Machiavelli The Prince Rhetorical Analysis

1690 Words7 Pages
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 says a prince should be fully committed to war and discipline because it is the only responsibility of one who commands. War should be a prince’s only focus and if he is to ever prioritize luxury over war, his title will be…show more content…
Being hated or praised by his people is a sector that comes with the high ranking of a prince. A prince cannot possess all the qualities that are regarded as honorable. Some of a prince’s acts that appear to be wicked are beneficial to the state. Due to the impracticality of a perfect ruler, a prince should contain some aspects of evil, despite the hatred of his people. What some may believe to be the acts of a malicious ruler are, in fact, in the best interest of the state. Machiavelli states that a prince should regard himself miserly, so his people may believe that he is investing in the commonwealth. Liberality will lead to increased taxes to support a prince’s lavish spending. Therefore, a lavishly spending prince will only be hated and untrusted by his people, which will lead turmoil. In addition, a prince that strays from generosity will be regarded as a miser. While stinginess might lead to shame, generosity will lead to contempt. Therefore, a prince should avoid being benevolent and, instead, treat his subjects with a reluctance to assist. As a parsimonious leader, a prince will have plenty of money for defending his state and embarking on tasks that will not burden his people. He will be perceived as generous to those he does not take from, the majority, and perceived as miserly to he does not take from, the few. A prince should be reputable for misery in order to…show more content…
I am firmly opposed to the manipulation of one’s subjects for the better of the ruler. Machiavelli’s concept for a prince’s soldiers is a malicious brainwash. A feared ruler will only induce despise from his people. I regard Machiavelli’s justification for a prince containing aspects of evil to be a unethical form of governing a society. His depiction of a feared ruler disregards the prosperity of his people and does not account for their pursuit of happiness. They must live in fear and refrain from angering their malicious prince. A ruler should not be concerned with his own prosperity, instead, he should seek to benefit his people. I believe Machiavelli’s opinion on how a prince should rule is evil, and I find no justification in his

More about Machiavelli The Prince Rhetorical Analysis

Open Document