Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The prince machiavelli principles
Mussolini's impact in Italy
Contribution of Niccolo Machiavelli to modern Politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The prince machiavelli principles
Renaissance Princedoms and Italian Fascism The Italian Peninsula has had many different governments throughout its history. During the Renaissance, one form of government that took place in city-states of the Italian Peninsula was a princedom. One strong supporter princedoms was Niccolo Machiavelli. He wrote a book, called “The Prince,” in which he outlined how he believed that princes should act when ruling a princedom. This form of government ended in the region when it became a united country during the 19th century. After World War One, a new form of government, called Fascism, was implemented in Italy under the control of Benito Mussolini. These governments show how the politics of the Italian Peninsula evolved over time. While many strategies …show more content…
of the Italian Fascist government under Benito Mussolini differed from Niccolo Machiavelli’s view of Italian Renaissance princedoms, much of Mussolini’s actions and his quest for power and territory remained similar with the princedoms. I chose to compare and contrast Italian Renaissance princedoms and Italian Fascism for a few reasons. First, I chose these as my topics because of my cultural connection to Italy. I have Italian ancestors on both sides of my family, including my grandparents on my father’s side. Because of this, I wanted to learn more about events that took place in Italian history, which lead me to pick these topics. Another reason why I chose to compare and contrast these governments is because I have always been interested in the Renaissance. Near the beginning of the semester, when going over the end of the Renaissance, I was interested in learning more about the political thought of the Italian Renaissance, especially the thoughts of Niccolo Machiavelli. I decided that I wanted to learn more about princedoms, so I chose to use it as one of my topics. These were the reasons I chose to compare and contrast these two topics. Italian Fascism began to take place in the ear 20th century. Many people around Europe, including Italy, at this time were upset with liberalism, democracy, and communism. Fascism operated on extreme nationalism and totalitarianism and was formed as a response to these other ideologies (Perry, pg.446-447). In October of 1922, Benito Mussolini, the main supporter of Fascism in Italy, and other Fascist supporters marched to Rome to overthrow the existing government. Mussolini succeeded and was appointed prime minister by King Victor Emmanuel III, the king of Italy (Perry, pg. 449-450). After he became prime minister, Benito Mussolini took steps to turn Italy into a totalitarian regime, with him becoming the dictator. To establish this regime, Mussolini “eliminated, non-Fascists from his cabinet, dissolved opposition parties, smashed the independent trade unions, suppressed opposition newspapers, replaced local mayors with Fascist Officials, and organized a secret police to round up troublemakers” (Perry, pg. 450). Mussolini would then go on to take many more steps to try to secure his position of power. During his time as dictator of Italy, Benito Mussolini used manipulation and militarism to keep and extend his power.
One of Mussolini’s main tools of manipulation was widespread propaganda. Mussolini used propaganda to obtain the support and loyalty of the Italian citizens and to advance his military campaigns. Some of the propaganda portrayed Mussolini as a strong leader, often having Mussolini “photographed bare chested or in a uniform and a steel helmet” (Perry, pg. 450). The propaganda also promoted loyalty and obedience, the restoration of the Roman Empire, and promoted war (Perry, pg. 450). Another way that Mussolini solidified his power was through gaining the support of the Catholic Church. He did this by making the Vatican City, the residency of the pope, an independent state, repealing laws that went against the Catholic Church, and adding mandatory religious lessons in schools (Perry, pg. 451). Mussolini also used war to try to gain power and take over new territories for Italy. He did this by invading Ethiopia, allying with Hitler, giving support to Francisco Franco, trying to invade Greece and North Africa, and joining World War Two (Ryan). These are the aspects of Italian Fascism under Benito …show more content…
Mussolini. During the Renaissance, princedoms were a common form of dictatorship for many Italian city-states.
