More handpicked essays just for you.
The Prince and the palper by machiavelli
Political idea of the prince by machiavelli
A note on the prince by machiavelly
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The battle zone has become further entrenched between the protesters and the government in the Capitol of Venezuela, Caracas. With 13 dead and 150 injured tension between Nicolás Maduro and his people is at an all time high (Glusing). In the post Hugo Chavez world not only has Maduro failed to inspire the confidence of his people, but his inability to deal with rising economic woes has only worsened his relationship with his people. Machiavelli in his works The Prince and The Discourses, deals with how a leader should deal, interact, and satisfy his subjects. Thus, Machiavellian lens could be critical to best explain the current state of tension within Venezuela. To do this it is first necessary to explain Machiavelli’s method, second understand his conceptual framework, and third evaluate the situation through his work, before finally addressing limitations.
First, Machiavelli’s method attempts to discard discussion of the “imaginary” political world and instead focuses on “real life” (Machiavelli 48). His end goal is to construct rubric for leaders to follow either to rule and unite (in this case Italy) in the Prince or create a powerful republic in the Discourses. His method is derived from comparing contemporary and historical events to illustrate and substantiate his argument. He is critical of how people interpret history (Machiavelli 83). He still believes that his ability to interpret and compare history is superior. Arguing that his methodological approach doesn’t just “chew” on history but actually “tastes” it (Machiavelli 83). Therefore we can understand that he justifies his method approach as not being akin to most because he possesses a much deeper understanding of history. Throughout his two books using ...
... middle of paper ...
...prevented conflict was important to evaluate. As well as examining solutions to the current situation he finds himself in. Using the lens of Machiavelli this loss of control could be better understood, allowing for a critical observation of why the events were unfolding.
Works Cited
Glusing, Jens. "Venezuela President Maduro Faces Economic Distress and Protests." SPIEGEL ONLINE. Der Spiegel, 26 Feb. 2014. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.
Gunson, Phil. "Hugo Chávez Obituary." The Guardian [London] 5 Mar. 2013: n. pag. Print.
Machiavelli, Niccolò, and David Wootton. Selected Political Writings. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub., 1994. Print.
Neuman, William. "Venezuela Gives Chávez Protégé Narrow Victory." The New York Times. The New York Times, 14 Apr. 2013. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.
"Towards the Brink." The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 01 Mar. 2014. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.
The people in Venezuela are starving and dying because they don't have food. Venezuela is struggling with shortages of food,and medicine. Venezuela’s economy mostly depends on their oil.Oil prices have dropped and that has affected Venezuela. The food crisis is bad because in grocery stores there is no food so there is specific days people have to line up. In the text from the website it states “Venezuelans are bearing the brunt of the economy's problems. The government can't pay to import basic food items like milk, flour and eggs, leaving many supermarkets with empty shelves.” This quote shows that Venezuela is struggling with food and with money and the government doesn't do much to help their
Machiavelli’s views were drastically different from other humanists at his time. He strongly promoted a secular society and felt morality was not necessary but stood in the way of a successfully governed state. He stated that people generally tended to work for their own best interests and gave little thought to the well being of the state. He distrusted citizens saying, “In time of adversity, when a state is in need of its citizens, there are few to be found.” In his writings in The Prince, he constantly questioned the citizens’ loyalty and warned for the leaders to be wary in trusting citizens. His radical and distrusting thoughts on human nature were derived out of concern for Italy’s then unstable government. Machiavelli also had a s...
In his work The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli explores the complex relationship between a ruler and his people, but ultimately comes to the conclusion that the people, because they are crucial to the well being of the country, are to be manipulated in order for a country to thrive. In order to manipulate effectively one must keep the people oppressed, but not to the point of inspiring hate, and only when that balance is achieved is when a ruler can successfully manipulate their people.
In recent history, the last fifty years or so, modern businessmen and politicians have given Machiavelli a Renaissance of his own. Professional politicians have written novels they claim to be on the same philosophical level of Machiavelli’s The Prince. Gary Hart, in his book The Patriot: An Exhortation to Liberate America From the Barbarians attempts to update Niccolo to the modern age with his own political philosophies, and attempts to credit Machiavelli by quoting him frequently. “Hart makes an effort to mimic the form, if not the spirit, of the most famous work by his Florentine ‘mentor.’…There is a dedicatory le...
“Spanish dictator.” Sunday Mail; Kuala Lumpur. 28 Jul. 2002: 22. eLibrary. Web. 23 Mar. 2014.
