Machiavelli's The Prince.

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Viking Socrates, Dec 5, 2011.

  1. Viking Socrates I am Mad Scientist

    Member Since:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    9,153
    Likes Received:
    1,487
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    In a cave,watching shadows (Plato reference)
    Portrait_of_Niccolò_Machiavelli_by_Santi_di_Tito.jpg Before all else, be armed-- Machiavelli

    Introduction: Why is that every time I’m reading this I fell as though Machiavelli is influence in part a lot by Aristotle’s politics? Also it very easy to tell who he admires in life, see: Cesar Borgia, Cyrus the great.

    Next I would like to point out it was a mistake to read The prince first, I should have read his other more “republican” works first and then the prince, but bear in mind the prince is meant for the Medici. But anyways here it The prince By Machiavelli with side notes by Viking Socrates.

    Chapter 1: Pretty much saying there are two forms of state: The republic or the Principality

    Chapter 2: Machiavelli states that this will be about the prince, not the republic. Machiavelli states that a hereditary state under accustom to a family of the prince is far more likely to succeed then what that is not accustomed to the family of the prince, he further insights the example of the Duke of Ferra who would not have been able to beat back the venetians and the papal forces had he not already long established his dominions.

    Chapter 3:Goes off by stating that when the French captured Milan (Under the Louis the twelfth) they so quickly lost it because of the French ill-treatment of the natives, allowing the Duke Lodovico to quickly retake it.

    The next portion of the chapter goes along as to state when a State conquers another state they are either of the same language and culture or they are not. When there are, it is far easier to hold the territory. If one wishes to annex them one must do two things: 1. Destroy the family of the former lord (So say the united states conquered Saudi Arabia the first thing it would need to do is destroy the house of Saud) 2. That when you conquer a new state there laws and taxes should not be changed (to which if the United Kingdom reconquered the United States, they should keep the constitution)

    it then goes and state that conquering a state where the language and customs are different is far more difficult. The first thing a prince should do is when taking a new state is to move to it and live there (Perhaps Obama should have move to Iraq then?) For if the prince lives in the state he will see a rebellion before they occur and stop them before they become great, also the population will become used to the prince and learn to love and most importantly Fear him.

    Machiavelli then argues the best thing to do is to make a new state your colony (Very easily one could relate this statement to the rise of European colonialism that takes place right after) Machiavelli makes a reference to the Romans and the Greeks calling this a perfect example. He then makes another reference to Louis the 7th, stating that at first the King did everything he was supposed to do, however his greatest mistake was allowing the pope to capture Romagna.

    King Louis the 7th made the 5 great errors
    * He destroyed the weaker powers of Italy
    * He increased the power of a great state in Italy (The Vatican)
    * He brought in a foreign power (The Spanish)
    * He did not settle into the country
    * He did not sent colonies.

    Chapter 4: He first goes off by saying the Turks would be extremely difficult in conquering, however once conquered and the sultan’s family killed off one would have no difficulty controlling it. The exact opposite of this would be the French who would be easy to conquer, yet hard to control (Cough French resistance cough) Machiavelli then remarks on how Alexander the great’s conquest of Asia was a lot like conquering the Turks.

    Chapter 5: First thing you should do is destroy the government at hand and install the one you make, however keep the laws of the people. (Kind of like what the USA did to Saddam Hussein and the Baath party of Iraq) There are three things you can do when you conquer a new state according to Machiavelli.

    Ruin them: Like the romans did to Carthage
    Live there: Like the Turks did to the Byzantines
    or install a puppet government, although Machiavelli claims this is doomed to fail (I wonder what he would have thought about the puppet government in Afghanistan?)

    Chapter 6: states that princes who rise to power through their own skill and resources (their "virtue") rather than luck tend to have a hard time rising to the top, but once they reach the top they are very secure in their position. This is because they effectively crush their opponents and earn great respect from everyone else. Because they are strong and more self-sufficient, they have to make fewer compromises with their allies.

    Changing a law to fit the needs of a prince is the hardest thing a prince can do to his new subjects, for the people who support the prince will not be certain of the new laws benefit to them and as such not be vocal about it, while the ones who against it are of the old order and will always do such. If one wishes to change laws it is far better to do so by force. (I love how Machiavelli makes Moses and Cyrus the great out to be people who use force to get what they want, and the final footnote on Hiero the Syracusan is amazing cause who doesn’t want to be a private citizen who gets into power)

    Chapter 7:A prince who rises to power through their own luck and cunning, have an easy time rising to the top. However once they get they easily fall out of favor. Cesare Borgia is an example of a prince who escaped this pattern; His luck (being that of the Borgia family and son of Pope Alexander the sixth) allowed him to easily gain control of the papal armies. However the Papal army at the time was reliant on Orsini mercenaries to whom Cesare won over the mercenaries’ alliance with better pay and more prestige positions (Yet again showing that mercenaries are unreliable because they fight for money, thus refuting that Plato’s utopia is unrealistic in its reliance in mercenaries) the papal states where very reliant on the French, and when it looked like the French where not going to support the Borgia’s anymore Cesare did the smartest thing and looked for the Spanish to help.
    The greatest misfortune to ever come before Cesare was the election of Pope Julius (And Ezio auditore da Firenze: D Assassins creed ftw)