A book written by Niccolo Machiavelli, “The Prince,” described the ways in which Machiavelli believed that princedoms should be run. Many of his methods could be characterized by the use of deceit and ruthlessness to stay in power. One main point of Machiavelli’s was his rejection of Christianity and morals in politics. He believed that “politics has nothing to do with God’s intent or with moral precepts originating in a higher world” (Perry, 187). Machiavelli’s, “The Prince,” reflected this belief and in his book; he encouraged princes to do everything in their power to keep control. According to Machiavelli, “the prince may use any means to save the state when its survival is at stake” (Perry, pg. 186). All of his views on how a prince should govern went against the past beliefs that political power came from God. Machiavelli also extended these views to include ways to keep the citizens of a princedom satisfied and how to avoid invasion from other
princedoms. In his book, Niccolo Machiavelli outlines many ways for princes to stay in power and take over new lands. When a prince first gains power, usually through war, Machiavelli states that the prince must completely destroy the old ruling power, so that they do not take revenge against him (The Prince). Another effect of destroying the old ruling power is that it would make the citizens fearful of rebelling against the new prince. Machiavelli also states that the only way to maintain power is by keeping the citizens of the princedom content with the prince’s rule. He believed that as long as the new prince kept things similar to the previous rule, such as keeping the taxes and laws, the “people will live quietly and peacefully” (The Prince). Machiavelli believed that the prince of a city-state should only be concerned with war. In “The Prince,” he states that “A prince must have no other objective, no other thought, nor take up any profession but that of war” (The Prince). He believed that the only way a prince could take and maintain power was through warfare. This focus on warfare is seen throughout Machiavelli’s “The Prince.” These are the aspects of how Niccolo Machiavelli believed that princedoms should be run. There are many similarities between Italian Fascism under Benito Mussolini and Niccolo Macchivelli’s view of Italian Renaissance princedoms. One major similarity between these two government systems is that they both relied heavily on militarism. Under princedoms, Niccolo Machiavelli believed that war was the only way to seize and maintain power. Benito Mussolini used the threat of military violence to establish his Fascist regime and used war as a way to unite his citizens and to expand his territory. Furthermore, both of these government systems relied on keeping the common people satisfied to stay in power. In princedoms, citizens were more likely to rebel against the prince if they were unhappy with the prince’s rule. For Benito Mussolini, this situation played out with the Italian people arresting and eventually executing him after they grew upset of years of depression and military losses (Ryan). Finally, both forms of governments were totalitarian. Princedoms were usually ruled by princes that acted as dictators and Mussolini became a dictator during his rule over Italy. This shows the many examples of similarities between these two government systems, even though they are hundreds of years apart. These similarities likely exist because of the surge of totalitarian governments that took place after World War One. Italy’s Fascism under Benito Mussolini represented a rejection of liberalism and the desire for the old forms of governments, which included princedoms. Although there are many similarities between these two systems of government, there are also many differences. There are a few important distinctions that can be made between Benito Mussolini’s Italian Fascism and Niccolo Machiavelli’s view of Renaissance princedoms. First, the methods for avoiding rebellions and internal unrest are drastically different between these two systems of government. Under princedoms, Machiavelli believed that instilling fear in the common people would avoid rebellions, while under Fascism, Mussolini used many forms of propaganda to keep the citizens happy. Another major difference between these governments is their view of religion in politics. Benito Mussolini used the support of the Catholic Church to keep and strengthen his power, while Machiavelli believed that princes should not care about Christianity or morality when making decisions. Finally, the reasons for each government being put into place is different. Fascism, including Italian Fascism, was largely a reaction against liberalism and communism, while princedoms were not a reaction against any ideologies, but a common government system at the time of the renaissance. These differences between Italian princedoms and Italian Fascism are largely due to what the best course of action in establishing a dictatorship was during each time period. During the time of princedoms, being ruthless and avoiding morality was likely the easiest way to become a prince. However, Benito Mussolini benefitted from the support of the Catholic Church, so he used the church to gain more power. Also, princes had a much smaller population to deal with, making it more effective to instill fear than it would have been for Mussolini. These differences between the time periods led to the different governing styles between Italian Fascism and princedoms. In conclusion, although Benito Mussolini’s quest for power and actions involved in obtaining power and creating a Fascist government were similar to Niccolo Machiavelli’s description of how a prince should act, many of Mussolini’s strategies differed from those of the princedoms. Both Mussolini’s Italian Fascism and Machiavelli’s view on princedoms were dictatorships that used military power and the satisfaction of the people to gain and maintain power. However, Mussolini relied on the Catholic Church and propaganda to keep his power, while Machiavelli believed that princes should not use morality or religion and should instill fear in the common people to keep power. These similarities and differences are mainly due the feelings of the people after World War Two and the different situations that each time period faced.
