Machiavelli The Prince Essay

Machiavelli states in his book, The Prince, that to be a good prince, one must appear to be good to his people, when in reality, he is not. This is to help deal with the idea that a prince may not possess every trait admirable in a king. Machiavelli uses the statement, “no ruler can possess or fully practice” all the characteristics the people would like to see in their prince, and it is for this reason “a prince must be prudent that he escapes ill repute for such vices as might take his position away from him.” These vices Machiavelli refers to are characteristics such as mercy and the inability to appear moral.
Having mercy makes a prince weak. This statement is paraphrased constantly throughout The Prince. This does not mean a prince must act without morals and not for the good

of his people. Machiavelli explains his intentions by saying, “a prince, in order to hold his position, must acquire the power to be good, and understand when to use it and when not to use it, in accord with necessity.” A prince must know when to make gestures to his people or behind the backs of his people. The reason for this is based on the idea that people are generally not driven by morality.
The selfish drive of human nature was a concept covered last semester in my economics class. The main decision making factor for people is whether or not they receive a net gain or loss from their action. In the buyer’s perspective, is a water worth $2. If the buyer is stranded in the middle of a desert, yes, a water would be worth much more than $2, and he would purchase it without a question. However, a person who is holding a water bottle in their hand may not be as compelled to purchase the water bottle. This is the concept Machiavelli based his ideas upon. People will act in whichever manner will bring them the largest benefit, no matter the effect it may have on others.
This concept is also used to defend the immorality a prince must be willing to act with. When the world is driven by a need for personal gain even at the risk of hurting others, one cannot fight fire with an open hand. A prince will not hold a secure position or be able to maintain a safe nation for his people, without being willing to stoop to the level of those who oppose him. Machiavelli uses this concept to defend the use of torture and taking the lives of individuals, as long as it is for the safety and preservation of his people. This may be confusing because such acts are viewed as taboo in American society. I am no conspiracy theorist, but we believe our government does not practice acts of torture. However, there is no proof of this. It is impossible to prove we do not use torture tactics in our government, there is only proof they haven’t been caught using them, which is basis of another tactic Machiavelli uses to defend immoral actions.
Machiavelli’s belief that a prince must appear good in the eyes of his people, while he is not good in reality, goes hand in hand with the concept that to our knowledge, the American government does not torture prisoners.

Torture has become an idea worth rallying behind. When ISIS posts videos of them torturing our people, our nation jump on top of it and say “we should go to war” “and “we’ll make them pay.” In reality, we could be practicing these tactics behind closed doors. This is just an example of how a prince could hide and even denounce immoral acts while participate in them secretly for the good of his people. This ability to manipulate how people view a prince, or government, can be very useful to a prince if he wants to go to war to protect himself or his people.
The idea of manipulating the view of the prince to his people is the foundation of Machiavelli’s book, The Prince. He considers the ability to appear good, while in reality not being good, to be necessary for a strong prince. He backs this idea through a trail of concepts including the weakness of mercy, the selfish drive of people, the necessity of immorality, and the ability to disguise and hide practices as a

whole.