Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527)
Among the most original
thinkers of the Renaissance is a brilliant and slightly tragic figure, Niccolò
Machiavelli. Throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, his name would
be synonymous with deviousness, cruelty, and willfully destructive rationality;
no thinker was every so demonized or misunderstood than Machiavelli. The source
of this misunderstanding is his most influential and widely read treatise on
government, The
Prince, a remarkably short book that attempts to lay out
methods to secure and maintain political power.
What is the most typical first impression of Machiavelli?
His life
spanned the greatest period of cultural achievement in Florence to its ultimate
downfall. This period was marked by political instability, fear, invasion,
intrigue, and high cultural achievement as the tiny states of Italy, including
the Papal States, were pulled into the politics and wars of Europe by the
immense gravity of two large states, Spain and France. His life began at the
very start of this process: in 1469, when Ferdinand and Isabella married and
through this marriage created a new, large kingdom of Spain composed of Castile
and Aragon, Machiavelli was born to a wealthy Florentine lawyer. In his
lifetime, he would see the efflorescence of Florentine culture and political
power under the brilliant political genius of Lorenzo de'Medici. He would also
see the twilight of the Medici power as Lorenzo's son and successor, Piero
de'Medici, was thrown from power by the Dominican monk, Savonarola, who set up
a true Florentine Republic. When Savonarola, a fanatic about reform, was
himself thrown from power and burned, a second Republic was set up under
Soderini in 1498. Machiavelli was the secretary of this new Republic, an important
and distinguished position. The Republic, however, was crushed in 1512 by the
Spanish who installed the Medici's as rulers of Florence once again.
What was Machiavelli’s personal experience in politics?
It seems that Machiavelli really had no
political commitments or political stripe: he seems to have been on nobody's
side politically. For when the Medici came to power, he began to work overtime
to get in good with them. It seems that either he was ruthlessly ambitious or
believed in serving in government no matter what political group or party was
in charge. The Medici, however, never fully trusted him since he had been an
important official in the Republic. They imprisoned and tortured him in 1513
and eventually banished him to his country estate at San Casciano (all this
torture and imprisonment, however, didn't stop him from trying to get in good
with the Medicis). It was during his exile in San Casciano, when he was
desparate to get back into government, that he wrote his principle works: the Discourse on Livy , The Prince , The
History of Florence ,
and two plays. Many of these works, such as The
Prince, were written for the express purpose of getting a job in the Medici
government.
What was the purpose of writing The Prince?
The tremendous innovation of both the Discourses on Livy and The Prince was Machiavelli's uncoupling of political theory from ethics.
Throughout the Western tradition, as in the Chinese tradition, political theory
and policy was closely linked to ethics. Aristotle summed up this connection
when he defined politics as merely an extension of ethics. Throughout the
Western tradition, then, politics had been understood in terms of right and
wrong, just and unjust, temperate and intemperate, and so on. The moral terms
used to evaluate human actions were employed to evaluate political actions.
What was the “innovation” which made Machiavelli famous?
Machiavelli
was the first to discuss politics and social phenomena in their own terms
without recourse to ethics or jurisprudence. In many ways you could consider
Machiavelli to be the first major Western thinker to apply the strictly
scientific method of Aristotle and Averroes to politics. He did so by observing
the phenomena of politics, reading all that's been written on the subject, and
describing political systems in their own terms. For Machiavelli, politics was
about one and only one thing: getting and keeping power or authority.
Everything else—religion, morality, etc—that people associate with politics has
nothing to do with this fundamental aspect of politics—unless being moral helps
one get and keep power. The only skill that counts in getting and maintaining
power is calculation;
the successful politician knows what to do or what to say for every situation.
With this insight, Machiavelli in The Prince simply describes the means by which individuals have tried to
seize and to maintain power. Most of the examples he gives are failures; the
entire book is suffused with tragedy for at any moment, if the ruler makes one
miscalculation, all the authority he has so assiduously cultivated will dry up
like the morning dew. The social and political world of the The Prince is monstrously
unpredictable and volatile; only the most superhuman calculative mind can
overcome this social and political volatility.
Throughout The Prince
and the Discourses , it's clear that Machiavelli has praise only
for the winners. For this reason, he admires figures such as Alexander VI and
Julius II, universally hated throughout Europe as ungodly popes, for the
astonishing military and political success. His refusal to allow ethical
judgements enter into political theory branded him throughout the Renaissance
as a kind of anti-Christ. In chapters such as "Whether a Prince Should Be
True to his Word," Machiavelli argues that any moral judgment should be
secondary to getting, increasing and maintaining power. The answer to the above
question, for instance, is "it's good to be true to your word, but you
should lie whenever it advances your power or security—not only that, it's
necessary."
Is Machiavelli proposing that leaders should act unethically in
every political situation to gain power?
Explain:
It might help to understand Machiavelli to
imagine that he's not talking about the state so much in ethical terms but in
medical terms. For Machiavelli believed that the Italian situation was
desperate and that the Florentine state was in grave danger. Rather than
approach the question from an ethical point of view, Machiavelli was genuinely
concerned with healing the state to make it stronger. For instance, in talking
about seditious points of view, Machiavelli doesn't make an ethical argument,
but rather a medical one—"seditious people should be amputated before they
infect the whole state."
The single most articulated value in the work of
Machiavelli is virtú
(Latin virtus),
which is related to our word, "virtue." Machiavelli means it more in
its Latin sense of "manly," but individuals with virtú are primarily
marked by their ability to enforce their will on volatile social situations.
They do this through a combination of strong will, strength, and brilliant and
strategic calculation. In one of the most famous passages from The Prince , Machiavelli describes the proper
orientation towards the volatility of the world, or Fortune, by comparing
Fortune to a lady: "la fortuna é donna," or "Fortune is a
Lady." Machiavelli is referring to the courtly love tradition, where the
lady that constitutes the object of desire is approached and entreated and
begged. The ideal Prince, however, for Machiavelli does not entreat or beg Lady
Fortune, but rather physically grabs her and takes whatever he wants. This was
a scandalous passage and still is today, but it represents a powerful translation
of the Renaissance idea of human potential to the area of politics. For if,
according to Pico della Mirandola, a human being can self-transform into
anything it wants, then it must be possible for a single, strong-willed
individual to order the chaos of political life.
Why would Machiavelli’s “innovation” be so repulsive to many of
his peers (especially in Italy) , yet likely to occur at this point and place
in history?
What type of government and what type of leadership would be most
ideal for Machiavelli? Why?
Machiavelli idealised the rationally planning and cunning prince,
who was to free Italy from all foreign influence. Many have seen Machiavelli’s ideals as a logical end to
Christendom and a start of Nationalism.
Agree or disagree. Why?
Taken
from: http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/REN/MACHIAV.HTM