Niccolo Machiavelli
Niccolo Machiavelli was an Italian Renaissance political philosopher and diplomat. He is best known for his work "The Prince," in which he discussed the nature of power and the strategies rulers should employ to maintain control. Machiavelli's ideas, often associated with cunning and ruthlessness, have had a lasting impact on political thought and continue to be studied and debated.
8 Key excerpts on "Niccolo Machiavelli"
eBook - ePubPhilosophy and Leadership
Three Classical Models and Cases
- Brent Cusher, Mark Menaldo(Authors)
- 2021(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...At the core of Machiavelli’s new perspective is his demand to examine “what is done” (realism) in public life rather than “what ought to be done” (idealism). Machiavelli offers his readers a frank and unapologetic political realism. 9 See Harvey C. Mansfield, Machiavelli’s Virtue (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996); J.G.A. Pocock, The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016); Leo Strauss, Thoughts on Machiavelli (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014); and Maurizio Viroli, Redeeming the Prince: The Meaning of Machiavelli’s Masterpiece (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013). Princely politics is a game of chess, and every move is for the sake of winning. In politics, everything depends upon circumstances. Like a chess strategy, a prince must adapt his political strategy to the changing facts on the ground. Machiavelli relaxes general ethical rules and undermines the view that a leader must possess distinct and unbending character virtues. Freed from constraints of principled leadership, a prince practices tough-minded politics for the sake of dominion (holding on to his state). Deception, which entails a clear-eyed understanding of why and when a leader deceives, is necessary for the prince to maintain his state. The prince seeks solid foundations between himself and followers, not authentic or ethical ones. 10 The view that emerges in the book is that public life subsumes a prince’s life: the acquisition and maintenance of the state. For Machiavelli, it is all about the means, and it is what The Prince is ostensibly famous for, “ends justify the means” – although Machiavelli did not actually write this phrase. What he actually says is, in the actions of all men, and especially of princes, where there is no court to appeal to, one looks to the end...
- John T. Scott(Author)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...Finally, they have Machiavelli as the first theorist of the modern state, both in the sense that he lived in a time when the modern state was coming into existence and in the sense that he was among the first to offer a political theory in which the emerging modern state was front and center. In all these respects, those who herald Machiavelli as the first modern political thinker point to his influence on later thinkers, for example likening his exhortation in chapter 25 of The Prince to use virtue to dam and dike fortune to Sir Francis Bacon’s project of mastering nature for the benefit of mankind, or seeing his realism and even rather dim view of human nature reflected in Thomas Hobbes, or finding his emphasis on acquisition in John Locke. All of these claims of novelty on Machiavelli’s part and of his influence on later thinkers are appealing, but are also of course contested. What we can say is that they are all among his possible legacies in political thought and intellectual history more broadly. If we turn from high intellectual history, we should consider Machiavelli’s legacies with regard to what might be called broad approaches to politics and morals: the theory of raison d’état, “realism” both in general and in relation to international relations, and the question of “dirty hands.” The theory of raison d’état, with the French term being more common than the English “reason of state,” holds that the national interest of a state is the paramount goal, both in terms of internal and external politics. One can easily see how such a theory could be traced to Machiavelli, who writes in chapter 15 of The Prince : “For, if everything be well considered, something will be found that will appear a virtue, but will lead to his ruin if adopted; and something else that will appear a vice, if adopted, will result in his security and well-being” (chap. 15, 88)...
eBook - ePubA History of Western Thought
From Ancient Greece to the Twentieth Century
- Nils Gilje, Gunnar Skirbekk(Authors)
- 2017(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...Milan, Venice, Naples, Florence, and the Vatican State intrigued against one another and against foreign states. The pope functioned as an Italian local king in this game. And social life was, in many ways, characterized by an unbridled egotism. Creating a stable state became a goal for Machiavelli. Machiavelli lived during the transition from the Middle Ages to early modern times. His conception of being a citizen was closely related to certain points of view in the Middle Ages: honour and fame were fundamental. His method was consistent with the humanist approach of the day: using historical examples in order to clarify current affairs. And this secularized way of thinking showed a relationship with aspects of the intellectual life in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Machiavelli’s political theory is a doctrine of the mechanics of government. Superficially, it is a diplomatic ‘game theory’ for absolute princes. This theory was immediately applicable to the political struggle between the small states in Italy; at the same time, Machiavelli’s political theory includes features that are typical of the Renaissance, and that distinguish it from the political theories of both ancient Greece and the Middle Ages. A presupposition for Machiavelli is that man is egotistic. There are hardly any limits to man’s desire for things and for power. Since resources are scarce, there is conflict. The state is founded on the individual’s need for protection against the aggression of others. Without enforcement of the law, there is anarchy. Therefore, a strong ruler is needed to provide security for the people. Machiavelli takes this for granted without entering into a philosophical analysis of man’s essence. A ruler must, then, assume that human beings are evil. A ruler must be hard and cynical to secure the state and thus the life and property of the people. Even though human beings are always egotistic, there are various degrees of corruption...
