Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Machiavelli the prince and political framework
Machiavelli the prince and political framework
Machiavelli the prince and political framework
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Machiavelli the prince and political framework
In Praise of War is a poem written by Bertran De Born and is to no surprise from its title, about his love for war due to the pleasure it brings him during battle. Born was the Lord of Altaforte at the time and was involved in several wars, most notably against Henry II, the King of England. The Prince is a political treatise written by the notorious Niccolò Machiavelli of Florentine and it includes an analysis on how to acquire and maintain political power. In both works of literature, betrayal and loyalty is a shared common theme in warfare. Machiavelli discusses these two themes while Born contradicts as well as supports them and actually demonstrated them in reality. One specific aspect that both Born and Machiavelli could both agree on, …show more content…
When a question arises for a leader such as if they have enough resources to look after themselves or if they will rely on alliances, Machiavelli answered with the following: “ In order to clarify this question, I would maintain those rulers can look after themselves who have sufficient reserves, whether of troops or of money, to be able to put together a sound army and face battle against any opponent” (Machiavelli, 34). What he meant by this is that a ruler should always aim to keep an army size and strength equally or preferably stronger than any foreign military out there that might potentially attack. With the rulers cities being fortified properly, and with a strong military, this would make any aggressor second guess their attack. If they were to execute their plan to attack your fortified city foolishly, your military might will always be there to match theirs for a victory. However, having a strong military is not the only thing a ruler should worry about. Machiavelli believes that a ruler's military can only be a strong as their leader, therefore, the ruler should only pay attention to warfare. “A ruler, then, should have no other concern, no other thought, should pay attention to nothing aside from war, military institutions, and the training of his soldiers” (Machiavelli,
Niccolo Machiavelli believes in a strong government. The leader should be strong and feared. I believe he gets this idea from the fear of God; no one is supposed to question God because he is so feared, and in the same sense, no one should question a strong leader. Machiavelli realizes that the leader should be feared, but not hated. A hated leader will probably be killed in a rebellion. One also can not be loved. Any compassion towards your citizens will make them believe you are weak, and they will rebel. He thinks a very strong military is necessary at all times, and that powerful arms should be available and in hand. This idea is similar to that of right wing America and our friends, the National Rifle Association, who believe assault rifles are America’s pastime. The nation should always be prepared for war, and should always be searching for new lands to conquer. T...
Machiavelli strongly believes that a prince should be involved in the military and understand all military matters. A prince must always be concentrated on war. Whether his country is at war or not, he must always be prepared. He must continuously be training, mentally and physically, and know the terrain around him. Machiavelli believes that a prince who does not attain these military related qualities will fail as a leader. In addition, during times of war, a successful prince should always question all outcomes of possible battles and prepare himself for the future by studying past wars. Studying the
Tragic events occur not only in the United States, but also all over the world. From these tragic events communities, families, and the government decide to place memorials for people that were lost and as a thank you for people protecting the citizens of the country. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial, The Wall, in Washington D.C. is one of these cases. However, what exactly was the purpose of this memorial? The purpose of putting up the Vietnam Veterans Memorial was not only to thank the veterans for their bravery, but to remind future generations about happened during the Vietnam War. Also, the memorial is important to help people and the veterans to accept the fact that the war actually
Review of "War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning" War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, written by the talented author Chris Hedges, gives us provoking thoughts that are somewhat painful to read, but at the same time are quite personal confessions. Chris Hedges, a talented journalist to say the least, brings nearly 15 years of being a foreign correspondent to this book and concludes how all of his world experiences tie together. Throughout his book, he unifies themes present in all the wars he experienced first hand. The most important themes I was able to draw from this book were, war skews reality, dominates culture, seduces society with its heroic attributes, distorts memory, and supports a cause, and allures us by a constant battle between death and love.
War changes people. Usually when one thinks of war, blood, battle and death are the first things that come to mind, but psychological trauma is over shadowed by these popular thoughts. Though war, on the surface, is focused on such gory aspects, The Wars by Timothy Findley shows us an angle where the chaos of war significantly affects a soldier’s mind mentally. War definitively effects the life of all soldiers, so much so that they may show signs of insanity after, or even during battle. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is a psychological disorder triggered when a victim experiences a significantly traumatic event in their life, and has difficulty returning to life as it was (“Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder”). Insanity as defined by Psychology
The just war theory is described by Thomas Massaro in his book Living Justice as the “principle that warfare might be justified under certain conditions” (108). The complexities involved with international relations makes determining a just war very difficult. Even though historically pacifism hasn’t gained much traction within Catholic circles, it currently is gaining popularity with many mainstream Catholics. With so many differing views on military action, one might ask, “What determines a just war? How can we balance the need for peace with self-defense?” An examination of criteria for a just war and critiques written on this topic might shed light on these two questions.
"The Prince," written by Niccolo Machiavelli in 1513, is a political treatise addressed to the Medici family of Florentine. "The Prince" was written to analyze and explain the acquisition, perpetuation, and use of political power in the west. Machiavelli’s theories in the work describe methods that an aspiring prince could possibly use to acquire power, or an existing prince could use to keep power. Though this work was written in 1513 and published in 1532, its context can be applied to foreign policy in today’s world. The principles suggested by Machiavelli provide insight into the issues that arose with the war on Iraq and issues involved with occupation and transition to a new government.
