Comparing Stalin 'And Machiavelli's The Prince'

Stalin was abused, mistreated when he was, and had many misfortunes as a child. His father abused him and the village children of Gori treated him as inferior. He learned to be cruel and mistreat others who crossed him. His rough childhood turned him into one of the most cruel people in the world.

Niccolò Machiavelli was an Italian politician and writer during the sixteenth century. He is most famous for his book The Prince which talks about how to gain political power. His book addresses the concept of the “new prince” rather than the hereditary prince who must stabilize his power as well a building political structure. In The Prince, Machiavelli talks about whether it is better to be feared or loved. Machiavelli states that a leader should be both feared and loved, but that if you had to pick one, pick fear. I do believe that being feared has advantages when ruling a country and makes a leader more successful in the long run.

There are many different ways on how a prince or ruler could come into power and how they choose to rule once in power. Niccolo Machiavelli wrote the book The Prince based on his own personal opinions on how a prince should rule. Machiavelli writes all of his beliefs based on princes and the monarchy in England/France in the fourteenth century. The principalities that Machiavelli wrote about can be compared to many European leaders. One European leader that has some differences to what Machiavelli wrote is Joseph Stalin, the dictator of the Soviet Union. As said before many leaders come into power in different ways and the way Stalin came into power and what he did with that power is different from a Machiavellian ruler.

Soso Djugashvili, more commonly known as Joseph Stalin, ‘man of steel’, dictator of the Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) Russia, can be considered a ‘Red Tsar’ to an extent when features of Stalinism are compared to those of Tsarism and Russia ruled by Nicholas II’s autocratic regime from 1894 to 1917. A ‘Red Tsar’ is a communist leader whom follows similar principles followed under the leadership of a Tsar, that were influenced by few opinions allowing sole leadership and little opposition from others. Stalin can be considered a ‘Red Tsar’ to an extent as he ruled Communist Russia as a somewhat totalitarian state and was considered a ‘God-like’ figure sent to Earth to lead the nation and its people. From Stalin’s reign of terror from 1929 to 1953 there can be similarities seen in his regime to features of Tsarism as well as differences, this is why there are alternative interpretations for Stalin being considered a ‘Red Tsar’.

How does a leader gain and maintain the love of his people when he is killing them in mass numbers? Joseph Stalin was successful in this by following the political tactic of using fear to gain love. A tactic that was highly valued by Nicolo Machiavelli in his work The Prince. “In Arthur Koestler’s Darkness at Noon, the main character, and Old Bolshevik, Nikolaiz Rubashov, declares that “Number one” (Stalin) kept Machiavelli’s The Prince as his favorite night-table book” (Tisemanean). Stalin’s strategy of leadership can be closely compared to the strategies that Machiavelli describes in The Prince. A work that received much controversy over the lessons it preached to political leaders. It coined the phrase “the end justify the means” which follows as a consequence of considering vice a virtue. Stalin used many vices to gain and maintain his state till the day he died. Alexsandr Solzhenitsyn work, The First Circle, showcased how even on death’s door Stalin still used traits treasured in a Machiavellian prince. This paper will assess how Stalin follows Machiavelli’s guidelines for a prince in the areas of war, fear, crime, and in dealing with the people.

Joseph Stalin, from the time that he was a low level revolutionary to the years that he spent as the dictator of the Soviet Union, always knew what he needed to do to achieve his goals. His organized rise to power allowed him to gain a steady flow of followers who would support him for decades to come. Stalin received a minor government position in 1917, but by the time a new leader was needed in 1924, he “had turned the largely routine post of Party general secretary into the most powerful office in the Soviet Union” (“Joseph Stalin) and “had built a personal empire for himself through his control over committee appointments at all levels . . . expand[ing] the leading Party organs with his supporters, who then voted against his rivals”

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

This strategy disposed Stalin of any political opposition, which helped him sustain his power. Another major method that Stalin used to maintain his power was the use of propaganda to portray himself as a benevolent father figure. While at the same time he was committing mass murder. In Ukraine alone he killed ten million people in only two years! Many historians agree that Stalin killed over sixty million people. Why did he kill so much people? This can be traced back to Machiavelli’s The Prince. As discussed before, The Prince teaches that a ruler should have the fear of the people. Stalin slaughtered so many people to prevent any opposition to his reign. He eliminated all the strong people, both the intellectual and physical; therefore the few left would be too afraid and too weak, physically and mentally, to resist. Stalin did exactly what Machiavelli stated in the Prince, which was also stated above, “ And here it has to be noted that men must be either pampered or crushed, because they can get revenge fore small injuries but not fore grievous ones.” Stalin stated “ Death is the solution to all problems. No man - no problem.”, “ Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs.”, and “ I trust no one, not even myself.” As it can be clearly seen, Joseph Stalin epitomises most of Machiavelli’s beliefs that are stated in The Prince. Therefore, Stalin can be consider Machiavelli’s ideal prince.