Many empirical things can often still be debated and refuted by experts, but there is a general admittance to the idea that power is the root of many evil things. In all fairness, we must admit that a many evil things can in their essence, be great. And that is one of the many theories advanced by Niccolo Machiavelli in his well-known work, The Prince. The Prince serves a dual purpose of both teaching a person how to attain power, but also how to retain it. Incredibly enough, history has proven most of Machiavelli’s findings and theories to work well, while some have failed to effectively secure power for the rulers who did, in fact try them. His work, does obviously highlight one main fact, which is, that power is a well sought-after attribute, and most who attain are willing to do whatever is necessary to keep it.
Machiavelli believes that a government should be very structured, controlled, and powerful. He makes it known that the only priorities of a prince are war, the institutions, and discipline. His writings describes how it is more important for a prince to be practical than moral. This is shown where he writes, "in order to maintain the state he is often obliged to act against his promise, against charity, against humanity, and against religion" (47). In addition, Machiavelli argues that a prince may have to be cunning and deceitful in order to maintain political power. He takes the stance that it is better for the prince to be feared than loved. His view of how a government should run and his unethical conduct are both early signs of dictatorship.
Niccolò Machiavelli was a man who lived during the fourteen and fifteen hundreds in Florence, Italy, and spent part of his life imprisoned after the Medici princes returned to power. He believed that he should express his feelings on how a prince should be through writing and became the author of “The Qualities of a Prince.” In his essay, he discusses many points on how a prince should act based on military matters, reputation, giving back to the people, punishment, and keeping promises. When writing his essay, he follows his points with examples to back up his beliefs. In summary, Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of a Prince,” provides us with what actions and behaviors that a prince should have in order to maintain power and respect.
In secular democracies, power is necessarily derived from the will of the governed. That power is then entrusted to a leader, who Machiavelli would understand to be a "prince". Inherently, his book, The Prince, has been close at hand for most politicians for centuries, as it provides general, historically proven advice for principalities and republics on how to govern and maintain relations with their most important resource and the very core of their power, which would be the people themselves.
Although Machiavelli gives numerous points on what it takes to excel as a prince, he also shows some raw examples of how he feels a prince should act in order to achieve maximum supremacy. First, when he says, "ought to hold of little account a reputation for being mean, for it is one of those vices which will enable him to govern" proves Machiavelli feels mighty adamant about his view that being mean will help a prince achieve success (332). It is absurd to imagine the meanest prince as the most successful. Also, when Machiavelli states, "our experience has been that those princes who have done great things have held good faith of little account, and have known how to circumvent the intellect of men by craft" revealing his attitude to manipulate people into fearing and respecting the prince (335). Also, Machiavelli shows that for a prince to be successful, he must not think about good faith.
"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.
Machiavelli remains one of the controversial figures of political history. One of his works, The Prince (also known as "A Handbook for Dictators"), contains many references...
A totalitarian state is defined as “a few control everything,” and “the government controls every aspect of the citizens life.” This cannot be better exemplified than by Italy under the rule of the ruthless and violent dictator, Benito Mussolini. What a totalitarian state is, the characteristics it has, and how Italy turned into one are three points that will be studied in this essay. A brief look into Mussolini’s life and his rise to power will also be examined, as well as how his reign resulted for Italy and in turn, how it affected the whole world. An assessment of Italy as a totalitarian state will bring this essay to a close.
