Machiavelli
Niccolo Machiavelli is probably at one and the same time one of themost read and one of the most widely misunderstood of any of the politicalphilosophers of the renaissance in Europe whose ideas are still consideredrelevant and in active circulation today, indeed, as Leo Strauss has noted,there seems to be a prevailing notion that Machiavelli's teaching was abasically malevolent one that offers little hope for progress in . . . the old fashioned and simple opinion according to which Machiavelli was a teacher of evil . . . the only philosopher who has lent the weight of his name to . . . [a] way of political thinking and political acting . . . Callicles and Thrasymachus, who set forth the evil doctrine . . . are Platonic characters . . . the Athenian ambassadors who state the same doctrine . . . are Thucydidean actors. Machiavelli proclaims openly and triumphantly a corrupting doctrine . (Strauss 9-10)While it is certainly true that Machiavelli was not a man overly concernedwith abstract ethical systems, neither was he evil. Indeed, as his less
And such difficulty is reasonable; because that people is nothing else other than a brute animal, which ((although by nature ferocious and wild)) has always been brought up in prison and servitude, (and) which later being left by chance free in a field, (and) not being accustomed to (obtain) food or not knowing where to find shelter for refuge, becomes prey to the first one who seeks to enchain it again. Nonetheless, Machiavelli does further conclude that, whilea prince may be better of being feared, he should do well not to bedespised or seen as a tyrant, saying that "a prince ought to inspire fearin such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because hecan endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated" (Machiavelli, ThePrince, Chapter XVII). Thus, Machiavelli's sole concern here lies in increasing the reign ofthe putative prince rather than enforcing some moral dogma or qualm. ("Niccolo Machiavelli-Biography and Works"). The main distinction between Machaivelli's The Prince, however, andhis other widely important though considerably less-read mature work, TheDiscourses on Livy, is the fact that wherein the former considers only thepossibilities in governance afforded by a monarchy in terms of governance,the latter considers the role of leadership within a republic. JamesPocock, in his book The Machiavellian Movement goes on at some length aboutthis pointing out specifically that "a city accustomed to liberty" is themost difficult to maintain because "the memory of its former liberties,which can never serve to legitimate the new prince, is extraordinarilytenacious . Livy, reveals, he was a staunch and ardentdefender of the idea of the republic as the best solution for thegovernance of the people. Simply, passages like these revealthat, when it comes to diplomatic relationships, Machiavelli is unwillingto consider the possibility that they might be defined and regulated bymoral action. Indeed,while he is often pegged as an immoral author who has only concerned aboutteaching others how to manipulate a political system best to its ownadvantages, such an understanding of Machiavelli is neither full nor fair,and, indeed, he was a staunch defender of the idea of a republicangovernment not very unlike the one founded in Rome. Thus Machiavellithe pragmatist rather than the ethicist is apparent in both works. Mostspecifically and obviously, The Prince is notable for the fact that isseems to offer a series of instructions and even a sort of "model kit" uponwhich an aspiring autocrat could base the very foundations of a futurerule. Nonetheless, this is not a sea change or a watershed in terms ofNiccolo Machiavelli's philosophical ideas, but rather, he believes that,for exceptionally pragmatic reasons, that the republic is the best form ofgovernance available, and, always the pragmatists, he goes on to delineatethe necessary factors for the transformation of a state ruled by a princeinto one that is a republic in terms of its structure of leadership.
Common topics in this essay:
Discourses Livy,
Machiavellian Movement,
Prince Machiavelli,
XIX Machiavelli's,
XIX Indeed,
Chapter Indeed,
Machiavelli-Biography Indeed,
Machiavelli Indeed,
Niccolo Machiavelli,
Callicles Thrasymachus,
discourses livy,
machiavelli prince chapter,
prince chapter,
machiavelli prince,
loved feared,
niccolo machiavelli,
idea republic,
defender idea,
doctrine ,
machiavelli makes,
prince chapter xvii,
written 1513,
defender idea republic,
prince chapter xix,
mature discourses livy,
|
Acceptance Essays