eBook - ePub- Ian Adams, R.W. Dyson(Authors)
- 2007(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...Nicolò Machiavelli (1469–1527) Nicolò Machiavelli was born in Florence, Italy, into an ancient but impoverished family. He entered the service of the republic of Florence in 1494 and was employed on diplomatic missions to France, the Holy See and Germany. When the republic fell in 1512, he was briefly imprisoned and tortured. He retired into private life and devoted himself to political analysis, military theory and the study of history, producing The Prince in about 1513, The Discourses in about 1516 and The Art of War in about 1520. Part of his purpose in writing The Prince was to ingratiate himself with Lorenzo de’ Medici, to whom it is dedicated; but it was not until 1525 that he was recalled to government service. With the overthrow of the Medici in 1527, Machiavelli was again excluded from office. In the last years of his life he completed a History of Florence, a commentary on the historical records of Florence, offering a remarkably sophisticated account of causal relationships rather than mere chronology. Machiavelli is not interested in the religious and ecclesiastical issues so characteristic of medieval political thought. He is on the whole hostile to Christianity, believing that a people genuinely committed to the Christian virtues of meekness and submission would not thrive in the cut-throat world of politics. He is a republican and a patriot interested in the establishment and maintenance of a strong state in the face of foreign aggression and domestic upheaval. This interest expresses itself in two main ways. In The Prince, Machiavelli’s concern is with how one man can maintain his sway over subjects; in The Discourses, he addresses the question of how a republic can be made to endure and prosper by channelling the fundamentally selfish vigour of its citizens in publicly beneficial ways. Machiavelli’s method is historical and comparative, relying especially upon illustrations furnished by classical antiquity...
- A. R. M. Murray(Author)
- 2010(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...Machiavelli never sought to deny the reality or influence of that experience, but he thought that its place both in political theory and in practical politics had been generally misconceived. It had been thought of as providing a rational directive by which all practical issues could be solved, whereas to Machiavelli it was itself part of the irrational material which the rational statesman can neither justify nor condemn, but which he must necessarily recognize if his plans and calculations are to be successful. Religious beliefs have, in Machiavelli’s view, the same status and functions as moral principles. They are without objective significance, but may prove valuable allies of the statesman if they can be used to influence people to pursue the ends which he is seeking to achieve. It is, for example, likely to be of great help to a national leader if a war which is really being fought for purposes of national survival or aggrandisement is generally believed to be a war against the forces of evil and the devil. Thus Machiavelli’s attitude to politics was remarkably similar to that subsequently adopted by Karl Marx. Both believed that political forces are essentially ‘material’ or irrational forces, and that the moral judgments frequently evoked by these forces are themselves the expression of forces which are equally irrational. Both held that rationality is achieved only by the detached observer who studies all these forces in a scientific spirit, and directs them in the way best calculated to’ achieve the end in view. And in politics the only end which can be consistently pursued is the end which government is created to achieve, for the power of government depends upon the support of those who create and sustain it. Machiavelli’s Principles in Contemporary Politics Some of Machiavelli’s principles have found a ready application in the totalitarian systems of modern times...
