Machiavelli Prince Leadership

In the book he looks at the historical aspects of what has happened and uses them to establish his main points. After going through what we were assigned to read, I gathered that the two most important aspects that a prince should have is knowledge and flexibility in the area of morality. Knowledge allows him to be smarter than his populace, knowing when not to be good, and the ability to combat certain cases. Being morally flexible allows him to be able to handle the ends justifying the means. It also should be noted that he believed that power is the only thing that matters and how to hold that power. Machiavelli has clearly started a lot of thought on how the school of Realism operates. Though his view on humans and some of his methods may be extreme, The Prince and the Discourses shows a lot of insight on what do if a prince wants to hold his power and what action should be done to do

Thomas Jefferson and Niccolo Machiavelli both believe that the actions of the people shape the characteristics of the ruler and define the type of authority that will be held towards the people. Machiavelli, the first great political philosopher of the Renaissance, argues all men are untrustworthy due to their selfish, self-interested and impulsive ways of life in his writing, The Morals of the Prince, and therefore, to keep the people under control the ruler must be prepared to be cruel and instill fear among the people. Opposing Machiavelli is Jefferson. In The Declaration of Independence Jefferson believes people can be trusted since they have the ability to make their own decisions. Whereas Machiavelli supports tyranny, Jefferson believes

Throughout history, we have seen many great leaders marshal and inspire their men. From Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King Jr, to Alexander the Great and Winston Churchill. Although undoubtedly different in their styles and methodologies, it is without doubt that all of these people were very strong and effective leaders. In William Shakespeare’s Henry V, we are also presented with different leaders – King Henry, King Charles IV of France, and the French Prince, the Dauphin. Throughout the text, the leadership styles and methods of these three men are conveyed to us, and it becomes evident that their styles are quite different. But in the text, what makes a good leader? What characteristics of the leaders make them successful, or not?

What exactly is a good leader and how should they be? In the readings, by Christine de Pizan The Treasure of the City of Ladies and another by Niccolo Machiavelli The Prince. They both talk about how a prince and a princess should act upon their people. For Pizan she talks about how a princess should be kind hearted and accepting towards her people. She should act like this sho that they will help her whenever she is need. Then for Machiavelli he talks about how a prince should show no fear instead for him to show that he is the one with power. That a prince's people should fear him. Both authors go on to talk on how their people react based on the prince and princesse act. The authors then go on to explain how they should view and run their people. Both authors also reflect the fact that the way their people are going to act towards them is mainly based off of how they treat them. The authors go into how gender plays a big role on how they should act upon their people and how their people should accept them. There are many factors that go towards one being a good leader or a bad leader. That is what exactly the authors Pizan and Machiavelli explained in their readings.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once stated, “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.” For century’s philosophers, kings and many more have been on a quest to determine what it takes to become a great ruler and to maintain power. Between the Middle Ages (500 A.D.) and the Renaissance (1500 A.D.), in the books The Prince and The Life of Charlemagne”, Niccolo Machiavelli and Einhard displayed their idea of what the theory of leadership is. Based on their ideas it seems as if amorality, virtu, and religious Practices made the difference in what it took to become an effective leader during the Middle Ages.

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.

In The Prince (1532), Machiavelli lists elements a prince should have. The biggest thing Machiavelli cautions against is breeding hatred. He claims that “[…] a wise prince should establish himself on that which is in his own control and not in that of others; he must endeavor only to avoid hatred” (Machiavelli 82). Hatred will lead to loss of control. If the civilians hate the prince, then they have control over him. With this control, they could stage a revolt and displace the prince. The prince, with no control, has no option other than to respond with detrimental actions in an attempt to subdue the hatred and his impending removal. Machiavelli argues that this sequence of events can be avoided entirely by preventing hatred from starting in the first place. If the prince does this, then he controls how the civilians perceive him and he can act in ways to limit their desire to overthrow him. Thus, hatred should be avoided at all costs.

