H. Dawary
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2019
- Messages
- 565
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Machiavelli was a 15th century Florentine (Italy) statesman who was well known for writing a short handbook The Prince... In the Prince, Machiavelli gives a problem to Princes to the question of how a Prince can unconditionally keep himself upon the throne, in the light of internal and external enemies. His problem is not an ethical one whether the prince as a man should want to do so or not, but purely the political solution as to how it is to be carried out, should he so desire. Machiavelli gives the solution to this, just as chess master gives instructions on how to play chess, in which it wouldn't be necessary to ask the question as to whether or not chess is morally correct or not. To reproach Machiavelli with immorality for his work is just as much out of place to reproach a boxing instructor for not opening a book with a moral lecture against murder.
In the Prince, Machiavelli advises Princes to keep a facade of religion, but to not actually follow it, he advises Princes to break promises if it is against their best interests, he advises Princes to commit cruelties if it means up-keeping their state. His role model of a Prince being his contemporary Cesare Borgia, who cheated his allies, betrayed his friends, used the people around him as a means to an end, crushed his enemies, pretended to be religions, and built a solid foundation in the Romagna which came to a fruitless end at the death of his father Pope Alexander VI. Machiavelli praised Cesare's actions and held him as a role model of a Prince, and thus came up with the famous saying "The end justifies the means"-Niccolo Machiavelli.
Despite all this, was Machiavelli really Machiavellian?
Machiavelli although becoming famous dues to his famous work the Prince, later wrote a much more lengthier book about Republics based on the first 10 books of Titus Livy, as well as on his contemporary experiences and republics that sprung later after Rome. In that book he praised Republics much more than Principalities, and we hear from Machiavelli in his own words as to whether or not he was Machiavellian...
"The best remedy whoever becomes prince of either a city or a state has for holding that principality is to make everything in that state anew;.... to make the rich poor, the poor rich, as did David when he became king...., not to leave anything untouched in that province, so that there is no rank, no order, no state, no wealth there that he who holds it does not it as from you; and to take as one's model Philip of Macedon, father of Alexander, who from a small king became prince of Greece with these modes. He who writes of him says that he transferred men from province to province as herdsmen transfer their herds. these modes are very cruel, and enemies to every way of life, not only Christian but human; and any man whatever should flee them and wish to live in private rather than as a king with so much ruin to men. Nonetheless he who does not wish to take the first way of the good must enter into this evil one if he wishes to maintain himself." (Niccolo Machiavelli, Discourses On Livy, University of Chicago 1996, book 1 chapter 26 page 61-62)
And he showed his republican Tendencies in chapter 58 Book I "The Multitude is more wiser and constant than a prince"(Niccolo Machiavelli, Discourses On Livy, University of Chicago 1996, book 1 chapter 58 page 115)
Machiavelli trusted a freer way of life in which only Republics could promise individuals than living under Princes
Similarly, Machiavelli praised individuals such as Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus who on two separate occasions became the dictator of Rome to save it from peril and relinquished his dictatorship both times as soon as he saved it right thereafter. And Condemned individuals like Julius and Augustus Caesar for having betrayed their fatherland and bringing it under servitude.
Although Machiavelli praised a free way of life, he also understood the importance of Dictatorships, as he read about individuals such as Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus and Lucius Cornelius Sulla, who saved the Republic as it was heading towards dictatorship under the Marian party and authority was being abused and thrown around. Sulla although sought illegal means to fix the Republic, he nevertheless after becoming dictator and renewing the laws, after 1 year laid down his dictatorship and gave back the Senate its rightful authority.
I would like to ask all of you a question... Is it better to live under a Republic or under a Principality? And is it possible to find a praiseworthy man who would save his fatherland and avoid a Caesar?
@OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ @Pan-Islamic-Pakistan @Mangus Ortus Novem @Slav Defence @Sine Nomine @litman
In the Prince, Machiavelli advises Princes to keep a facade of religion, but to not actually follow it, he advises Princes to break promises if it is against their best interests, he advises Princes to commit cruelties if it means up-keeping their state. His role model of a Prince being his contemporary Cesare Borgia, who cheated his allies, betrayed his friends, used the people around him as a means to an end, crushed his enemies, pretended to be religions, and built a solid foundation in the Romagna which came to a fruitless end at the death of his father Pope Alexander VI. Machiavelli praised Cesare's actions and held him as a role model of a Prince, and thus came up with the famous saying "The end justifies the means"-Niccolo Machiavelli.
Despite all this, was Machiavelli really Machiavellian?
Machiavelli although becoming famous dues to his famous work the Prince, later wrote a much more lengthier book about Republics based on the first 10 books of Titus Livy, as well as on his contemporary experiences and republics that sprung later after Rome. In that book he praised Republics much more than Principalities, and we hear from Machiavelli in his own words as to whether or not he was Machiavellian...
"The best remedy whoever becomes prince of either a city or a state has for holding that principality is to make everything in that state anew;.... to make the rich poor, the poor rich, as did David when he became king...., not to leave anything untouched in that province, so that there is no rank, no order, no state, no wealth there that he who holds it does not it as from you; and to take as one's model Philip of Macedon, father of Alexander, who from a small king became prince of Greece with these modes. He who writes of him says that he transferred men from province to province as herdsmen transfer their herds. these modes are very cruel, and enemies to every way of life, not only Christian but human; and any man whatever should flee them and wish to live in private rather than as a king with so much ruin to men. Nonetheless he who does not wish to take the first way of the good must enter into this evil one if he wishes to maintain himself." (Niccolo Machiavelli, Discourses On Livy, University of Chicago 1996, book 1 chapter 26 page 61-62)
And he showed his republican Tendencies in chapter 58 Book I "The Multitude is more wiser and constant than a prince"(Niccolo Machiavelli, Discourses On Livy, University of Chicago 1996, book 1 chapter 58 page 115)
Machiavelli trusted a freer way of life in which only Republics could promise individuals than living under Princes
Similarly, Machiavelli praised individuals such as Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus who on two separate occasions became the dictator of Rome to save it from peril and relinquished his dictatorship both times as soon as he saved it right thereafter. And Condemned individuals like Julius and Augustus Caesar for having betrayed their fatherland and bringing it under servitude.
Although Machiavelli praised a free way of life, he also understood the importance of Dictatorships, as he read about individuals such as Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus and Lucius Cornelius Sulla, who saved the Republic as it was heading towards dictatorship under the Marian party and authority was being abused and thrown around. Sulla although sought illegal means to fix the Republic, he nevertheless after becoming dictator and renewing the laws, after 1 year laid down his dictatorship and gave back the Senate its rightful authority.
I would like to ask all of you a question... Is it better to live under a Republic or under a Principality? And is it possible to find a praiseworthy man who would save his fatherland and avoid a Caesar?
@OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ @Pan-Islamic-Pakistan @Mangus Ortus Novem @Slav Defence @Sine Nomine @litman
