Machiavelli's The Prince: The Ends Justify The Means

Team C believes that Machiavelli’s principal idea is demonstrated in politics, “the ends justify the means”. If a leader is vicious and effective it is better than being virtuous and ineffective. Machiavelli, however did not endorse vicious behavior in general, just whatever would not “allow disorders to arise”. To remain in power, a leader must avoid the hatred of his people. It is not necessary for a leader to be loved; in fact, it is often better for him to be feared. The author states, “It is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be lacking” (p. 103). Machiavelli warns leaders against doing things that might result in hatred, such as the confiscation of property. Being hated, however, can result the downfall of a prince.
Machiavelli, asserts that a number of traits are inherent in human nature. People are generally self-interested, ungrateful, fickle, liars who shun danger; although their affection for others can be won and

lost. Individuals are typically content and happy as long as they are not victims of terrible circumstances. Men and women are trustworthy in prosperous times, however, they could quickly turn deceitful and profit-driven in times of adversity. Hence they would risk their lives for a leader when the perceived danger was remote, but when such dangers become much more real they would quickly defect. Machiavelli, understands that a prince should always try to appear virtuous, but that acting virtuously can prove detrimental to the principality. A prince should not necessarily avoid vices such as cruelty or dishonesty if employing them will benefit the state. Every action the prince takes must be considered in light of its effect on the state, not in terms of its intrinsic moral value.
Discussing the role of fortune in determining human affairs, Machiavelli attempts to compromise between free will and determinism by arguing that fortune controls half of human actions and leaves the other half to free will. However, Machiavelli also argues that through foresight people can shield themselves against fortune’s vicissitudes. Thus, Machiavelli is confident in the power of human beings to shape their destinies to a degree, but equally confident that human control over events is never absolute.
Machiavelli states, “A prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise” (p. 104). It is seen throughout history that people of power constantly renege on their promises. This philosophy can be connected to our most prominent political figure of this modern day: President Obama and also to the government of the former Soviet Union. It is of an opinion that, the former Soviet Union gained, maintained, and expanded control over people by utilizing the techniques suggested by the author.
We also agree with Niccolo Machiavelli, in his observations and insights on how men are “Praised or Blamed”. This is especially true when the person holds a position of leadership, such as a holding the title of a Prince. The point that Machiavelli draws on is that if a person who lives their life neglecting the key elements that would keep his core values in check; will eventually meet the evil of his own demise that will destroy him.
Knowing his own vulnerabilities, and how to restrain himself from falling victim to the available vices will save him from his own ruins. The point of “Cruelty and Clemency, and Whether It Is Better to Be Loved Than Feared” is also addressed by Machiavelli and states, “That every prince ought to desire to be considered merciful and not cruel. Nevertheless he ought to take care not to misuse this mercy” (pg. 103). Machiavelli points out that the prince’s decisions and actions should not be quick, nor should he allow himself to express fear.
Controlling his emotions to an even temperament with, “prudence and humanity” (p. 103) this would keep the appearance of him being overconfident avoiding the people’s distrust in him. True friendships come without a purchase price, the gift of friendship is earned, whereas being feared, there is no respect or friendship. However, being loved Machiavelli prescribes that this is, “Preserved by a link of obligation” (p. 103). Knowing limits and boundaries is also a must; going after another person’s property or processions will not win you favor among your peers. This act of restraint ties into his philosophy of, “Being feared or loved” where his concluding thought is, “He must endeavor only to avoid hatred” (p. 104).
When analyzing the case study, The Prince, it is possible for one to understand how in the sixteenth century “Human nature doesn’t change”.

This is apparent throughout the study because in order to be a good prince, a man must obtain certain types of qualities and characteristics. Consequently, if exhibited properly they will bring him security and prosperity among the state. Throughout a comprehensive analysis of the case, it is obvious that the skills learned in order to become a good prince are adapted from the norms of elders and other successful princes. An example is when discussing in the case on how to ,“strive for mastery” (p. 104). In the study Machiavelli speaks on how Achilles, known for being one of the mightiest Greeks who fought in the Trojan War, was raised on norms and discipline. Due to Achilles bold characteristics and fame, other princes wanted to obtain the same qualities of success and survival. In turn, this was paramount to the princes and human nature did not see much change back

then.
In today’s day and age, the serious study of the past provides examples of how recent decisions either emulate the acts of past heroes or proves how human nature does indeed change. One example of how human nature does change is through the decision making of new Presidents of the United States. Many newly elected Presidents are capable of building off of the previous President’s plans, but tend to build off their own beliefs and pursue different goals to obtain sustainability. Another topic discussed in class that provides a better understanding when discussing this controversial discussion is the Denali Commission. As learned through the class, the Denali Commission has suffered a tremendous loss in funding, lacks a proper staff, and their own inspector general wants the commission to end. Although in rough shape, the commission finds a way to survive as the government begins to support the Denali commission. When looking at this example, it is possible for one to see how even the government is prone to making the same kinds of mistakes our predecessors made with funding a company that is depleted instead of creating a new one.