“It is much safer to be feared than loved.” This quotation was just a specimen of the harsh and very practical political annotation of the legendary historian, Niccolò Machiavelli – philosopher, patriot, diplomat, advisor and statesman. He was born as the son of a poor lawyer in 1498, but he never let boundaries restrict him. He still received an excellent humanist education from the University of Florence and was soon after appointed as the Second Chancellor of the Republic of Florence.2 His political importance to Florence would soon give him the opportunity to write what is disputed as one of the most significant works in history, The Prince.

Through the use of fear, Stalin was able to take over all of Russia. Stalin even starved his nation and worked them to death, but even though they were dying, the citizens of Russia were still loyal to Stalin. Machiavelli wrote in his book,"…no prince should mind being called cruel for what he does to keep his subjects united and loyal…". As long as the leader is in control of his country, the leader should be slipshod what his subjects say, actions are stronger than words. When a leader is loved rather than feared the citizens or subjects are more open to saying an offensive and faulty thing about their leader. Bad talking a leader mostly happens with a gentle, loving leader, while a leader who is feared shameful talking will not happen as much, Machiavelli states," People are less concerned with offending a man who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared…". Machiavelli takes the "fear is better side" to help a prince achieve honor in ruling a hard, strenuous nation. Although leaders rule through love, ruling through fear is much more reliable and keeps people from disobeying an influential

Niccolo Machiavelli stressed that “one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved…for love is held by a chain of obligation which, men being selfish, is broken whenever it serves their purpose; but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never fails.” He felt that a true leader must be cunning and deceptive, winning the hearts of his people through power and influence. If he could not be liked, he could at least get by knowing he has intimidated these below him into submission. However rash or cruel this may seem, Machiavelli’s argument is not one to be countered easily.

Machiavelli states that to be feared is better to be loved. ThaHe thinks that “love is a link of obligation which men, because they are rotten will break and the think doing so serves their advantage; fear involves dread of punishment.” If you have to make a choice to be feared its much safer than to be loved”. Machiavelli wants the leader to be feared not hated, this will be the result of only the prince will keep his hands of the property of his subject or citizens of their women therefore Machiavelli

A family of monarchy which tortured Machiavelli for months causing him great suffrage and sorrow. He writes to Lorenzo “May I trust, therefore, that Your Highness will accept this little gift in the spirit in which it is offered: and if Your Highness will deign to peruse it, you will recognize in it my ardent desire that you may attain to that grandeur which fortune and your own merits presage for you.” This enough is confusing because if this is the same principality that caused so much suffering why dedicate a book to let their reign continue into longevity? As to add to this confusion, Machiavelli explains how a prince should use cruelty and violence correctly against the people. To use cruelty and punishment all at once so that the people learn to respect you by fear. He includes that if you had a choice on either being loved or feared, be feared for love can change as quick as it came. Fear of punishment, people would avoid and be subservient. He also goes on to put out that a prince must be cunning like a fox yet strong and fearsome like a lion. To use Realpolitik, morality and ideology left out for the world is not these things as you should not be as well. Furthermore, Machiavelli explains what must happen when a new ruler overtakes a new city and the people in it. “And whoever becomes the ruler of a free city and does not destroy it, can expect to be destroyed by it,

Machiavelli Essay Machiavelli claims that it is better to be feared than loved as a leader. It is good to be both feared and loved, but fear triumphs if there is only one option. People are more driven by fear than love because it is human nature to avoid the consequences rather than collect the reward. Overall, I agree with Machiavelli that it is better to be feared than loved because fear gives a leader more strength and confidence, which is needed to be successful.

First let us discuss the ideas of Niccolo Machiavelli in is piece “The Prince”. Machiavelli has a very independent controversial way of thinking and portraying his ideal form of governance in this text. The ideal and most effective from of governance for him is not in that of a republic but instead he insists in an autocratic regime. He argues that republics and other forms of government are too weak because of the corruptness of human nature. This book is written as a guide on how a prince should run his state or nation based on how and when he would come into this power. One of his main concerns in which he has been criticized for is his disregard to follow moral values so as to properly run the state, as well as