eBook - ePub- Benedetto Croce(Author)
- 2019(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...One would be acting as a novice in the art of ruling if one wished “always to carry on as a lion.” The art.and science of politics, of pure politics, brought to maturity by the Italians, were to him a source of pride. For this reason he answered Cardinal de Rohan, who used to tell him that the Italians knew nothing about war, by saying that “the French knew nothing about the State.” The continuation of Machiavelli’s thought must not be sought among the Machiavellians, who continue his political casuistry and body of maxims and write about the “raison d’état,” frequently mixing moralizing trivialities with these maxims: nor among the anti-Machiavellians, who proclaim the fusion and identification of politics with morality and conceive States founded on pure dictates of goodness and justice: nor among the eclectics, who place in juxtaposition theories of morality and theories of politics, and take the edge off antinomies and make them empirical, instead of solving them, and change them to misfortunes and inconveniences which happen in life but have the character of accidental things. It must be sought in those who made an effort to classify the concept of “prudence,” of shrewdness” and, in short, of “political virtue,” without confusing it with the concept of “moral virtue” and, also, without in the least denying the latter. (One of these was Zuccolo, a seventeenth century writer.) And it must be sought in some powerful spirits who, beyond the shrewdness and sagacity of the individual, as analyzed by Machiavelli, asserted the divine work of Providence. Such a person was Tommaso Campanella. 1 But Machiavelli’s true and worthy successor, the powerful intellect who gathered together and strengthened both these scattered suggestions of criticisms and the immortal thought of the Florentine secretary, was another Italian, Vico. In truth, the whole philosophy of politics in its central idea is symbolized in two Italians...
eBook - ePubThe Structure of Political Thought
A Study in the History of Political Ideas
- Charles N. R. McCoy(Author)
- 2017(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...140. 18. See J. W. Allen, A History of Political Thought in the Sixteenth Century, The Dial Press, Inc., New York, 1928, pp. 464–465; Allen H. Gilbert (ed.), Machiavelli, The Prince and Other Works, Packard & Co., Chicago, 1941, p. 15. Professor Gilbert writes of Machiavelli that “the chief of his political ideas is to be found in the traditional political conception of the common good.” 19. For both the Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livius and The Prince I have used the translation by Luigi Ricci, revised by E. R. P. Vincent. These are printed in the “Modern Library, 1940” (edited by Max Lerner). Page references are to this edition. 20. Allen, op. cit., p. 464. 21. F. J. C. Hearnshaw, The Social and Political Ideas of Some Great Thinkers of the Renaissance and Reformation, Barnes & Noble, Inc., New York, 1932, p. 107. More than this, of course, Machiavelli insists that evil is radical in man. (Discourses, bk. I, chap. 3; The Prince, chap. 23.) 22. Discourses, bk. I, chap. 3, p. 118. 23. Discourses, bk. I, p. 103. 24. This theme is expressed in the celebrated “Oration on the Dignity of Man,” composed by Pico della Mirandola (1463–1494): In addressing man, God says: “The nature of all other beings is limited and constrained within the bounds of laws prescribed by Us. Thou, constrained by no limits, in accordance with thine own free will, shalt ordain for thyself the limits of thy nature. . . . With freedom of choice and with honor, as though the maker and molder of thyself, thou mayest fashion thyself in whatever shape thou shalt prefer. Thou shalt have the power to degenerate into the lower forms of life, which are brutish. Thou shalt have the power. . . to be reborn into the higher forms, which are divine.” In The Renaissance Philosophy of Man, Ernst Cassirer, P. O. Kristeller, and J. H. Randall, Jr. (eds.) (Copyright, 1948, by The University of Chicago), p. 225. 25. The Prince, chap. 18. 26...
eBook - ePub- Harvey C. Mansfield(Author)
- 1998(Publication Date)
- University of Chicago Press(Publisher)
...With such a notion of virtue, Machiavelli seems to accommodate the evil deeds of Renaissance princes. Far from being a prince himself, he seems to efface himself from politics and to leave the field to its practitioners. In accordance with this impression, Machiavelli offers his “homage” (servitù) to Lorenzo de’ Medici in the dedicatory letter of The Prince, and gives the impression that he composed that work, the most famous book on politics ever written, to gain employment with a third-rate prince ruling in the city of Urbino. Against that impression we have the unforgettable scene described in Machiavelli’s letter of December 10, 1513, in which he enters “the ancient courts of ancient men” and feeds “on the food that is mine alone.” Here he proudly asserts the distinction between the philosophers and “the vulgar” and maintains the continuity of the tradition of philosophy from ancients to moderns. Nonetheless, in following the effectual truth, he says he departs “from the orders of others” who construct imaginary principalities and republics (P 15)—surely the very ancient authors with whom he converses. His own writing, moreover, is as far as can be from the stale practice of rationalization. He does not serve princes by supplying platitudes for their speeches, like speech writers in our day. How can it be that Machiavelli’s ideas escape his apparent dismissal of the power of ideas? How, again, given his understanding of an author’s virtue, can this author consider himself a prince? Machiavelli says that armed prophets have always conquered and unarmed ones have come to ruin (P 6). His example of the latter, Savonarola, makes us think of the counterexample of Christ, who did not come to ruin but in a sense conquered a large portion of the world...