The most astounding aspect of The Prince is Machiavelli’s view that princes may indeed, be cruel and dishonest if their ultimate aim is for the good of the state. It is not only acceptable but necessary to lie, to use torture, and to walk over other states and cities. Machiavellianism is defined as “A political doctrine of Machiavelli, which denies the relevance of morality in political affairs and holds that craft and deceit are justified in pursuing and maintaining political power (Def.)” This implies that in the conquest for power, the ends justify the means. This is the basis of Machiavellianism. The priority for the power holder is to keep the security of the state regardless of the morality of the means. He accepts that these things are in and of themselves morally wrong, but he points out that the consequences of failure, the ruin of states and the destruction of cities, can be far worse. Machiavelli strongly emphasizes that princes should not hesitate to use immoral methods to achieve power, if power is necessary for security and survival.
Morality is hard to define, and nearly impossible to agree upon; however, when it comes to war, there is a single “widely accepted moral theory” that reaches beyond borders . Just war theory, a doctrine originally attributed to the Christian theologian Saint Augustine , postulates that certain circumstances can lead to the justification of war, particularly if war is used to prevent even greater atrocities from occurring in the future. In its fundamental charter, the United Nations even articulates that every state has the right to go to war in its charter. In its broadest definition, just war theory declares that war may be justifiable if the states involved have both jus ad bellum, or just cause, and jus in bello, or just conduct in war;
It is this idea of virtu that serves as a central figure in not just The Prince but also other works of Machiavelli, most famously ‘The Art of War’ where the general is expected to change his tactics and strategies based on the varied battlefield that he may encounter Drawing a parallel, it can be claimed that in Machiavelli’s views politics dynamics are similar to a battlefield scenarios. Hence, the Prince just as the general needs to have virtù i.e. to be aware of what strategies are apt in a particular circumstance (Nederman
In Khaled Hosseini’s novel titled “A Thousand Splendid Suns”, the concept of man’s inhumanity to man describes the ways that war has a ripple effect, such that any inhumanity carried out has consequences for many more people than are involved in that act. One can clearly see that war leads to destruction during different regimes in Afghanistan. The destructive effects of war can be seen in the death of so many people. It leads to the suffering of the younger generation and it demolishes the infrastructure of the country.
The Thirty Years War was a series of conflicts, not-knowingly involving most European countries from 1618 to 1648. The war, which was fought mainly in Germany, was started when Bohemian Protestants furiously attacked the Holy Roman Emperor in terms to impose a restriction on their religious and civil liberties. By understanding the Thirty Years War, you will notice the notable religious, political and social changes. The changes paved the religious and political maps of Europe. Not only did this war affect the religious and political demographic, it caused populations to perish and lose large amounts of their goods. What was known as a religious battle, turned out to be a political feud in competition of which state has the greater power affecting men, women, soldiers and civilians. “[The bohemians] had no idea that their violent deed would set off a chain reaction of armed conflict that would last thirty years and later be called Europe’s “first world war” of the modern era.” When the war ended, the lands were defiled and over 5 million people were killed.
Machiavelli argues in chapter 5 that the key to taking over a free state is initially to destroy it. By destroying the city, Machiavelli believes that the citizens will have no choice but to follow the direction of the new prince. He goes deeper to say that if a prince who occupies these cities does not destroy it, he risk the probable outcome of a rebellion. This rebellion is brought fourth by the tradition held by the citizens and the memories of the former way of government. The second step is to live there in person to establish loyalty and the third step is letting the people live by its own laws, but establish a small government who is loyal to you to keep it friendly. Chapter 6 gives us some insight on what Machiavelli feels leadership is. Leaders, he explains, are followers too in many ways. All leaders are imitating great rulers in history. A leader who really wants to achieve glory, does so by his own prowess, meaning by his own talent. Anyone can inherit a kingdom, but not anyone can rule it with natural leadership. This kind of leadership is what makes great leaders in history such as Moses or Cyrus. Chapter 7 explains that a leader should not try to buy his subjects. If a prince buys his subjects they will only temporarily be loyal. A prince needs to eliminate his enemies and do so all at once. Even if a prince does not succeed in ruling by his own prowess in his lifetime, he is still setting a good foundation for future princes which is just as important. Chapter 8 explains the level of evil that should be done in order to rise to power. He gives us clear insight of the pros and cons of obtaining power by evil means and how to use evil in ways of benefit. Machiavelli was a man of manipulation.
War is a universal phenomenon, it is a violent tool people use to accomplish their interests. It is not autonomous, rather policy always determines its character. Normally it starts when diplomacy fails to reach a peaceful end. War is not an end rather than a mean to reach the end, however, it does not end, and it only rests in preparation for better conditions. It is a simple and dynamic act with difficult and unstable factors which make it unpredictable and complex. It is a resistant environment where the simplest act is difficult to perform. In this paper, I will argue why war is a universal phenomenon and what are the implications of my argument to strategists.
War has been around for centuries. From the time modern civilizations began, war has played an integral part in human history. It shaped the world into the modern world we live in. War has been said to be a great motivator, for example, the Great Wall of China was built to fend off the attackers from the north. However, the negative aspects of war far outweighs any positive effects it might have. The destruction of civilizations, cities and countries, mass killings of men, woman and children alike, the disastrous effect it has on economy and the after effects of war can last for centuries.