Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince

For many centuries, there have been many leaders and rulers around the world making their own rules and decisions. In the Book “The Prince” by Niccolo Machiavelli, Machiavelli describes ways that leaders can be successful if they follow his advice. One leader that shows Machiavelli’s advice by the way they rule is Adolf Hitler.The way he ruled was by fear, violence, and by conquering other countries. Although Hitler had some failures during his lifetime, he shows how Machiavelli’s advice is relevant in today's leaders.

Machiavelli’s work The Prince is, evidently, a bit dated. However, the points that it expresses maintain their significance, even when monarchies are no longer the primary form of government. The Prince is relevant to contemporary society in today’s age as it relates to contemporary elements such as North Korea, World War II, and more.

From describing world leaders to political antiheroes in television dramas, characterizing someone as a “Machiavellian figure” is perceived more as derisive description than an accurate representation of that person’s philosophical views of power. This popular depiction is due to Niccolo Machiavelli’s harsh portrayal of the interlaced relationship between power and politics in his treatise, The Prince. Machiavelli begins his work by contending that it is “more effective” to reveal the “practical truth of a subject” rather than “depend on [his] fancies for it”(Machiavelli 2524). His rejection of idealism and focus on realism impels him to claim that a ruler has to be acquainted with and effectively use both virtue and vice to wield power over his subjects. However, Machiavelli’s philosophical justifications which allow him to arrive at such a conclusion are based on three problematic beliefs which are that the public is easily gratified with a fulfillment of their most basic desires, the ruler has to develop a narcissistic personality to understand how to wield power and the ruler, as a man, must beat the woman Fortune to have dominion (Machiavelli 2531). These assumptions are what gives the term “Machiavellian” such a negative connotation; more importantly, they reveal that Machiavelli’s understanding of power is problematic since it is not based on realism but on an idealized view of the general public and masculinity.

The Oxford Dictionary defines the term “Machiavellian” as someone who is cunning, scheming, and unscrupulous, especially in politics or in advancing one’s career. These principles, as well as others, were established in Niccolo Machiavelli’s book, The Prince. The Prince dwelves on what a person needs to do to obtain and maintain power in a principality. Although it was written nearly 500 years ago, it has influenced countless rulers over time. A great example of one of these rulers is Joseph Stalin, dictator of the U.S.S.R (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) from 1929 - 1953.

The Prince was a book that really opened my eyes to a certain way of thinking and not feeling like a bad person for thinking that way. A lot of people regard narcissism as bad and selfish and make you out to be an ignorant villain. Growing up I have always considered myself to be quite narcissistic and everyone around me always made me feel like it was a crime to think highly of myself. Having narcissistic qualities is not a crime, in fact depending on where you want your life to go it can be a blessing to have those qualities. Although these qualities can be to our benefit in some instances, if we do not know how to use the power of these qualities they will become of no use and instead work against us.

Machiavelli then moves to the final section of The Prince where he writes about prudence and change around Italy at that time. He starts with stating that there are many princes around Italy that simply lost their states. Machiavelli goes on to state that the reason for this is not because of bad luck or fortune but simply because their power got to their heads, they thought they were invincible, and in the end they found out that they weren’t and crumbled along with their states. Machiavelli then writes that fortune is two ways. Part of it is influenced by actions and the reactions to certain scenarios. The other part is the “sweet” part of fortune that many people believe that they have no control over where in reality they do. Basically

Niccolo Machiavelli’s advice towards leaders in his book The Prince is both relevant and not relevant today in many ways. The European leader that I have chosen to prove what advice Machiavelli gave in The Prince is relevant and what is not, is Edward Heath. Some of Edwards work relates to the advice given by Machiavelli while many of it is the pure opposite of Machiavelli’s advice.

