Machiavelli's The Prince

Contrary to More’s Humanist perspective of people as good and treachery as irrational, Machiavelli embraces mankind’s fickle nature, even expecting it. People, from his perspective, are never dependable. While they may appear to love and support a leader, they will betray their trust whenever it benefits

Machiavelli wrote The Prince in 16th-century. His methods of acquiring and maintaining rule over people are not relevant in today’s modern American society. There are many principles that are still true in politics today, but the methods of ruling can no longer be used in American society today.

In my attempt to compare the past and the present, I must explain to you the inner thoughts and workings of an ancient icon known as Niccolo Machiavelli on his publication “The Prince”. To do this, I must first start with explaining the brighter side of an ill fate. William Enfield suggested that “The Prince” was a ridicule of Machiavelli’s own perception of political leaders in his time. All in all, declaring that the book was written to “pull off the face of tyranny” and that “men were always fickle, liars, and deceivers” (Enfield, William) as the reporter points out in his article summary as well. Machiavelli’s personality makes this idea a double standard because of the fact that he wrote of breaking the bond of love and even trust if

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, sees this as an impractical and impossible way to lead. Machiavelli has the stance that “the conditions of human life make it impossible to exercise all those qualities” (Machiavelli 33). Machiavelli’s expresses his rational thought process on how government can be ruled. His experience working for the Florentine republic and then the Medici government allowed him to see what works and fails in effective leadership as both those governments saw failure. Machiavelli recognition that the leaders are only human and cannot be perfect.

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.

Machiavelli did not energize the thought in confiding in the ones that lead, however, “[…] men are a sorry lot and will not keep their promises to you, you likewise need not keep yours to them.” (230) He hoped for strategy, injustice, and unlawfulness from his kin and composed his tenets all things considered under the beliefs of being a pragmatist. While discovering “they are ungrateful, fickle, simulators and deceivers, avoiders of danger, greedy for gain” (228) the function of Prince was to hold and manage opposed to giving the general population a chance to thrive or set a

What are some of the qualities and strategies Machiavelli recommends to political leaders in the excerpts you read? How does this represent a break with the past?

When people are put into different situations they must act accordingly. When their life is in danger they must do what it takes to survive, and when a man is made prince he must adjust to his situation. He must act accordingly so that he can remain in power. Machiavelli feels that a price should be generous, but not so generous that he loses everything in the process. Machiavelli says, “… for when he is poor, nobody will respect him.” The prince gets his money from the people, and to give them everything that they want he would have to increase taxes and that would anger his people. Machiavelli is right when it comes to a prince being generous. You must be generous enough that your people remain happy and respectful, but stingy enough that you do not end up poor trying to please them.

In the article, Vincet Barnett explains and shows how there is more to Machiavelli than we really know. Machiavelli originally was trying to win back favor from the then-current rulers by writing "The Prince;" assuming a bitter attitude would work. "The Prince," had to be a crucial book to understand the meaning of what a leader had to do to succeed.

Nichollo Machiavelli's book “The Prince” was published in 1532 and ever since then, has been a handbook used by many throughout history to staying in power. In this book Machiavelli uses his experiences through his position in the both the government and the military, to give advice to others who are either seeking power or trying to remain in power. The book is divided into several chapters, each giving situation specific advice on how one should rule to obtain power or remain in it

encouraging them to work better in order to ameliorate the welfare of the country. (Machiavelli,56). These measures, although

Machiavelli has another argument “concerning those who become princes by evil means.”# He believes that cruelty can also be used to benefit the prince but only in modesty. If a prince frequently relies on cruel acts then he will not live in power for long. Proper use of cruelty is only achieved when it is done “out of the need for safety” and when it is done swiftly as to make sure that the act is quickly forgotten, and the people can return to a feeling of safety.# His idea that cruelty should be swift is excellent, this way the citizens will feel more at ease with there prince, because if he were to drag out the atrocities then the people may feel the need to revolt to protect their personal freedoms and civil rights. Many people may think these are evil ideas, but it is completely practical, during Machiavelli’s era (and even today) a prince will always face a moment in this rule that he will have to act in a cruel manner, in no way is this statement cruel it is just a practical way of dealing with a inevitable situation. He also believes that “benefits ought to be given little by little, so that the flavour of them may last longer.”# As much as people may be discusted by this

More advice given to the prince by Machiavelli was on general good governance, meaning how to rule, all supported by historical examples. He writes, "…the prince will avail himself of the occasion… to secure himself, with less consideration for

     Machiavelli’s argument also focuses on the topic of integrity and generosity and on how a political leader should keep his word. On one hand, he states that it is commendable for a political leader to live by integrity and to be considered generous; however the leaders who have accomplished great deeds throughout history hardly cared about keeping their word and were men that were known to be able to manipulate every situation by clever and shrewd means. Since it is impossible to always maintain all the qualities that man consider good and also maintain a state in his view, a great leader would know when to break those qualities when it is needed for the preservation of the state. However, he warns of excess generosity and the burdens it brings because in order for a leader to maintain his reputation as generous, he has to continuously tax his people in order to raise his funds. This process in turn makes those who employ excessive generosity appear to be the most miserly of all since they tax everyone in order to appear generous to a few.