Italy after the war was filled with an assortment of embittered veterans, republicans (anti-monarchists), anarchists, syndicalists and restless socialist revolutionaries. Many socialists and working people were impressed by the "worker 's revolution" in Russia, and they were ready to support revolution in Italy.” This explains some of the many reasons why Fascism was so attractive to Italian Citizens. Even though this way of governing went against citizens’ self-interests, they accepted it because they were angry with certain problems regarding the government in Italy. Despite the strong Italian nationalism, these citizens still desired a strong leader for stability. Because of the nationalism, citizens wanted to feel superior in their country. Of course there were still opposes to this fascist movement, but many people agreed with Benito Mussolini in an abundance of areas. They accepted Fascism for the military part of the deal; they believe that Italy can only survive by proving its military superiority. These people also had a strong desire to expand the territories, and Mussolini made it seem like he would be able to make that happen. There were many people who disagreed with Communist and socialist ways, so they seemed to like this “third-way” that Mussolini created. Due to the fact that it is a combination of ideas from other social groups, many people were able to relate and agree with
When striving for power, there are various methods that are used in order to assert dominance over ones’ peers. As presented in The Prince, written by Niccolo Machiavelli and translated by William J. Connell, various characteristics of a true leader must be adapted and practiced in order to establish a powerful and long lasting princedom. Through Ceasare Borgia, Remirro de Orco, and Pope Alexander VI, Machiavelli is able to establish cruelty as an effective yet hazardous tool to gain power and influence. The Prince establishes cruelty as acting “to kill one’s fellow citizens, to betray one’s friends, to be without faith, without compassion, without religion”(66). In Chapter 7, Machiavelli presents Alexander VI and his need to “make a great man of the duke, his son” (59).
He controlled the workers harshly in response to restoring order in the country. To remain in mastery, he suspended people’s freedom, destroyed all that dared to oppose him, and made himself dictator of Italy. (qtd. in History 2) Mussolini had to use brutal force and cruelty to stabilize his towering power over Italy. Because he was nearly overthrown by his own people, he had to take extended measures to continue his leadership. His ability to utilize his power for his own protection portrays what Machiavelli said “when they can rely on themselves and use force, then they are rarely endangered” (pg 33). Ironclad with the blood of his people, Mussolini’s brutal actions were ideally similar to the advice of Machiavelli, which presented him immediate success. However, the success he fought for crumbled into nothings in his later
...e the Fascists an opportunity to utilise the anger which had swept through Italy to their advantage to ensnare voters to enable them to gain a place in power. The fears, of the middle and upper classes in particular, meant that any problems with Fascism were overlooked as they were overshadowed by worries over loss of land and money through Socialism and Communism. The rise of the Fascists to power cannot be solely attributed to one cause as each was beneficial; Mussolini’s leadership enabled them to stay in power once they had got there, the after effects of WWI had created anger and resentment that could be argued to fuel Fascism, the system of proportional representation meant that Fascists easily gained a foothold in the government and fears over different ideologies meant that issues with Fascism went unnoticed and were therefore not seen as a potential threat.
This investigation will explore the question: To what extent did the impact of World War 1 have on the rise of fascism and Mussolini’s gain of power in Italy (1920-1945)? The period following the First World War will be focused on, as it marks the rise of authoritarian states in Europe.
In The Prince, Machiavelli separates ethics from politics. His approach to politics, as outlined in The Prince, is strictly practical. Machiavelli is less concerned with what is right and just, and instead with what will lead to the fortification of the government and the sustainment of power. Machiavelli believed that a ruler should use any means necessary to obtain and sustain power. He says, “…people judge by outcome. So if a ruler wins wars and holds onto power, the means he has employed will always be judged honorable, and everyone will praise them” (Machiavelli, 55). According to Machiavelli, the ends of an action justify the means (Machiavelli, 55). His motivation for these views in The Prince was the reunification of the Italian city-states (Machiavelli, 78-79). Machiavelli wanted Italy to return to its glory of the Roman Empire (Machiavelli 78-79). Some of the beliefs of Machiavelli could be perceived as evil and cruel, but he found them necessary. Machiavelli was not concerned with making people happy. His purpose was outcome and success, and in his opinion, the only way to be successful was to be realistic. These views of Machiavelli could classify him as one of the earliest modern
Written almost 500 years ago, Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince” brings forward a new definition of virtue. Machiavelli’s definition argued against the concept brought forward by the Catholic Church. Machiavelli did not impose any thoughts of his own, rather he wrote from his experience and whatever philosophy that lead to actions which essentially produced effective outcomes in the political scene of Italy and in other countries. While Machiavelli is still criticized for his notions, the truth is that, consciously or subconsciously we are all thinking for our own benefit and going at length to achieve it. On matters of power where there is much to gain and a lot more to lose, the concept of Machiavelli’s virtue of “doing what needs to be done” applies rigorously to our modern politics and thus “The Prince” still serves as a suitable political treatise in the 21st century.