they were always seeking power, when they were faced with problems they were too self-interested, and many people in power just wanted to be better than others. He believed people were uncontrollable unless they were ruled by a powerful force, and this is where the Prince came in. They were “all-powerful” and supposed to be the only thing that can change or influence the people.

In Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics", the concept of knowledge is expressed by the author as truth of the soul which guides one to find the virtuous middle ground between excess and defect (Aristotle, Pg. 126-128). This aspiration to intellectual virtue is a political one because it is an attempt at doing the right thing and achieving the "good". Within Book VI, Aristotle identifies three different kinds of knowledge: scientific, craft and practical (Aristotle, Pg. 128). Scientific knowledge, as described by Aristotle, is comprised of necessarily eternal truths which are "ungenerated and imperishable" (Aristotle, Pg. 129). Knowledge of science, therefore, must be concerned with the unchanging truths of the natural world. Craft or the intellectual

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.

In this paper, I will argue that a ruler should be beast-like and dishonest when it is beneficial. In section one, I will argue that deception is necessary to obtains one’s self-interests. Following that, being beast-like is necessary to keep a position of power such as being a ruler or politician. Lastly, I will present that it is better to be feared than loved. The ideas in The Prince, by Niccolo Machiavelli, are known to be relevant in society today along with its time.

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

In The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli depicted his views on how princes should rule their kingdom, how they should maintain their rule, and what traits they should possess. Machiavelli detailed throughout his work his principal political values that he believed to be the best way to rule and govern his people in order to provide guidance to kings, princes, and nobles. In The Prince, Machiavelli outlined his views on what a successful prince should look like and in order to become a successful prince, the prince must do whatever must be done regardless of the consequences.

Machiavelli in his work informs the prince that even if he does possess certain qualities he shall always appear to his followers as retaining all of these qualities as shown in the following quotation “A prince, therefore, need not necessarily have all the good qualities I mentioned above, but he should certainly appear to have them… He should appear to be compassionate, faithful to his word, kind guileless, and devout… He should not deviate from what is good, if that is possible, but he should know how to do evil, if that is necessary” (Machiavelli 57). Machiavelli highlights that image is extremely crucial for rulers and they must alter the perceptions of their people in regard to him in order to appear in control at all times for the purpose of maintaining and sustaining control. This idea is overturning

Machiavelli knew that a Prince must secure his power and must be powerful enough to keep it. The idea that doing anything to get this power, whether it was moral or not was the most important aspect. “A prince should not worry if he incurs reproach for his cruelty so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal.” (Machiavelli 9). [Burton &Dworkin] He did not see all men as equal. He perceived that some men existed to become rulers and others did not. In my opinion I think this is true in almost any government. He also believes that honesty could not always be a standard because some times you had to lie to get what you needed. In a sense saying, men who want to have more power are willing to be unethical to claim it. Machiavelli expresses very dark perspectives in the Prince which makes it easier for me to relate to

The Prince by Machiavelli is an essential piece of political literature, that describes the delicate balance that a prince must achieve in order to both gain and maintain power over a province. Machiavelli seems to have a pessimistic view of mankind, as he states “(men are) ungrateful, fickle, deceptive, and deceiving, avoiders of danger, eager to gain…”. This description reveals that Machiavelli is distrusting of man and believes that they cannot be

504 years ago, Niccolo Machiavelli completed his magnum opus The Prince, a work that discarded the political philosophies of the time and introduced a gritty, realistic method to ruling over a body of people. Now, centuries later, politicians and thinkers still discuss this writing in an attempt to find solutions to national issues. So why do we still ponder a piece of literature that was written in a foreign place and time as if it is universally true? In short, it is because Machiavelli was right. He was right to believe that for a ruler in his time to maintain his position of power, he must act immorally on occasion. However, the flaw in our constant application of The Prince in modern America is that the ultimate goal of a ruler is no longer to stay in power as long as possible. Thus, Machiavelli’s method is important to understand if one wants to study other societies or other time periods, but it should not be used to make sense of current politics in America, because our society is built to change.

Machiavelli emphasizes that the prince must obtain, retain and expand power (285).The price should maintain the state if he is in power. The prince should have no other goal or thought other than war, organization, and discipline, for this is the only art that is necessary for the one who

According to Machiavelli, a Prince’s quest of political power cannot incorporate too much of any quality. He must not be too nice, too generous, too honest, or even too evil. Although, many of the actions he suggests could be viewed as completely and utterly villainous. One must be this way to uphold his principality. His political aim was to maintain the stability of the state and sometimes that involved setting aside considerations of justice,