Niccolo Machiavelli and the Modern World - Research Paper Example

? Niccolo Machiavelli Introduction Niccolo Machiavelli was born on May 3, 1469, in Florence, Italy. In his adult life, he put his education to use as a political philosopher and diplomat. Already a prolific writer, he turned to writing as a means of expressing his point of view when he was forced from politics and sent into exile by an invading French army. Machiavelli has been called "the spiritual father of modem democratic revolution" (Arendt 21). In the eighteenth century, his writings were used to inspire a belief in the inevitability of radical change among revolutionaries (Baker 204-207). Following this revolutionary trend, Leon Trotsky said that Machiavelli was the political philosopher who generalized "the experience of democratic revolutions" (Trotsky 850). This image persists today: Roger Boesche argues that Machiavelli was "the greatest theorist of how popular government can defeat tyranny" (Boesche 165). In 1513, he wrote his best-known work, The Prince, which has become one of the most influential books ever written in modern political philosophy. Benedetto Fontana asserts that Machiavelli's new prince "was to have forged a political and cultural alliance with the people, and thus initiate a ‘rinnovazione’ [renewal] aiming at a new Italian state" (Fontana 148). It had a dramatic impact on modern political thought. The Prince In The Prince, Machiavelli offered practical leadership advice designed to keep a ruler in power, illustrating his ideas with practical, historical examples. He actively endorsed stratagems that would discourage mass discontent through the diversion of an opponent's energies; through such tactics, a leader could channel enemies' efforts elsewhere. In this way, a leader could create conditions in which it would be disadvantageous for his opponents to try to replace him. Machiavelli believed that a leader would occasionally be called upon to make use of force; however, he professed that force should only be exercised in response to dire circumstances. According to Machiavelli, a good leader would be able to walk away from evil means when they were no longer required. A leader would likewise benefit from respecting the need for his subjects' well being. In his discussion on the value of liberality, Machiavelli cautioned that a Prince should be liberal by maintaining the general welfare (86) Machiavelli realized that good fortune had a key relationship to restrained use of resources for the best overall effect. Leaders should be frugal, both in allocating resources to the military infrastructure that protects the state from external threat and in allocating funds to the political and economic infrastructure that promotes the welfare of the state. Once people understand that frugality is in their best interests, it will be linked to good fortune over the long term. The ability of a prince to act in his own best interests and the best interests of the people (even when, initially, they might not see his acts as desirable) requires that he not be governed exclusively by a rigid code of ethical standards. The ends, in some instances, could justify the means. Despite his overriding concern for the best interests of the ruler and the preservation of the state, Machiavelli professed that general ethical standards are desirable to maintain, when possible. Chapter 21 of The Prince deals entirely with the value of a ruler's positive reputation. According to Machiavelli, a prince needs to appear as a true friend and should show himself as a "lover of merit" by giving "preferment to the able" and honoring "those who excel in every art" (112-113). Although Machiavelli did not claim that such standards are required for success, he did laud ethical leadership as a general guideline. Machiavelli's innovation was that ethics were expendable. He outlined a series of circumstances and situations in which a leader might be forced to use violence to a degree that would be morally reprehensible in any normal situation. For instance, when ravaging newly conquered territories and dispersing the native population in order to maintain control, violence would be necessary for success. On Liberality vs. Frugality When addressing the question of liberality versus frugality, Machiavelli stated that it is better to be frugal, as frugality can prevent or at least provide for times of need. While this principle might seem self-evident, princes have often sought to make a grand impression at the expense of the people, commissioning grand works that have overburdened the resources and welfare of their states. The key for any leader is to become generous by virtue of being frugal, as a prince who makes expensive gifts will in time drain his own resources and then become rapacious in his demands on his people, who will come to hate him. Better by far is the leader who is frugal, as such a leader can offer far more to his people by imposing few demands on their wealth. To Machiavelli, extravagance was wasteful and reckless; reasonable-expenditures and frugal economic policies were key to maintaining both the health of the state and the position and reputation of the prince. Machiavelli understood that creating a welfare state undermines any leader because the burden of endless taxation creates instability. People dependent on welfare can easily descend into sloth while always asking for more, particularly under a leader who makes an imprudent show of generosity. Rome was destroyed just as much by the economic burden of paying for a welfare state of bread and circuses as it was by the barbarians at the gates. Maintained by a fiscal system that was "not only inefficient but also radically unjust" (Tierney 32), the Roman Empire was