The Prince, by Niccoló Machiavelli, is a how to rule guide for sovereigns. It was written in 1513 but published only in 1532, nearly five years after Machiavelli’s death. The book was composed to tell sovereigns how to rule, but some scholars say it is more on how not to rule. From how to act as a prince to how not to attack in war, Machiavelli discusses it all. He was a regular citizen in Florence, but claimed he knew more about the art of ruling than princes did, he watched Italy rise and fall and decided to write The Prince in hopes that Lorenzo de Medici, the prince at the time, would read it and put it to use. Machiavelli claimed that if a prince were to read his book and follow his guidance, he would have no problem ruling and go down

I think his lack of faith in people played a big part in how Macheavelli's works reflect the political realities of Renaissance Italy. The more I read about how Macheavelli used fear to control his people the more I understand why he did it. He loved his land and the people that occupied it, and the people could see that in him. At the same time he used his power to make people fear him and want to follow him. However I feel that his letters to Francesco Vettori in Rome make this clear enough. This combination of political elements, and Machiavelli's contemplative lifestyle, produced a work he wrote in just his first several months on the farm in late in 1513; The Prince. He originally dedicated it to the de' Medici family who were in control

A Republic is representative government ruled by law, where democracy is a direct government ruled by majority of the people. Republic is based on individuals and inalienable rights. In The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli the book expresses how to become and stay a prince through numerous obstacles. From the beginning, different forms of government are stated and described, but Machiavelli focuses on the different types of principles a prince should maintain within a kingdom and why a kingdom fails or thrives. He expresses in great detail the different governments. However, the book is not based upon republics but of monarchies, old and new.

Machiavelli has many ideas throughout his work. A few of them can definitely translate to current day situations. In Machiavelli’s “the prince” he brings up many key points that people may find very controversial. Some people completely agree and other people think that they're completely irrational and too powerful. Either way you look at it you have a really organized government form that may or may not work in this day and age.

Machiavelli elaborates on how fortune is a woman and also how fortune can take control. I found his theory to be true. Women are fortunes men will never understand. Fortune is something men will never cherish correctly. In today’s society men overlook how highly they should treat a woman. No men open doors, lend a helping hand, or ask how their day have been. Many people believe fortune controls everything, so they let it. As years went by men have slacked off the respect for women and their fortune. In Machiavelli selection of The Prince, he seems to have it all figured out.

Machiavelli’s the Prince is a highly acclaimed and influential book to read by wide crowds of audiences. Machiavelli is not evil, he’s just a political expert that’s trying to return Florence to the former glory of itself before the liberation and drive out the foreigners. Throughout the book, it has historical examples on how to properly conquer a kingdom, marketing ploys, and colonizing tips. Also, this was how society was in the period of Medieval times and Renaissance because you would either need to conquer as many lands as possible in order to be seen as powerful and wealthy or be conquered by wealthier enemies.

In paragraph six subtitle “The Prince,” the author is trying to explain that The Prince is not the only book out here in the world that specifies how a ruler should rule in order to keep his title. He also goes on to quote from Machiavelli that “a prudent ruler cannot, and must not, honour his word when t places him at disadvantages” which in another words is saying, if he makes a promise and somehow that promise puts him a step behind the game, he must break it. He also notes that to be a ruler you have to be a great liar and deceiver. My opinion for the above following would cause me to lose my title and no longer be a ruler, due to the sense that I totally disagree with all of the following.

Prince Giacomo Ronzoni has just selected me to help him with his disputes in his city-state. I find myself honored and nervous to take on such a vital task. This makes me a key player in his rule, but if I misguide him the residents of the city-state may behead him and in turn behead me as well. The patrons of the city-state are upset with Prince Giacomo Ronzoni political rulings and there is a risk of a war with our neighbor Modena. However, I think I can offer some sage advice because of my recent reading of Machiavelli’s book, The Prince. Knowing our time is short before a rebellion or a war could break out I must prepare a concise understanding of the book for Prince Giacomo Ronzoni. When I have my advising hearing with the prince I have decided to focus on six main principles: free will, cruelty, arms, history, generosity and the unification of Italy.