Machiavelli

Posted for Caleb McBride

https://youtu.be/9SSV6mwPfTI A video breakdown of the work by someone smarter than me.

Written over 500 years ago, Machiavelli’s the Prince offers an answer to the age-old question: how should a ruler rule? This was a relevant during the time of its publication and it is just as, if not more, relevant to the world now than it was then. Born in the May of 1469 as the second son to 2 Florentine nobles the author of The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli, grew up with Florence as a major Italian political figure functioning primarily under the guidance of Lorenzo de’ Medici. However, the year that he entered the political landscape the Medici family fell from power and operated as a Republic until 1512 when the Medici’s returned to power and Machiavelli, consequently, lost his position and was imprisoned. The 2nd reign of the Medici lasted for 15 years, but Machiavelli died shortly after the family was expulsed from power, meaning he never regained his position.


With his time in the political service and his experience with drastically changing political environments, Machiavelli developed a keen sense of political intuition and compiled his thoughts in “The Prince” to regain his political status. Unlike some of the more fantastical and outlandish works on philosophy and ruling, there is very little exposition here, The Prince reads as more of an instruction manual. Personally, I love this kind of political writing and I really enjoyed diving into The Prince. This is especially true because Machiavelli has many things that I feel translate very nicely into the business world, as well as the political world. For example, I feel like the entire message of the Prince can be summed up in the idea that a leader must adapt their policy to the times in order to prosper, and that those whose policy clashes with the demands of the times does not and that the support of the people is more important than that of the nobles.

This thesis I feel is especially relevant in the political climate of today as a large portion of the government is focused on maintaining the status quo and pleasing the campaign contributors in a world that has evolved past said quo’s ability to properly govern us as Americans. The dissonance between the outdated (By the standards of The Prince) American governing style and the Americans being governed has resulted in radicalized views on both sides and the seeming inability to respectfully bride the gap. Furthermore, by focusing on garnering the support of the people (voters) instead of the nobles (the campaign contributors) I feel like politicians could secure more power and create a less confrontational political environment.

However, the interesting thing I find about the Prince is that while some things (such as Machiavelli’s opinion that governments should change with the times) gel well with the American political system, his other advice regarding conquest, ruling styles and other such things is easier to apply to the capitalistic world of business. For example, one idea of Machiavelli’s is that if a ruler finds themselves in charge of a new state/province that differs from the ruler’s traditional kingdom it is much easier to rule them if the ruler lives in the area in person and becomes familiar with the people, language and customs of the new area. Machiavelli says this will improve a ruler’s possession of the land more secure and permanent but the same is also true for a business that was recently taken over. If a CEO acquires a new business via a takeover of some sort, but never personally visits the new business to see the various relationships and atmospheres in the environment it becomes very easy to make decisions that will result in both strain on the company itself and on the relationship between boss and employee.

However, Machiavelli did have a quite a few issues. All of his advice was purely centered on obtaining and maintaining power at all costs so it is very easy to see how some of his ideas may not have be the most altruistic or friendly to anyone outside those with power. For example, in The Prince, Machiavelli makes it clear that he is of the opinion that the ends justify the means when searching to gain and keep power and all of his advice is given assuming that the ruler is willing to do, say and be whatever they have to be in order to win. When combined with other less than stellar ideas present in his work, such as the opinion that it is better to be feared by those you rule then loved, these ideas would quickly become problematic if adopted by modern businesses and governments.

Nevertheless, despite some of the problems innate in his views Machiavelli has a great deal of advice that is very relevant to todays political and business worlds and I feel that many of his ideas should be revisited in those areas, so long as the person who does so is altruistic in their intent.

These are only a few of Machiavelli’s ideas and my opinions on them, if you want to explore his views more or without my commentary then feel free to read more

The Prince:
https://www.constitution.org/mac/prince.pdf


Other ideas:


https://warontherocks.com/2014/08/machiavellis-27-rules-of-war/

If you are curious as to how similar your ideals are to Machiavelli’s take this qui

(https://www.aconsciousrethink.com/6299/machiavellian-scale-test/)


If you want to see what a letter from Machiavelli to Trump would look like, feel free


http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2017/02/26/sincerely-niccolo-machiavelli-an-open-letter-to-donald-trump-from-a-berkeley-freshman-published-in-salon-magazine/


Quiz Questions:


Why did Machiavelli write the Prince?


What was the Prince’s thesis?


How can a politician apply Machiavelli’s ideas to secure more power and support?


Machiavellian ideas have the potential to be constructive and helpful so long as they are implemented by what kind of ruler?


Discussion Questions:


Do you think that the ends justify the means? Why?


What are some other ways Machiavelli’s ideas can be adopted to a modern world?


Where do you draw the line in what is acceptable from your leaders?

What situations do you think warrant a “better to be feared than loved” outlook? How about a “ends justify the means” outlook?