crippled by its inattention to the peasants who were its potentially most productive class. Rather than investing in the genuine well being of the peasantry, the Roman leadership instigated economic decline by pouring its wealth into "spectacles staged by the public authorities to entertain the urban mobs" (Tierney 32) that had become dependent on the welfare system. On Being Feared or Being Loved Much has been made of Machiavelli's discussion of the relative merits of cruelty and mercy, or whether it is better to be feared than loved. As a child, I learned my family's motto, "Fear God in life." I took exception to the word "fear," until my father explained that, in the antiquated sense, "fear" was synonymous with "revere." Machiavelli clearly understood that there was greater value in being loved by one's people; ideally, one should be revered by friends as a capable protector and feared by enemies. Machiavelli believed that although a prince might not always in fact be good, it was desirable for a prince to try to appear good, as long as apparent goodness did not convey weakness. To some extent, Machiavelli considered both fear and love to be useful. Machiavelli wrote that a leader should avoid being hated, as affection is the greatest possible balm against internal threat and conspiracy. The best strategy to inspire affection is to improve the condition of the state, as a state with a good standard of living can provide greater security and benefits to the people than an unproven conspiracy can. In a well-run state, conspirators must always fear exposure by others who find their security with the prince who is in power (Machiavelli 95-96). By considering this aspect of leadership in relation to the people, Machiavelli illustrated the positive value (if not the ethical merit) of a good relationship between the governor and the governed. On Being Able to Make Hard Choices and Use Evil Means A leader must be called upon to make hard choices, particularly as regards the use of evil tactics. While extolling the virtues of a good relationship with the governed and professing the value of maintaining stability, Machiavelli stated that "a prince who wishes to maintain the state is often forced to do evil" (99). Winston Churchill chose to sacrifice the city of Coventry to German bombs rather than reveal that the Allies had broken the Enigma code. In so doing, Churchill paid an unenviable price; however, he made an evil sacrifice in order to achieve eventual success. Machiavelli urged that a prince should "not deviate from what is good, if possible, but be able to do evil if constrained" (93). A prince should be prepared and willing to use evil when necessary, but should be capable of walking away from the use of evil when the situation no longer requires it. On Justice and the Rule of Law Finally, Machiavelli noted "how laudable it is for a prince to keep faith and live with integrity" over guile, believing in justice and the rule of law, even if these principles might not always be possible to follow: You must know there are two ways of fighting, the one by the law, the other by force: the first method is that of men, the second of beasts; but as the first is often insufficient, one must have recourse to the second. It is therefore necessary for a prince to know well how to use both the beast and the man. (Machiavelli 92) Machiavelli considered both paths to have value, but perceived justice and the rule of law as preferable. Being unable to use either path would lead to destruction. Conclusion In conclusion, the states of Renaissance Italy were situated in a web of intricate political manipulation, involving various city-states such as Florence, Venice, Naples, and Rome; factions such as the Church; and rival European nations who were also rising from the Dark Ages and beginning to vie for control, power, prosperity, and the vast wealth of the Mediterranean with its access to the re-opening Middle Eastern and Asian markets. Lacking the size of the larger states in Europe, the tiny Italian states had to rely on political cunning to survive and prosper. Machiavelli believed a republic to be the best possible form of government; in another of his books, entitled The Art of War, Machiavelli suggested that a body of men might be less vulnerable to corruption than a single leader. His pragmatic reflections on corruption and expedience extol the virtues of a republic, which he maintained could bring about the best in people while minimizing corruption, as "There will always be a greater number of excellent men in republics than in monarchies because virtu is generally honored in the former, but feared in the latter" (Machiavelli, Art of War 77). In The Prince, Machiavelli offered a comprehensive and thoughtful treatise on all that should be known to succeed and prosper as a leader. In this text, he clarified the manner that should be cultivated in a prince, as well as those qualities that would render a leader "despicable by being thought changeable, frivolous, effeminate, timid, and irresolute" (95). Work Cited Arendt, Hannah. On Revolution. London: Penguin, 1990. Boesche, Roger .Theories of Tyranny from Plato to Arendt, University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1996. Fontana, Benedetto. Hegemony and Power: On the Relation between Gramsci and Machiavelli Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993. Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Art of War. 1521. New York: DaCapo, 1965. Machiavelli, Niccolo., The Prince. 1513. New York: Penguin, 1980. Tierney, Brian. Western Europe In The Middle Ages 300-1475. New York: Knopf, 1970. Trotsky, Leon. History of the Russian Revolution, Vol. 3, Chapter 1, trans. by Max Eastman New York: Pathfinder, 1999. Read More