The Prince, written by Machiavelli, is a candid outline of how he believes leaders gain and keep power. Machiavelli uses examples of past leaders to determine traits that are necessary to rule successfully. Leaders such as the King of Naples and the Duke of Milan lacked military power, made their subjects hate them, or did not know how to protect themselves from the elite, causing them to lose power. He says that these rulers should blame laziness, not luck, for their failures. By looking at these historical successes and failures, Machiavelli is able to develop his own thoughts on how politics and leaders should be in the future. The overall goal of the government should be the well-being and stability of the state. He states that leaders

In Machiavelli’s book, The Prince, he maintains a harsh perspective on reality. His advice on how to maintain power leaves no room for compassion or generousity. While some may believe that these are qualities of a good person, Machiavelli believes these qualities lead to the downfall of rulers. He acknowledges that, in reality, it is impossible for someone to have qualities of a good person and simultaneously a good ruler. Machiavelli’s realistic outlook causes him to emphasize that it is better to maintain power through fear, rather than compassion. Despite this, he notes that a ruler must avoid his people hating him. A hated ruler possesses no power since the people hold the power. Therefore, a ruler can be miserly, unfaithful, and ruthless, but they must appear to be the opposite. Machiavelli concludes that it is important for a ruler to balance his reputation and his actions, which I agree with, however others may argue that a ruler can posses both qualities.

Shakespeare through the play Hamlet portrays many complex themes through the various characters in the play. Hamlet, the protagonist is in particular a mesh of various complexities and ideas. He is often caught in between his own opposing characteristics and these ultimately affect the course of his actions.

To Machiavelli, there is no morality in politics, only political virtue (Prudence). Prudence means knowing when to exhibit virtue or vice. As long as the Prince understands the role of Prudence, they will be successful. However, Machiavelli made an oversight. He also categorized humanity into two categories. Those who want power, and those who are suspicious of the ones who want power. No matter how expertly a prince may utilize prudence, the people will always be suspicious of the Prince. Suspicious people will never be fully obedient. The Prince never has full control and power over their people. No matter the method, as long as a person who wants power or is in power is known to the people, the people’s suspicion will prevent total and absolute

In his novel, the prince, nicolo machiavelli guides us to be a fruitful ruler. He clarifies the best routes for any ruler or sovereign to govern a region, bring prosper to the society, and keep up their position. This book can be read by anyone to get a few pointers on political issues. Most of the thoughts held by machivelli were linked to mercilessness and evil, hence they raised a considerable number of eyebrows. He maintains that the ruler 's primary goal should be conquering, staying in control of the general public and to always have the idea of war in mind. His ideas seemed utterly straightforward as he used simple logic, thus i liked his view points, even though i had a few disagreements with his ideas of solutions to some problems. Some of his central opinions based around the idea that its better to be feared than to be loved by people. to not be unbiased and to disregard flattery.

Being a prince is not as easy as it may seem. There are good and bad decisions a prince can make. Machiavelli has his own standards on how a prince should behave. According to Machiavelli, a prince could be considered a lion, a fox, or a wolf. The lion is fierce but doesn’t have the smarts, while a fox has the smarts but isn 't fierce. A wolf has a little bit of smarts and can be fierce when they are in packs. Machiavelli considered a good prince to be a mixture of a fox and a lion. Also, he wanted a prince that would honors his own words and to be generally praised by others.

According to Machiavelli, ideal prince is a risk-taker who puts a military on action, as the people respect the warrior. An ideal prince thinks for himself rather than relying on others, knows how to read characters, and does not surround himself with flatterers. He lives in reality, not fantasy. He works hard, utilizes his own mind, and makes survival of his guide. The ideal leader is neither loved nor hated, but respected. He cannot be too generous, because that increases people 's expectations of him and it is impossible to keep buying the people 's love as the price gets too high. Yet, the prince should not be hated due to his violent nature, because that rises up. The prince should act in ways that keep him in power and maintain his own power. He should be able to read the character and motives of others in order to use them for his own ends. A good prince is able to

In his famous work the Prince Niccolo Machiavelli exposes what it takes to be a good prince and how only this good price and keep control over his state. There are many different qualities that make a man a good ruler but there are some that are more essential than others. In this work Machiavelli stresses the importance of being a warrior prince, a wise prince, and knowing how to navigate the duality of virtù and vices. Without these attributes there was no way that a prince could hold together their state and their people. This is a work that still influences us today and is still relevant in today’s complex society. Some of the most prominent leaders of the 20th century have been influenced by Machiavellian ideas. U.S Presidents like Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton and U.K Prime Minister Anthony Blair are called Machiavellian leaders today.