To keep the country in tact and in order there has to be some sort of ruthlessness.in text 3 it says "We are still drawn to Machiavelli because we sense how impatient he was with the equivalent flummery in his own day, and how determined he was to confront a problem that preoccupies us too: when and how much ruthlessness is necessary in the world of politics"(text 3 lines 42-45).Even today people acknowledge Machiavelli's ideas because even in politics there has to be some of Machiavelli's ideas put forth to keep order. If a certain group such as governent falls, the whole nation will fall and there will be complete and total caos. This would be a reason why and how Machiavelli's ideas would be put forth in todays society. On the other hand, some people may say that Machiavelli's ideas were for people in the past time and cannot be used in todays society.
Machiavelli argued, as Hegel would later, that one must look to history and the accounts of previous nations' events in order to "sense...that flavor that they have in themselves" in common with those from the past (Discourses 6). This seems to follow the adage that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it, yet for Machiavelli he seems more concerned with actually emulating history in order to repeat success than looking out for particular things to avoid. For this reason, he pulls examples from an eclectic range of histories in order to demonstrate how his principles in both The Prince and the Discourses on Livy, when followed, will lead to a successful state. In particular, he refers to the Roman Republic a great deal in the Discourses, which are focused around Livy's account of Rome's history, to demonstrate what about this ancient society was so unique and worthy of repeating in terms of its existence as a republic. In fact, the Roman Republic serves as Machiavelli's central example in the work. In The Prince, however, since Machiavelli was more concerned with the behavior of an individual who wields absolute power over a principality, he looks more to the Roman Empire, since there are few examples one can find from the history of the Republic where one man was thrust into a situation where he could act prince-like and, as a result, the arguments made would have been harder to support had he used the Republic as his central example. The Roman Republic figures as such an important nation because Machiavelli sees in it the characteristics that are necessary for a successful republic and also because of its origin from a monarchy he sees a way for representative governments to start replacing, w...
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.
There is no easy solution to our moral quandrums (another much discussed idea in the Discourses. Machiavelli’s daring, his awareness of unadorned reality, his honesty and anti-hypocrisy, his republican commitment can help us, if we are able to grasp the essence of his politics and his ethics, also in this very complex and problematic stage of human development.
Machiavelli discusses assertive and bold ideas in “The Prince,” revealing his radical and courageous nature. His treatise is deceptively self-soliciting, because he disguises his extreme notions behind a veil of feigned expertise. His frank approach makes him appear confident and deserving of the utmost respect; however, he cautiously humbles himself by pouring immense flattery for the ruling prince into his work and, in doing so, assures protection for himself and his notorious ideas.
Voigt, Kevin, Simon Hooper, Maggie Lake, Paula Newton, and Jim Clancy. "Chavez leaves Venezuelan economy more equal, less stable." CNN. Cable News Network, 6 Mar. 2013. Web. 26 May 2014. .
Jan. 2014. Web. Apr. 2, 2014. http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/ Venezuelas-playbook-communist-manifesto. 5.
Machiavelli, lived in a time of corruption and political instability, in Florentine state. His work, is a reflection of his social and political context and his primary aim, to gain in favour with the medici’s, a highly influential family in rule. Due to the political turmoil, Machiavelli, in his work, writes on how to gain and remain in power. The sixteenth chapter of his work, clearly accentuates that, “a ruler in power and a man seeking power are two different things.” This suggests that during the time he lived in, it was quintessential to gain power and maintain it because of the political turmoil,
Machiavelli uses classical sources to advise a prince on the best way to maintain power. He alludes to Plato’ Republic to illustrate how many men have attempted to advice princes “ A great many men have imagined states and princedoms such as nobody ever saw or knew in the real word, and there’s such a difference between the way we really live and the way we ought to live that the man who neglects the real to study the ideal will learn how to accomplish his ruin, not his salvation.” Machiavelli also makes various references to classical figures to demonstrate examples of princely leadership. Machiavelli’s classical allusions are indicative of the Renaissance as the renewed study of the ancient classics was an important element of the Renaissance. Machiavelli adopted classical ideas in the hopes that these examples could inspire improvements within Italy. Rafael Major supports this idea in “ A New Argument for Morality: Machiavelli and the Ancients.” He argues, “ Even a cursory survey of classical literature reveals that very little of The Prince can properly be called original.” More also reflects the Renaissance through his classical allusions. He uses his classical sources to criticize certain practices within Europe, while also offering solutions to these problems through the example of the classics. For example, he also alludes to
Having written The Prince in 1532, it is easy to identify Machiavelli’s views on human nature as bleak and largely immoral. From this identification, one is able to relate his political advice to the modern day; however, doing so will only result in the realization that they are largely incompatible. In this essay, three of Machiavelli’s main points will be challenged according to modern day standards of politics, morality, and ethics. His sentiments regarding neutrality, public opinion, and presence, all of which are cornerstones of his philosophy, will be analyzed, ultimately revealing, with little exception, the way they do not apply to the modern standards of leadership. Machiavelli lived during a period of great moral deficiency.