“..The prince should, as I have already suggested, determine to avoid anything which will make him hated and despised.” (Machiavelli 102). Nicolae did not take this advice, nor anyone else’s for that matter. He continued to make life miserable for the people until he was despised by everyone. In 1987, thousands of working men mobbed the Communist Party headquarters in Brasov (“Nicolae Ceausescu Biography”). From that point, people came to fear Nicolae less, and hate him more. Until one day, on Christmas Day, there was another mob. This time however, the people were helped by the army. “His defence lies in being well armed and having good allies.” (Machiavelli 103). Unfortunately, Nicolae had become so despised that he had no allies or army
Niccolo Machiavelli, author of The Prince, was born in Italy in 1469 and raised in
Question #1 is worth 5 points – all others are worth 1 point each. Either type your answers directly onto THIS sheet OR create a new file and number your answers 1, 2, 3, etc.
Niccolo Machiavelli and Karl Marx developed theories concerning wealth and poverty in our society, as well as different types of governments. For instance, Machiavelli supported a capitalist economic system, unlike Marx, who embraced socialism in the society. Machiavelli wrote a book "The Prince" that explained how to be an effective leader. The theme of the book is "the end justifies the means." A person could or should do whatever is necessary to achieve the desired goal. According to Machiavelli, there is no concept of a perfect ruler, but only effective or ineffective leaders. Therefore, he claims that there are no fair fighters, but only losers and winners. Contrary, Marx embraced democracy as good practice for the government. This paper will analyze whether Marx would buy Machiavelli 's thought that states "desired ends justify undesirable means" (Weng 1).
Nowadays, it is politically impossible to commit to paper a "training guide" for leaders. There are innumerable detractors to any possible stance or strategy a leader might adopt. As a result of this, all "training" must take place behind closed doors, far from the prying eyes and ears of the news media or the public. But this has not always been the case.
When it comes to love stories in mythology, most people assume that the god Eros (also known as Cupid) and the goddess Aphrodite (also known as Venus) are behind the stories. However, most of the stories barely involve Eros and Aphrodite in their stories. There are more gods besides Eros and Aphrodite that help symbolize love by their actions in the stories of love. Even though Aphrodite and Eros are the main deities associated with love, several of the other Olympian gods are also agents of love.
I agree with you in the fact that media in the United States is indeed biased. The mainstream media particularly all seem to have a majority of the same viewpoints with little variation on their beliefs, but I must disagree when you say all journalists and writers are biased because, “they push their agenda in news and entertainment.” Media bias comes from a multitude of factors, who enters careers in writing and journalism, where journalists get information from, and how audiences receive news and media.
Machiavelli’s The Prince talks about many issues of modern political philosophy, it was written to help rulers stay in power. His common themes are ruling through fear, being as powerful as a lion and as intelligent as a fox, and to maintain the state at all costs. One of the common discussions about his writings is what he means by “one must learn how to not be good.” For what reason should a ruler learn to not be good? He claims that being good and continuing to be good could only make a ruler more weak. He continues to list good and bad qualities of a ruler and claiming that every ruler will have at least one of the bad qualities but the way he conquers his unpraised attribute is most important. A ruler should hide his flaws so that he only
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
To describe what it is to be “Machiavellian” one must first describe what it is not. It is not being cruel for the sake of cruelty, just as it is not being good for the sake of goodness. It is being deliberate in one’s actions for the success of the state, or whatever one is ruling over. Machiavellians do not concern themselves with reputation, as long as those they are trying to rule do not hate them. I would describe a Machiavellian as intelligent, motivated by power, and someone that would not hesitate to deceive or manipulate others to reach their goals. While those traits might have brought someone success in ruling as a prince during the Renaissance, disregarding morals and ethics in today’s politics would not get someone very far.
Machiavelli wrote The Prince trying to ingratiate himself with the Medici princes who had recently taken over the government in Florence in the early sixteenth century. He envisioned this book to be a short, concise handbook for princes who have acquired power and wished to keep it. Accordingly, it begins by dividing all governments into two kinds: republics and "principalities" (those ruled by a "prince," or single ruler). Machiavelli swiftly dismisses the first kind of government as being outside the scope of his argument. He then goes on to subdivide the latter kind. Principalities, he writes, are of two kinds: there are those which have been ruled by a family for a long time, and those which are newly conquered. It is this last kind, obviously,
After reading “The Prince” I would advise the prince that he would need some sort of violence to take the self-governed republics but he should keep in mind that he cannot afford to keep violent will all. He should get it over as soon as things are under control and start being nice to people. In that way he can earn the people’s trust and love and the people won’t hate him. Even the people who are unhappy with his political decisions would start to accept him nicely. Politics is not so easy. Sometimes you have to be rude and violent like a tyrant to stop some rebels against you. Furthermore, I would advise Giacomo Ronzoni never to let his people hate him. This is can be done if he stays honest. He shouldn’t lie, cheat or steal and become hated. He should stick to his commitment and never break his promise to the
In this paper, I will examine Niccolo Machiavelli’s claims in The Prince that dictatorial power drives most princes. Machiavelli discusses the differences between shared and dictatorial power. The dominant power is to never be conquered, even with the possibility for people to attain greater status. In The Prince, Machiavelli discusses two groups of people: the public and the upper class. This paper will uncover more of how Machiavelli creates the distinctions between powers.
¨Every prince ought to desire to be considered compassionate and not cruel.¨ Notice in this quote from Niccolo Machiavelli's ¨The Prince¨ the word ¨considered¨ is used, rather than something more firm or nothing at all. The point Machiavelli is making is that as a ruler, one must only look like a kind person rather than actually being one. Machiavelli expresses multiple times in his writing that when ruling, using fear is safe and easy to maintain while using love can be messy and full of expectations to uphold. To Machiavelli, the goal is for the ruler to show compassion while still keeping his fear factor, which will help him have an easier time maintaining power. That probably worked when a select few held all the power. In the modern world however, there are more rulers than just Machiavelli’s princes and in most cases it is better to show love rather than to incite fear because the power is now in the hands of the people.
In Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince, he discussed the need for rulers to occasionally make choices that are evil, but may assist in achieving a common good. He argues that these decisions are required from time to time, regardless of what people may think of the ruler. Although Machiavelli says that these acts of evil, while still evil, must be committed only on occasion to help the state, his diagnosis of the issues wrong with governments at the time is often looked down upon as being much harsher than it is.
Relying on the needs of the society of that time, Machiavelli comes to the conclusion that the most important task is the formation of a single Italian state (Machiavelli 15). Developing his thoughts, the author comes to the following inference: only a prince can become a leader capable of leading people and building a unified state. It is not a concrete historical personality but someone abstract, symbolic, possessing such qualities that in the aggregate are inaccessible to any living ruler. That is why Machiavelli devotes most of his research to the issue of what qualities should the prince possess to fulfill the historical task of developing a new state. The written work is constructed strictly logically and objectively. Even though the image of an ideal prince is abstract, Machiavelli argues that he should be ruthless, deceiving, and selfish.