    Chapter 8: That tough there are two main way to become a Prince (Virtue and Luck) there is infact a third and often immoral way as to one to become a prince, and that is through criminal behavior and slaughtering anyone in your way however it is important to note that when you do such, do it fast and kill as many as you can quickly as once you do you will not need to do it again for some time and the people will in turn forget what you had done. (He cites Agathocles of Syracuse as a perfect example; he called a meeting of the city's elite. At his signal, his soldiers killed all the senators and the wealthiest citizens, completely destroying the old oligarchy. He declared himself ruler with no opposition. So secure was his power that he could afford to absent himself to go off on military campaigns in Africa. )
    Hence it is to be remarked that, in seizing a state, the usurper ought to examine closely into all those injuries which it is necessary for him to inflict, and to do them all at one stroke so as not to have to repeat them daily; and thus by not unsettling men he will be able to reassure them, and win them to himself by benefits. He, who does otherwise, either from timidity or evil advice, is always compelled to keep the knife in his hand; neither can he rely on his subjects.

    Chapter 9: There is another way to which a prince can become the leader of his country, and that is through the favor of his fellow citizens (It is quite know that many of the founding father of the United States like this portion of the prince) there are two camps of the citizens that one can use to obtain power, the everyday man or the Nobel class. Each one with a unique set of advantages and disadvantages. (He notes the Nobel wish to oppress, while the people wish to not be oppressed and as such it is in my opinion easier to gain favor with the people. If you use their hatred of the nobles) he states that is far worse to lose the trust and favor of the nobles and have a lot more to fear if the people go against you. (The same context could be placed in the Libyan revolution where Gaddafi lost favor of his nobles or military and as such did not wish to do his bidden and defected; a counter example would be the Syrian revolution) One should make sure that the people need the prince, especially if a time of need should come. (This chapter is so very random it seems as though Machiavelli cannot come to any sort of conclusion to which is better, at one instant he relates the people to building a house on mud while on the next calling it a sturdy foundation for a house. It’s so very contradictory)

    Chapter 10: There Is two ways you can measure strength of a Prince. That is of which in times of crises he can support himself with his own resources, or is he reliant on others. It said that if you need not rely on your allies you can go on the offensive and take the fight to the enemy, while it is wise to set up a defensive position if you are weak and need others. It then goes on to say Piss people off when there already pissed off its wiser in the end.

    Chapter 11: Machiavelli discusses the recent history of the Church as if it were a princedom that was in competition to conquer Italy against other princes. He points to factionalism as a historical weak point in the Church, and points to the recent example of the Borgia family as a better strategy which almost worked. He then explicitly proposes that the Medici is now in a position to try the same thing.

    Chapter 12: The chief foundations of any state are Strong Laws and Strong military, this section is about a strong military. First of all Machiavelli states that the use of mercenaries is the worst thing anyone can do, for they fight for money and greed and are not loyal to the prince (Wonder what he would have said to Gaddafi) He also says that a republic should infact switch out its bad generals until it fights a good one (It is of my own believe that Machiavelli would have praised General McChrystal kicking out and the instatement of David Petraeus. Oh and since I failed to address this earlier it seems as though Machiavelli would have praised Stalin’s rapid Great purges or anything vlad the impaler did) He then goes on to see Carthages use of mercenaries are one of the main reasons they lost the great Punic wars. Calles Mercenaries the sole reason for Italian failure to unify.

    Chapter 13:in this chapter Machiavelli also warns against using auxiliary forces, troops borrowed from an ally, because if they win, the employer is under their favor and if they lose, he is ruined. Auxiliary forces are more dangerous than mercenary forces because they are united and controlled by capable leaders who may turn against the employer. (So in darkest hour, make sure not to borrow troops from an ally got it)

    Chapter 14: this chapter discusses the prince’s main duty is to understand war. Peace makes a country soft and weak; allways prepare for war and train your men as hard. Anyone who wishes to be a prince must study anything to do with Cyrus the great, Julius Caesar, and Alexander the great. Place Military philosophy ahead of any sort of Philosophy.

    Chapter 15:A prince must know how to be cunning and ruthless while appearing compassionate.

    Chapter 16: A prince must exercise Liberty and be liberal. (Classical Libertarianism? Hey it mentions Julius Caesar) so be liberal but strict and kill everyone, O.K. got it.

    Chapter 17: The prince must find the perfect balance between Cruelty and Clemency. He cites Cesare Borgia as a fine example of this. Therefore a prince, so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal, ought not to mind the reproach of cruelty; because with a few examples he will be more merciful than those who, through too much mercy, allow disorders to arise, from which follow murders or robberies; for these are wont to injure the whole people, whilst those executions which originate with a prince offend the individual only.

