In “The Prince,” Machiavelli discusses the terms and procedures he believes a prince should take to govern his society. Many perceive his views on human nature and leadership as evil and cruel towards his people. He justifies his views on human nature as he draws examples from the tactics and traits of successful leaders from the past. His ideas are comprised from justifying the means of his actions by its ends. Machiavelli selects the aspects of admirable historical figures to produce and describe his ideal prince.
He argues that a good and strong princedom is one that can sufficiently battle out with any military power in the battle fields without relaying to allies. A good prince is one with a good war plan and who understands the war terrains. More so, he should not be over generous to his subjects as this may cause greed which may lead to exhaustion of resources. A prince should exhibit a love-fear kind of attributes, as it is better to be feared than loved but should exhibit caution with interfering with his subject 's properties. A prince should keep his words and avoid contradicting aspects in his reign so as to have respect among his subjects.
Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes both recognized during their lives that they lived in an imperfect world and had similar ideas about how to prevent their society from becoming disarray. Both great thinkers agree that men need a power structure in place, so that men 's ambition do not become too great and plunge society into chaos. Machiavelli 's The Prince approaches this issue from a practical worldview, as Machiavelli was a seasoned politician in the city-state of Florence and authored his work so rulers can retain their power in society. He uses his personal experiences in politics in order to convey that people are flawed in their thinking and "for many have pictured republics and principalities which in fact have never been known or seen, because how one lives is so far distant from how one ought to live" (Machiavelli 406). A single man thinks that he knows what is best for society, but in reality, has a warped and selfish perception of the world.
In Niccolo Machiavelli's book, The Prince (1513), he evaluates on how a prince can be a successful leader. Machiavelli’s purpose of this guidebook was to construct his argument to the rising ruler Giuliano de Medici for when he comes to power in Florence. He adopts a casual but authoritative tone in order to convince the prince that Machiavelli’s evaluation on how to be the best prince, is the right thing for the prince to do without coming off as he knows more than the prince or is trying to intimidate him.. Machiavelli’s reference to previous rulers and whether their tactics failed or succeeded helps to benefit his credibility along with his allusion to historic text. He appeals to our logic by simply stating a prince can only do what is within his power to control, and his use of an analogy furthers his argument. Throughout the chapter, Machiavelli uses authoritative language to help convince the reader and prince that his ideas are worthy of being followed.
Questions: 1. Machiavelli wrote The Prince because he wanted to teach future princes how to rule by giving his opinions and examples through history and previous princes. Not just that, but he also teaches and talks about how to obtain power, invulnerability, and respect. Machiavelli does this by saying what is necessary to do and what is definitely unnecessary to do using examples from the past. It is a rule book for politics to follow in Machiavelli’s own opinions.
In Federalist Paper number one Alexander Hamilton states, “History will teach us…” He conveys what he is trying to say using words like despotism, emolument, obsequious, and demagogues. In an excerpt Hamilton says, “...their interest can never be separated; and that a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the forbidden appearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of government.” In other words some of the people supporting the constitution are only doing it because they think it will increase their economical and political status and that it is hard to separate those people from the ones who actually believe in the constitution. It’s hard to separate them because they
According to Machiavelli’s standards, Adolf had part of a good leader right. Adolf was extremely fierce like a lion, which is how Machiavelli wanted a prince to be, but Adolf was just too fierce by going to the point where he was killing people for no good reason. When Machiavelli says he wants a prince to be fierce he isn 't talking about killing people, he is more so talking about having the courage to make a risky law change or do something people may not like, but will help them in the long run. He was not smart in any way like a fox is. Throwing people into
The book Of Mice and Men showed so many people showing courage in many different forms. Lennie showed his strength to fight back and not get walked on by Curley. Crooks spoke up to defend himself even though it was pretty risky. George did something that was morally and physically hard to do by shooting Lennie. In today’s society, people would have a hard time doing what Lennie, Crooks, and George did.
A moment examination may be made amongst criminal and sacred method for accomplishing power. Here, the primary purpose of contrast is not the expertise and experience of the ruler but rather well known demeanors toward the sovereign. A sovereign who comes to control through wrongdoing runs the most serious hazard since he might be compelled to confer some brutality toward his subjects, jeopardizing himself by reproducing contempt and disdain among the masses. A sacred sovereign, be that as it may, comes to control with the support of either the nobles or ordinary citizens, and his employment comprises basically of keeping the unsupportive gathering happy with his run the show. To entirety up, ability is to be favored over fortune since ability prompts to a more viable ruler who is probably going to gather enduring transcendence.
Politics is a critical element of Richard II, and it is a guiding force of King Henry when he makes the decision to banish Exton. Appearances are crucial to any politicians, but particularly to a new king, such as Henry, who overthrew the last king in a military coup. King Henry shows a great understanding of himself and politics and is a better ruler than Richard because of that knowledge. King Henry has to solidify his rule, authority and power, and he has to do it quickly. A new king, one who gained power by force, cannot allow the murderer of the previous king to remain unpunished.