    Is it better to be feared then loved, or better to be loved then feared. Tough one would wish to be both, it is fair safer to be feared then loved. Because men who really on love are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous. While he is feared, he ought to make sure he is not hated. Machiavelli then compares Scipo and Hannibal, sighting at how Hannibal was a feared leader there were no rebellions against him, while Scipo had entire legions rebel against him in Spain and northern Italy. Fear is simply a means to an end, and that end is security for the prince.

    Chapter 18: A prince should keep his word only when it suits his purpose, and break it when it suits his purpose tough it is far better to keep it. (So be like Julius Caesar and Sulla and go “Oh where totally not going to use are armies to enter Rome…ops nevermind”)

    Chapter 19:To keep your men happy they need two things: Property and Women. (Join my army I got Property and Bitches, WOOOT) if you can keep up the happiness your avoid the risk of being hated thus you can keep up your fear. It then talks to what to do when there is a coup, and going with traditional Machiavellian philosophy it goes with kill them quickly or you risk a full scale rebellion. (Why does he seem like someone who would support Gaddafi bombing and killing the people of Benghazi to me?) Next allways be on the lookout for conspiracies, when the people love him he need not worry about rumors of conspiracy and if the people hate him, he need to. (But don’t all leaders think there people love them….See Gaddafi “ALL LIBYANS, ALL LIBYANS LOVE ME GADDAFI”) he then goes and calls France the greatest government at the time, while then going off on Rome, Calling a lot of the Roman emperors weak and too reliant on others. A prince wishing to keep his state must do evil. it is now more necessary to all princes, except the Turk and the Soldan, to satisfy the people rather the soldiers, because the people are the more powerful.

    Chapter 20: There never was a prince who first disarmed his subjects, and when he does he loses the trust and respect of his subjects. It goes off on how to hold onto one’s new territory, and that’s to build fortresses but not really on them.

    Chapter 21: Set a fine example. He praises King Ferdinand the second for his dealings with the moors and internal affairs; Machiavelli calls him a fine example of a Prince. He then discusses the prospect of neutrality and says that is far more advantage to pick a side (Wow he must really hate Switzerland) and when a prince picks a side he must go for the weaker of the states, for a powerful state could crush you. A king should also host huge festivals to distract the people and keep them happy as well; A prince should also associate himself with Guilds and Unions.

    Chapter 22: If a prince’s servants and nobles are faithful and true, then you know the Prince is a wise prince. there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehended; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless (Omg now I’m reminded of theory of multiple intelligences) A good Prince allways puts down ambitious servants.

    Chapter 23: BEWARE OF FLATTERY; yeah that’s pretty much the chapter. Question everyone’s opinion and then forum your own from that, one that best suits your purpose of course. To anyone who uses flattery over truth cannot be trusted and must be put to death. If after a conclusion and you issues out an order do not change it, he issues Emperor Maximillan as a prime example of someone who changes his mind too much.

    Chapter 24:Machiavelli then goes about Italy and how being the exact opposite of good princes has allowed them to lose their cities, so pretty much he wanted the reunification of Italy (He would have really liked Giuseppe Garibaldi then wait didn’t Karl Marx like him as well?)

    Chapter 25: This chapter is all about fortune; Machiavelli compares fortune to a torrential river that cannot be easily controlled during flooding season. In periods of calm, however, people can erect dams and levees in order to minimize its impact. Fortune, Machiavelli argues, seems to strike at the places where no resistance is offered, as had recently been the case in Italy. He then goes off and says something about fortune and God. (Leaving me to conclucued he considered Christianity to be weaking Italy not strengthen it)

    Chapter 26:Machiavelli calls Italians more enslaved then the Hebrews, more oppressed then the Persians, more scattered then the Greeks. This chapter directly appeals to the Medici to use what has been summarized in order to conquer Italy using Italian armies, following the advice in the book.

    Legacy: Modern day Materialist insight that Machiavelli was the first to insight realism. Most kings of the world have read it (Like Charles the 5th and Frederick the great) Napoleon praised it, while Huguenot despised it, but no the less Machiavelli's the prince has shaped the world.
  2. pedro3131 Running the Show While the Big Guy's Gone

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    3,949
    Likes Received:
    633
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Tempe, Az
  3. Viking Socrates I am Mad Scientist

    Member Since:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    9,153
    Likes Received:
    1,487
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    In a cave,watching shadows (Plato reference)
    Thanks for the link, i will check it out.

    And the eulogy to the Medici at the end of the book was awesome.
  4. Crusher949 Active Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Message Count:
    717
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Location:
    Bloomington, IL, U.S. of A.
    While learning about the French revolution, we get to the point where the new french Gov. starts killing the civies en mass. I stated in a quiz we took over it that "if the new french Gov. is going to kill the 250-500,000 civies, then they might as well kill more, as this in itself has caused to much turmoil to be turned around" and she told me in writing "you should read the prince". Is that a compliment or a suggestion/insult?
  5. CrazyManiac Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Message Count:
    185
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    68
    Location:
    Finland
    Man...I gotta read more books other than 40-50s sci-fi. Im hooked onto those

Share This Page

Facebook: